• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Finance Committee to drop end-of-life provision

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,937
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
They dropped it, because they go caught with their hand in the cookie jar, not because the provision would be misinterpreted...LOL!!

There's a bunch more crap in the bill that's going to have to go, before the heat will die down.


The Senate Finance Committee will drop a controversial provision on consultations for end-of-life care from its proposed healthcare bill, its top Republican member said Thursday.

The committee, which has worked on putting together a bipartisan healthcare reform bill, will drop the controversial provision after it was derided by conservatives as "death panels" to encourage euthanasia.

"On the Finance Committee, we are working very hard to avoid unintended consequences by methodically working through the complexities of all of these issues and policy options," Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said in a statement. "We dropped end-of-life provisions from consideration entirely because of the way they could be misinterpreted and implemented incorrectly."

TheHill.com - Finance Committee to drop end-of-life provision
 
Seriously, what is it with you hard core right wingers. You took a provision that would have done nothing more than paid physicians for the time they spent with Medicare recipients discussing end of life issues and turned that into government "death panels" deciding who will live and who will die.

First off, the only occasion I can think of off of the top of my head where the federal government attempted to involved itself in the end of life decisions of a private individual was when the Republicans did it with Terri Schiavo, the brain dead woman in Florida.

However, more to the point, if someone was to actually believe that the federal government would institute government death panels that would essentially weed out unproductive seniors, then they would have to believe that Washington Democrats and President Obama are quite literally on the same level with Joesph Stalin. Aside from being offensive, its irrational to the point of being truly psychotic. Seriously, you guys have taken a guy that is by all accounts a decent man, a good husband, and a wonderful father and turned him into Joesph Stalin, an unconscionable sociopathic dictator out to murder your grandparents and sick children......... All because you disagree with him.

Bad ideas does not equal evil person. If this health care debate has accomplished anything, its demonstrated how much we have neglected mental health care in this country as its truly an epidemic right now. Seriously, if you think that Obama is on the level of Joesph Stalin, and with this loony death panel bull**** you obviously do, then you need to check with your insurance providers and see which anti-psychotics are on the coverage list for you.
 
Last edited:
Seriously, what is it with you hard core right wingers. You took a provision that would have done nothing more than paid physicians for the time they spent with Medicare recipients discussing end of life issues and turned that into government "death panels" deciding who will live and who will die.

I'm having a hard time believing that it's as simple as paying a doc for spending time talking to a elderly patient with one foot in the grave. Did you read the section, at all?

One has to wonder, though, how the healthcare bill that will be the savior of the nation has to have a section written into it that says doctors are going to paid for end of life counseling. One would think that would be an understood thing. Is there a provision in the bill that allows doctors to be paid for cancer treatment counceling? What about abortion counceling?

No, I believe the section was what Palin said it was. No one has yet proved otherwise, with actual documentation from the bill. In fact, I haven't seen the first post by a supporter of the bill that includes actual language from the bill to prove themselves right. Why is that, ya reckon?

However, more to the point, if someone was to actually believe that the federal government would institute government death panels that would essentially weed out unproductive seniors, then they would have to believe that Washington Democrats and President Obama are quite literally on the same level with Joesph Stalin. Aside from being offensive, its irrational to the point of being truly psychotic. Seriously, you guys have taken a guy that is by all accounts a decent man, a good husband, and a wonderful father and turned him into Joesph Stalin, an unconscionable sociopathic dictator out to murder your grandparents and sick children......... All because you disagree with him.

Zeke Emanual is all for that exact kind of thing. He's going to be ramrodding the healthcare system. Isn't he?
 
Last edited:
They dropped it, because they go caught with their hand in the cookie jar, not because the provision would be misinterpreted...LOL!!

There's a bunch more crap in the bill that's going to have to go, before the heat will die down.

SCOOP!!!

HUGE breaking news, apdst!

thanks!

EXTREMELY MEANINGFUL!

baucus is the GATEWAY

grassley's got the ball right now

this occurrence happened STRAIGHT in the GATE

obliged

how anyone could "blame" this on republicans

LOLOLOL!

must not OWN a tv

why, GRASSLEY's trying to RESCUE this FOO

hello

he BETTER NOT

he'll get CRUCIFIED by his OWN

the blues can't ditch this bitch fast enough

THEY'RE the ONES

and you'd also be as ABSURDLY off the mark pointing your tattle tell tally at them too

NOT AFTER WHAT THE IDIOT IN THE WHITE HOUSE HAS PUT THEM THRU

for antenna's sake, LAND

it's called EARTH

great SCOOP, apdst

keep em coming

grassley better NOT

watch HIM

watch him CLOSE

cliff
 
Last edited:
I believe the section was what Palin said it was.

