• 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

Didn't you know that living wills are part of the evil liberal plot for eugenics? Shhh, don't tell any one though.

Too bad Sec. 1233 doesn't mention living wills, not even once.

Come on, guys! Dammit, I know there's someone that can use a hunderd dollar bill. If you're all so damned correct on what the bill says, then this should be over already.

There's enough folks on this forum that don't like me, to suggest that I'm wrong, even if only a little; even some Connies. This just shouldn't be all that hard for such obvious information.
 
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.

Who is the, "secretary"? What's the need for a secretary? What does the secretary have to do with doctors doing end of life counceling?
 
Who is the, "secretary"? What's the need for a secretary? What does the secretary have to do with doctors doing end of life counceling?

The evil "secretary" would be who ever the under-Secretary of Health and Human Services is at the time that is over Medicare along with the board of trustees. All this is stating is that the Secretary is to ensure along with state agencies and senior agencies that any consultation is within the boundaries of the state laws the physician practices in. Basically its just saying that it is the responsibility of Medicare when reimbursing this physician for this consultation to make sure that nothing is being told to the patient that violates state law. Ohhhhhhh the Horrors of that...
 
Too bad Sec. 1233 doesn't mention living wills, not even once.

Come on, guys! Dammit, I know there's someone that can use a hunderd dollar bill. If you're all so damned correct on what the bill says, then this should be over already.

There's enough folks on this forum that don't like me, to suggest that I'm wrong, even if only a little; even some Connies. This just shouldn't be all that hard for such obvious information.

Not by name, no, but that is what this type of counseling is used for.
 
Who is the, "secretary"? What's the need for a secretary? What does the secretary have to do with doctors doing end of life counceling?

Yes, a secretary is so ominous. Must be an evil plot.
 
The evil "secretary" would be who ever the under-Secretary of Health and Human Services is at the time that is over Medicare along with the board of trustees. All this is stating is that the Secretary is to ensure along with state agencies and senior agencies that any consultation is within the boundaries of the state laws the physician practices in. Basically its just saying that it is the responsibility of Medicare when reimbursing this physician for this consultation to make sure that nothing is being told to the patient that violates state law. Ohhhhhhh the Horrors of that...

Hey dude, you lost, give it up.

Not by name, no, but that is what this type of counseling is used for.

So, then, since it's not mentioned, "by name", it doesn't exist in the bill.
 
Yes, a secretary is so ominous. Must be an evil plot.

All ya'll can come up with is smartass answers to my posts. Right? Speaks volumes.
 
Hey dude, you lost, give it up.

I understand that, reason and knowledge will always lose in a debate to willful ignorance and absurd beliefs. Reason will never win over someone that did arrive at their beliefs through reason.

Believe what you wish to believe, let me nor the text of the actual bill, nor reality get in the way of it.;)
 
Hey dude, you lost, give it up.

How is explaining in clear language what the bill contains losing, when the best you have come up with is the bill mentions a secretary?

So, then, since it's not mentioned, "by name", it doesn't exist in the bill.

And yet it is described pretty much exactly in the bill...
 
I understand that, reason and knowledge will always lose in a debate to willful ignorance and absurd beliefs. Reason will never win over someone that did arrive at their beliefs through reason.

Believe what you wish to believe, let me nor the text of the actual bill, nor reality get in the way of it.;)

Someone owes you $100.

Great job. You've got a lot more patience than I.

abpst, are you going to pay up or what?
 
Which sources, using actual language in the bill, have exposed Palin as a liar. I await your response with baited breath.

I've posted them here in other threads...others have as well. The problem is, you are so in love with Palin that you fail to even recognize her pathetic propoganda even when it is placed right under your nose. But I'd expect nothing less.
 
I understand that, reason and knowledge will always lose in a debate to willful ignorance and absurd beliefs. Reason will never win over someone that did arrive at their beliefs through reason.

Believe what you wish to believe, let me nor the text of the actual bill, nor reality get in the way of it.;)

Well, if I'm so ignorant, then educate me. Surely it should be easier than that for you, since you're smarter than I am.
 
I've posted them here in other threads...others have as well. The problem is, you are so in love with Palin that you fail to even recognize her pathetic propoganda even when it is placed right under your nose. But I'd expect nothing less.

You ain't posted nothin'.
 
Well, if I'm so ignorant, then educate me.

Ok. Rub the magic lamp, and suck on this lollipop and you will finally have your education.

Sarah Palin falsely claims Barack Obama runs a 'death panel'

Sarah Palin, the former governor of Alaska, urged her supporters to oppose Democratic plans for health care reform on her Facebook page.