Of course you do...even though there have been numerous sources exposing her lies.

Palin is perfect for these fanatical fringe crowds. It gives her another opportunity to preach her propoganda and rile people up to yell "kill him" and so forth.....
 
I'm having a hard time believing that it's as simple as paying a doc for spending time talking to a elderly patient with one foot in the grave. Did you read the section, at all?

Yes, I did. As did AARP, and they saw nothing at all wrong with it either.

One has to wonder, though, how the healthcare bill that will be the savior of the nation has to have a section written into it that says doctors are going to paid for end of life counseling.

Because even if what ever health care reform that is enacted succeeds far beyond anyone's wildest dreams, everyone will still die one day and as every family that has dealt with that with a love one knows, it is best that you make those decisions about what care you want at the end of your life rather than your family.

One would think that would be an understood thing. Is there a provision in the bill that allows doctors to be paid for cancer treatment counceling?

Neither Medicare or Private Insurance pays for you to just go and chat with your doctor. They pay for services and procedures. For example, if you go to the doctor after being diagnosed for cancer, your insurer is paying your doctor for the time they spend with you discussing your treatment options. Your insurer would not pay your doctor for time they spent with you discussing cancer treatment options with you if you were not diagnosed with cancer. Similarly, if you just called up your physician right now and said that you wanted to just come in for an appointment to discuss end of life issues with them and nothing more, they would tell you that your insurance will probably not cover it, and it may be out of your pocket. All this provision did was allow for doctors to offer this counseling to seniors as an optional service and file a claim with Medicare to reimburse them for their time spent with you.

What about abortion counceling?

Medicare does not cover abortions. Seniors being they are all well past menopause don't tend to get pregnant, much less have unintended pregnancies, thus don't tend to seek abortions.

No, I believe the section was what Palin said it was.

How many times is Palin going to whore her special needs child out for her personal political use? Seriously, as someone that has adopted 2 special needs children I don't get it. Its beyond shameless to whore your special needs child out there like she does and make these insane claims that the government is going to deem them unworthy of Medical treatment. For most parents, any issues their kids have is a private matter, they don't go out and shamelessly throw it out there every conceivable opportunity when they think it might benefit what ever loony argument they are trying to make. I honestly believe that the day that loon found out she found out she was having a special needs child she jumped for joy screaming "Whoo Hoo I get to have a special needs child now that I can throw out there every time I want say something stupid to America. Yeehaw, pass the moose meatloaf."

No one has yet proved otherwise, with actual documentation from the bill. In fact, I haven't seen the first post by a supporter of the bill that includes actual language from the bill to prove themselves right. Why is that, ya reckon?

No one other than Fact Check, the AARP, and every single responsible news outlet on earth.

FACT CHECK: No 'death panel' in health care bill - Yahoo! News
 
Of course you do...even though there have been numerous sources exposing her lies.

Palin is perfect for these fanatical fringe crowds. It gives her another opportunity to preach her propoganda and rile people up to yell "kill him" and so forth.....

Which sources, using actual language in the bill, have exposed Palin as a liar. I await your response with baited breath.
 
Seriously, what is it with you hard core right wingers. You took a provision that would have done nothing more than paid physicians for the time they spent with Medicare recipients discussing end of life issues and turned that into government "death panels" deciding who will live and who will die.

First off, the only occasion I can think of off of the top of my head where the federal government attempted to involved itself in the end of life decisions of a private individual was when the Republicans did it with Terri Schiavo, the brain dead woman in Florida.

However, more to the point, if someone was to actually believe that the federal government would institute government death panels that would essentially weed out unproductive seniors, then they would have to believe that Washington Democrats and President Obama are quite literally on the same level with Joesph Stalin. Aside from being offensive, its irrational to the point of being truly psychotic. Seriously, you guys have taken a guy that is by all accounts a decent man, a good husband, and a wonderful father and turned him into Joesph Stalin, an unconscionable sociopathic dictator out to murder your grandparents and sick children......... All because you disagree with him.

Bad ideas does not equal evil person. If this health care debate has accomplished anything, its demonstrated how much we have neglected mental health care in this country as its truly an epidemic right now. Seriously, if you think that Obama is on the level of Joesph Stalin, and with this loony death panel bull**** you obviously do, then you need to check with your insurance providers and see which anti-psychotics are on the coverage list for you.

you're the one who concedes they're BAD IDEAS

look, there's the reality

and then there's the politics

the prez is responsible for both

he must create reality

he must manage the appearances

ie, politics

the prez is 1000% responsible for creating a political context that puts him in the spot of having to promise little girls that he's not gonna kill their gramma

in the first place

hello

HE's the one who's called all these emergency press conferences

HE's the one who keeps going on primetime

HE's the one who sent his members home without any ONE single plan to defend so that they were open to every imaginable charge dreamed up by any critic in the last 25 years

(how do you folks keep from LOL'ing? i am rolling as i write)

HE's the one who summoned an emergency presser on friday july 17, the day after cbo/elmendorf testified in the GATE, senate finance, that the COST CURVE went the wrong way

the next day, obama by all accounts to get the ball back, summons an emergency conference, friday the 17th

and that's the first day i ever heard him say he was gonna get 2/3 of the money he needs from wellness/prevention and IT

and "SAVINGS" from MEDICARE AND MEDICAID

HE's responsible for THIS landscape

whether gramma's gonna get guillotined or not, our SENIORS are FREAKING OUT

and the middle aged who LOVE THEM MOST are too

hell the freak'n oh

look the heck around

HE's the one who keeps bringing up END OF LIFE COSTS

how just KILLER they are to his DAMNED DEFICIT

going FORWARD

in THE OUT YEARS

you just can't do that and BE PRESIDENT at the same time

NOT in america, anyway

i don't know what nation you been lookin at all your life

but obama's in KENYA, or something

sorry

he's TOTALLY responsible for every WRONG IDEA anyone in this entire country has cooked up

he's INEPT

he's responsible for a LOSER legislation

and the worst national SALESMANSHIP any of us have ever seen

the results are utterly predictable
 
Yes, I did. As did AARP, and they saw nothing at all wrong with it either.

Except they're now embarressed to support the bill. They started out supporting the bill, now they're afraid to show their faces in public under that same banner.



Because even if what ever health care reform that is enacted succeeds far beyond anyone's wildest dreams, everyone will still die one day and as every family that has dealt with that with a love one knows, it is best that you make those decisions about what care you want at the end of your life rather than your family.

You're right, there's no way out-a-here alive. But, why does there have to be a specific provision in the bill, for doctors to decided if an, "order", for retention of medical care should be given to an elderly person? That's what the section says.



Neither Medicare or Private Insurance pays for you to just go and chat with your doctor. They pay for services and procedures. For example, if you go to the doctor after being diagnosed for cancer, your insurer is paying your doctor for the time they spend with you discussing your treatment options. Your insurer would not pay your doctor for time they spent with you discussing cancer treatment options with you if you were not diagnosed with cancer. Similarly, if you just called up your physician right now and said that you wanted to just come in for an appointment to discuss end of life issues with them and nothing more, they would tell you that your insurance will probably not cover it, and it may be out of your pocket. All this provision did was allow for doctors to offer this counseling to seniors as an optional service and file a claim with Medicare to reimburse them for their time spent with you.

Ok, they don't pay for counceling, either. Why have a provision that only deals with end of life counceling? Why not just a section that deals with all counceling? Are there provisions elsewhere in the bill that provide for medical counceling? If so, show me. If not, then why?



Medicare does not cover abortions. Seniors being they are all well past menopause don't tend to get pregnant, much less have unintended pregnancies, thus don't tend to seek abortions.

This bill will cover abortions. Wouldn't it be a good idea to provide a little counceling before sticking a fork in that baby's head?



No one other than Fact Check, the AARP, and every single responsible news outlet on earth.

FACT CHECK: No 'death panel' in health care bill - Yahoo! News


So, you can't use the actual bill to prove yourself right? Dontcha think there's something basically wrong with that?
 
Why have a provision that only deals with end of life counceling? Why not just a section that deals with all counceling?

nice play, my friend!!!
 
They dropped it, because they go caught with their hand in the cookie jar, not because the provision would be misinterpreted...LOL!!

There's a bunch more crap in the bill that's going to have to go, before the heat will die down.

What's this?