"As more Americans delve into the disturbing details of the nationalized health care plan that the current administration is rushing through Congress, our collective jaw is dropping, and we’re saying not just no, but hell no!" wrote Palin in a note posted Aug. 7, 2009.

She said that the Democrats plan to reduce health care costs by simply refusing to pay for care.

"And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil."

We agree with Palin that such a system would be evil. But it's definitely not what President Barack Obama or any other Democrat has proposed.

We have read all 1,000-plus pages of the Democratic bill and examined versions in various committees. There is no panel in any version of the health care bills in Congress that judges a person's "level of productivity in society" to determine whether they are "worthy" of health care.

Palin's claim sounds a little like another statement making the rounds, which says that health care reform would mandate counseling for seniors on how to end their lives sooner. We rated this claim Pants on Fire! The truth is that the health bill allows Medicare, for the first time, to pay for doctors' appointments for patients to discuss living wills and other end-of-life issues with their physicians. These types of appointments are completely optional, and AARP supports the measure.

Palin also may have also jumped to conclusions about the Obama administration's efforts to promote comparative effectiveness research. Such research has nothing to do with evaluating patients for "worthiness." Rather, comparative effectiveness research finds out which treatments work better than others.

I (we) accept your most humble apologies. I know, Palin's a looker and it's hard to actually listen to what she's saying when you're trying to picture her naked. But, trust me, I've listened and she's not that bright and really shouldn't be running her mouth about things too complicated for her to understand.
 
Well, if I'm so ignorant, then educate me. Surely it should be easier than that for you, since you're smarter than I am.

I don't think you are stupid. I think you are being willfully ignorant. There is nothing I nor anyone else on here can do about that. You have to make the choice not to be yourself.
 
I don't think you are stupid. I think you are being willfully ignorant. There is nothing I nor anyone else on here can do about that. You have to make the choice not to be yourself.

Has he paid up yet?
 
LOL!

they dropped the provision, didn't they?

so, who cares?

it musta really STUNK, whatever it said

LOL!

but, for anyone around here to go---whimper, it's not fair, the bill got MISCHARACTERIZED

LOLOLOLOL!

you sure better hope the PREZ doesn't take it like such a BABY

politics is for MEN

and WOMEN

not snivellers

excuse makers

EXPLAINERS AWAY OF FAILURE

LOLOL!

whatever it said, exactly (LOL!)---the prez is RESPONSIBLE

isn't he?

even if it ISN'T fair

LOLOLOLOL!

LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!
 
You're really off your game, Prof.

Remember, form follows function.
 
no, form follows endless back and forth over a provision that just died

LOL!

yanked by BOTH SIDES

definition of LOSER

cuz it got MISUNDERSTOOD

LOLOLOL!

thanks
 
Prof:

It's such a fine line between stupid, and clever.
Spinal Tap
 
wow, spinal tap

this, from the guy who wants something from ME concerning dorgan, lincoln, nelson and conrad announcing the death in the senate (this morning) of cap and trade

the fella who goes on and on parsing the precise interpretation of a death panel provision that's EXPIRED

LOL!

then bemoans how it's so unfair, it was MISUNDERSTOOD

LOLOL!

the same silly who wants to blame ME for killing the public option

when all i did is INFORM HIM what mr durbin said

LOLOL!

form follows substance, spinal tap, great

anything else?
 
wow, spinal tap

this, from the guy who wants something from ME concerning dorgan, lincoln, nelson and conrad announcing the death in the senate (this morning) of cap and trade

the fella who goes on and on parsing the precise interpretation of a death panel provision that's EXPIRED

LOL!

then bemoans how it's so unfair, it was MISUNDERSTOOD

LOLOL!

the same silly who wants to blame ME for killing the public option

when all i did is INFORM HIM what mr durbin said

LOLOL!

form follows substance, spinal tap, great

anything else?

Something that might help you out: [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paragraph]Paragraph - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
 
i'm talking to a friend

not writing an essay

grow up
 
wow, spinal tap

this, from the guy who wants something from ME concerning dorgan, lincoln, nelson and conrad announcing the death in the senate (this morning) of cap and trade

the fella who goes on and on parsing the precise interpretation of a death panel provision that's EXPIRED

LOL!

then bemoans how it's so unfair, it was MISUNDERSTOOD

LOLOL!

the same silly who wants to blame ME for killing the public option

when all i did is INFORM HIM what mr durbin said

LOLOL!

form follows substance, spinal tap, great

anything else?

Get back on your meds.

Please.
 
Back
Top Bottom