The rabid Messianic-butt-kissing Leftist socialist freedom grabbers were saying all the people opposed to the healthcare industry theft by their Messiah were crazy and liars because there were no "kill granny" provisions in this bill.

How could the committee drop those provisions if they weren't in there?

Doesn't that mean the people opposed to the bill on the basis of the existence of the "kill granny" provisions were ....ahem...RIGHT?

And WHY should we trust people who can put such a thing in a bill to refrain from sneaking it in later, if we were foolish enough to allow the bill to pass in any form at all?

All the flaming leftards owe the Americans an abject apology.
 
One of the Prof's summer school co-eds obviously bribed him with some hash brownies.

What's with the beat poetry, Prof? Interesting, but doesn't really add a lot to the discussion. Here's one for ya:

some of e. e. cummings

work had

depth.

some Not have.
 
What's this?

The rabid Messianic-butt-kissing Leftist socialist freedom grabbers were saying all the people opposed to the healthcare industry theft by their Messiah were crazy and liars because there were no "kill granny" provisions in this bill.

How could the committee drop those provisions if they weren't in there?

Doesn't that mean the people opposed to the bill on the basis of the existence of the "kill granny" provisions were ....ahem...RIGHT?

And WHY should we trust people who can put such a thing in a bill to refrain from sneaking it in later, if we were foolish enough to allow the bill to pass in any form at all?

All the flaming leftards owe the Americans an abject apology.


They got caught with their asses hangin' in the breeze. What's one to say.

I'm anxiously awaiting someone to refute my posts with information that comes from the actual bill. I'll probably be old enough for the death panel by the time we see any of that. :rofl
 
Seriously, what is it with you hard core right wingers. You took a provision that would have done nothing more than paid physicians for the time they spent with Medicare recipients discussing end of life issues and turned that into government "death panels" deciding who will live and who will die.

First off, the only occasion I can think of off of the top of my head where the federal government attempted to involved itself in the end of life decisions of a private individual was when the Republicans did it with Terri Schiavo, the brain dead woman in Florida.

Well, welcome to Messiah-care, where Womb-to-Tomb takes on a whole new meaning.


However, more to the point, if someone was to actually believe that the federal government would institute government death panels that would essentially weed out unproductive seniors, then they would have to believe that Washington Democrats and President Obama are quite literally on the same level with Joesph Stalin.

You mean we'd have to believe that the political party that demands that absolutely no limits should be placed on the murder of a child by it's mother, including the unrestricted use of Intact D&C, better and more descriptively known as Partial Birth Abortion, would EVER consider greasing the skids for the Alzheimer people?

Noooo.....of courrrse we'd have to be honest if we considered that possible.

And we all know that the people who voted for the Messiah have a headlock on honesty, and they're not going to let it get away from them, right?

Aside from being offensive, its irrational to the point of being truly psychotic.

And so completely consistent with history and human nature.

Is Messiah-care going to have an infinite budget? No? Then rationing has to happen somewhere.

Do address that reality someday, if you people will let honesty catch it's breath for a little while.

Seriously, you guys have taken a guy that is by all accounts a decent man,

Decent men do not sit in Rev. Wright's church for twenty years.

a good husband, and a wonderful father and turned him into Joesph Stalin, an unconscionable sociopathic dictator out to murder your grandparents and sick children......... All because you disagree with him.

Yeah, a better reason to do that is understanding the reality of the socialism he's pushing. It never ends well.

Bad ideas does not equal evil person.

Sure they do.

A bad idea is sniffing your tail pipe.

An evil person hooks the tailpipe up to the cargo section of the bus to speed up the cleansing process of Eastern Europe in 1939.

Another evil person will confiscate the national health care system and blame the deaths caused by the inevitable rationing on the bureaucrats.

Basicly, you can't claim your Messiah is both super-intelligent and completely ignorant. But that's what you're arguing.

If this health care debate has accomplished anything, its demonstrated how much we have neglected mental health care in this country as its truly an epidemic right now. Seriously, if you think that Obama is on the level of Joesph Stalin, and with this loony death panel bull**** you obviously do, then you need to check with your insurance providers and see which anti-psychotics are on the coverage list for you.

So once again the left resorts to ad hominem attacks....oh, and you'll notice that 0.1T of last years deficit under Bush came about as a result of the Democrats taking a completely irrelevant mental health provision onto the so-called emergeny bank bailout. So the Democrats should be able to get all the shink-time they need for their incurable guilt problems.
 
One of the Prof's summer school co-eds obviously bribed him with some hash brownies.

What's with the beat poetry, Prof? Interesting, but doesn't really add a lot to the discussion. Here's one for ya:

some of e. e. cummings

work had

depth.

some Not have.

health care's dead

the president is the fastest LOSER in american history
 
nice play, my friend!!!

The entire full text of the bill in question is here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-1200

You will notice that evil government death panels are no where in it. Just like no where in it is there a provision that allows the government to remove your right eye and implant it in your cod sack. Nor is there a provision that would bring back frontal lobotomies for extremist loons so folks like Palin and Glen Beck can breath a sigh of relief there too.
 
Last edited:
health care's dead

the president is the fastest LOSER in american history

Nope.

It's the seventh inning stretch

and everyone has gone for a pee

there's been some angry words thrown about

drunks in the bathroom and all

but cooler, smarter heads will prevail.

A little forced compassion for those making $320K

They have to fly coach to Aspen

teenage daughter so embarrassed

she wants to die

good thing psychiatric care is covered in the cadillac plan

Dr. feelsogood gets her preggers

baby covered in the plan, yippee.

Daddy indicted for tax evasion

mommy starts to drink

daughter strips because she misses daddy

baby gets sick, no money, no health plan at strip joint

medicare! baby going to live.

mommy go to rehab.

Thank you, Mr. Pres.
:2wave:
 
The entire full text of the bill in question is here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-1200

You will notice that evil government death panels are no where in it. Just like no where in it is there a provision that allows the government to remove your right eye and implant it in your cod sack. Nor is there a provision that would bring back frontal lobotomies for extremist loons so folks like Palin and Glen Beck can breath a sigh of relief there too.

Read Section 1233, on page 839 (I think that's the right page). While it doesn't actually say, "death panel", is clearly spells out how the so called elderly end of life counceling compensation for doctors was intended to work.

Bottom line: the Dems got caught in a big, big lie and now they have to perform damage control.
 
Last edited:
Nope.

It's the seventh inning stretch

and everyone has gone for a pee

there's been some angry words thrown about

drunks in the bathroom and all

but cooler, smarter heads will prevail.

A little forced compassion for those making $320K

They have to fly coach to Aspen

teenage daughter so embarrassed

she wants to die

good thing psychiatric care is covered in the cadillac plan

Dr. feelsogood gets her preggers

baby covered in the plan, yippee.

Daddy indicted for tax evasion

mommy starts to drink

daughter strips because she misses daddy

baby gets sick, no money, no health plan at strip joint

medicare! baby going to live.

mommy go to rehab.

Thank you, Mr. Pres.
:2wave:

nonsense

and kinda sick---the kiddie porn images

health care's dead, sorry

it died when baucus first bawled in the gateway---back to the drawing board

that was mere days before elmendorf's critical testimony concerning the cost curve, elicited in committee by kent conrad, july 16

the next day the prez called his emergency presser and claimed he'd found 2/3 of the cost in a box ted kennedy, apparently, could never find

it was tortured in the house

bluedogs and progressives in rangel's committee and more particularly amongst waxman's group have just tormented it

daschle's declaration more than a month ago that the "public option was dead" was a big moment

daschle was gonna be the prez' missionary on meds, had the former senate leader paid his taxes

but when durbin did what he did on sunday (cnn's john king), that was IT

sorry

the white house signalled surrender on the "public option"

now they're playing for the purple co op in the portal (senate finance)

that'd be grassley, enzi and snowe

that's why obama called out the trio in portsmouth---grassley, enzi and snowe

and examining the posture of the ranking member yesterday...

everything that's gone on in pelosi's place (the house) is kaput

ask durbin

ask baucus

ask elmendorf

ask ms mccaskill, who insisted in hillsboro august 11 (just minutes after obama's michael jackson lookalike at portsmouth)

ms mccaskill INSISTED before HER gymnasium of more AVERAGE americans

LOLOL!

she PLEDGED---no one's even TALKING ABOUT a public option, it's NOT ON THE TABLE, she's URGING

what? i don't understand this room, she says

you really think you're pursuading people by shouting out like that?

you don't trust me?

you want me to go home?

ask ms mccaskill about the public option, hazlnut

SHE vowed SHE'd never SIGN one

1. you need to get a tv and watch it

2. you need to focus on events in washingon, in committee and in places like hillsboro more

3. while worrying less perhaps about the styles of other posters (tho i'm flattered)
 
Last edited:
Read Section 1233, on page 839 (I think that's the right page). While it doesn't actually say, "death panel", is clearly spells out how the so called elderly end of life counceling compensation for doctors was intended to work.

Bottom line: the Dems got caught in a big, big lie and now they have to perform damage control.


Here is the section you are referring to:

(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term ‘advance care planning consultation’ means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such consultation shall include the following:

‘(A) An explanation by the practitioner of advance care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to.
‘(B) An explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses.
‘(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.
‘(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families with advance care planning, including the national toll-free hotline, the advance care planning clearinghouses, and State legal service organizations (including those funded through the Older Americans Act of 1965).
9
‘(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title.
‘(F)(i) Subject to clause (ii), an explanation of orders regarding life sustaining treatment or similar orders, which shall include--
‘(I) the reasons why the development of such an order is beneficial to the individual and the individual’s family and the reasons why such an order should be updated periodically as the health of the individual changes;
‘(II) the information needed for an individual or legal surrogate to make informed decisions regarding the completion of such an order; and
‘(III) the identification of resources that an individual may use to determine the requirements of the State in which such individual resides so that the treatment wishes of that individual will be carried out if the individual is unable to communicate those wishes, including requirements regarding the designation of a surrogate decisionmaker (also known as a health care proxy).
‘(ii) The Secretary shall limit the requirement for explanations under clause (i) to consultations furnished in a State--
‘(I) in which all legal barriers have been addressed for enabling orders for life sustaining treatment to constitute a set of medical orders respected across all care settings; and
‘(II) that has in effect a program for orders for life sustaining treatment described in clause (iii).
‘(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining treatment for a States described in this clause is a program that--
‘(I) ensures such orders are standardized and uniquely identifiable throughout the State;
‘(II) distributes or makes accessible such orders to physicians and other health professionals that (acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law) may sign orders for life sustaining treatment;
‘(III) provides training for health care professionals across the continuum of care about the goals and use of orders for life sustaining treatment; and
‘(IV) is guided by a coalition of stakeholders includes representatives from emergency medical services, emergency department physicians or nurses, state long-term care association, state medical association, state surveyors, agency responsible for senior services, state department of health, state hospital association, home health association, state bar association, and state hospice association.


Read, read it aloud if it helps it sink in, no where in that section is there anything remotely described like a government death panel deciding who lives and who dies.

It is just like I described it earlier, nothing but a provision for physicians, specifically doctors or nurse practitioners to be paid for time they spend discussing medical end of life issues with a patient. It then states that any consultation they are given must fall under the guidelines of the state laws the physician practices in. Thats all it does. In fact, it will only pay for such a consultation with your physician once every 5 years.
 
Here is the section you are referring to:

(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term ‘advance care planning consultation’ means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such consultation shall include the following:

‘(A) An explanation by the practitioner of advance care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to.
‘(B) An explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses.
‘(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.
‘(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families with advance care planning, including the national toll-free hotline, the advance care planning clearinghouses, and State legal service organizations (including those funded through the Older Americans Act of 1965).
9
‘(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title.
‘(F)(i) Subject to clause (ii), an explanation of orders regarding life sustaining treatment or similar orders, which shall include--
‘(I) the reasons why the development of such an order is beneficial to the individual and the individual’s family and the reasons why such an order should be updated periodically as the health of the individual changes;
‘(II) the information needed for an individual or legal surrogate to make informed decisions regarding the completion of such an order; and
‘(III) the identification of resources that an individual may use to determine the requirements of the State in which such individual resides so that the treatment wishes of that individual will be carried out if the individual is unable to communicate those wishes, including requirements regarding the designation of a surrogate decisionmaker (also known as a health care proxy).
‘(ii) The Secretary shall limit the requirement for explanations under clause (i) to consultations furnished in a State--
‘(I) in which all legal barriers have been addressed for enabling orders for life sustaining treatment to constitute a set of medical orders respected across all care settings; and
‘(II) that has in effect a program for orders for life sustaining treatment described in clause (iii).
‘(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining treatment for a States described in this clause is a program that--
‘(I) ensures such orders are standardized and uniquely identifiable throughout the State;
‘(II) distributes or makes accessible such orders to physicians and other health professionals that (acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law) may sign orders for life sustaining treatment;
‘(III) provides training for health care professionals across the continuum of care about the goals and use of orders for life sustaining treatment; and
‘(IV) is guided by a coalition of stakeholders includes representatives from emergency medical services, emergency department physicians or nurses, state long-term care association, state medical association, state surveyors, agency responsible for senior services, state department of health, state hospital association, home health association, state bar association, and state hospice association.


Read, read it aloud if it helps it sink in, no where in that section is there anything remotely described like a government death panel deciding who lives and who dies.

It is just like I described it earlier, nothing but a provision for physicians, specifically doctors or nurse practitioners to be paid for time they spend discussing medical end of life issues with a patient. It then states that any consultation they are given must fall under the guidelines of the state laws the physician practices in. Thats all it does. In fact, it will only pay for such a consultation with your physician once every 5 years.

unfortunately, mom america doesn't have time to read all that crap

the prez needed to explain himself simpler

it's not like he didn't have the opportunity

dang, he's on tv like every half hour

LOL!
 
Last edited:
nonsense

and kinda sick---the kiddie porn images

health care's dead, sorry

it died when baucus first bawled in the gateway---back to the drawing board

that was mere days before elmendorf's critical testimony concerning the cost curve, elicited in committee by kent conrad, july 16

the next day the prez called his emergency presser and claimed he'd found 2/3 of the cost in a box ted kennedy, apparently, could never find

it was tortured in the house

bluedogs and progressives in rangel's committee and more particularly amongst waxman's group have just tormented it

daschle's declaration more than a month ago that the "public option was dead" was a big moment

daschle was gonna be the prez' missionary on meds, had the former senate leader paid his taxes

but when durbin did what he did on sunday (cnn's john king), that was IT

sorry

the white house signalled surrender on the "public option"

now they're playing for the purple co op in the portal (senate finance)

that'd be grassley, enzi and snowe

that's why obama called out the trio in portsmouth---grassley, enzi and snowe

and examining the posture of the ranking member yesterday...

everything that's gone on in pelosi's place (the house) is kaput

ask durbin

ask baucus

ask elmendorf

ask ms mccaskill, who insisted in hillsboro august 11 (just minutes after obama's michael jackson lookalike at portsmouth)

ms mccaskill INSISTED before HER gymnasium of more AVERAGE americans

LOLOL!

she PLEDGED---no one's even TALKING ABOUT a public option, it's NOT ON THE TABLE, she's URGING

what? i don't understand this room, she says

you really think you're pursuading people by shouting out like that?

you don't trust me?

you want me to go home?

ask ms mccaskill about the public option, hazlnut

SHE vowed SHE'd never SIGN one

1. you need to get a tv and watch it

2. you need to focus on events in washingon, in committee and in places like hillsboro more

3. while worrying less perhaps about the styles of other posters (tho i'm flattered)

Your earlier work was more clever. The above effort is verbose and convoluted.

The teenage daughter was 18. Get over it.

BTW-- is the poetry fetish just so you don't have to post links to facts backing up your theories? Didn't think anyone would notice? You're not that interesting.


Health care reform is dead, huh? Guess no one told PhRMA.:shock:

Is that $150mil just for shows and giggles?
 
It is just like I described it earlier, nothing but a provision for physicians, specifically doctors or nurse practitioners to be paid for time they spend discussing medical end of life issues with a patient. It then states that any consultation they are given must fall under the guidelines of the state laws the physician practices in. Thats all it does. In fact, it will only pay for such a consultation with your physician once every 5 years.

Didn't you know that living wills are part of the evil liberal plot for eugenics? Shhh, don't tell any one though.
 
Your earlier work was more clever. The above effort is verbose and convoluted.

The teenage daughter was 18. Get over it.

BTW-- is the poetry fetish just so you don't have to post links to facts backing up your theories? Didn't think anyone would notice? You're not that interesting.


Health care reform is dead, huh? Guess no one told PhRMA.:shock:

Is that $150mil just for shows and giggles?

i have a link for every claim

all have been posted on these pages

appreciation for your patronage

keep perusing The prophetic Prof, it perpetually pays off

whatcha want?

baucus?

T-Word Looms Large In Health Care Cost Debate : NPR

daschle?

Daschle Urges Obama To Drop Federal Public Health Care Plan

elmendorf?

CBO Sees No Net Federal Cost Savings in Dem Health Plans - The Note

you confuse poety with plain speech

plain as a pane
 
Back
Top Bottom