• 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!

FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root

disneydude

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
25,528
Reaction score
8,470
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
If you are tired of all the right-wing lies....check the facts:


FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root - Yahoo! News

Fact #1: THE FACTS: Nothing being debated in Washington would give the government such authority. Critics have twisted a provision in a House bill that would direct Medicare to pay for counseling sessions about end-of-life care, living wills, hospices and the like if a patient wants such consultations with a doctor. They have said, incorrectly, that the elderly would be required to have these sessions.

Fact #2 : THE FACTS: Obama is not proposing a single-payer system in which the government covers everyone, like in Canada or some European countries. He says that direction is not right for the U.S. The proposals being negotiated do not go there.

Fact#3: THE FACTS: The House version of legislation would allow coverage for abortion in the public plan. But the procedure would be paid for with dollars from beneficiary premiums, not from federal funds. Likewise, private plans in the new insurance exchange could opt to cover abortion, but no federal subsidies would be used to pay for the procedure.
 
Ooooo! An AP article taken off of Yahoo! How credible.

I'm convinced.
 
I think it's quite telling how the followers can tell us what's not going on, but don't have a clue about what is going on.
 
I think it's quite telling how the followers can tell us what's not going on, but don't have a clue about what is going on.

Indeed. Funny how they all know how it's going to turn out when the President himself doesn't have all the details... Then again, that's never stopped HIM from opening his mouth before.
 
I think it's quite telling how the followers can tell us what's not going on, but don't have a clue about what is going on.

I find it equally telling that everything you claimed is in the bill, isn't.

By the way, I can tell you a large portion of what is in the bill, and know where to look for details.
 
THE FACTS: Nothing being debated in Washington would give the government such authority. Critics have twisted a provision in a House bill that would direct Medicare to pay for counseling sessions about end-of-life care, living wills, hospices and the like if a patient wants such consultations with a doctor. They have said, incorrectly, that the elderly would be required to have these sessions.

HR3200
SEC. 1401. COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH.

(a) In General- title XI of the Social Security Act is amended by adding at the end the following new part:

`Part D--Comparative Effectiveness Research
`COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH

`Sec. 1181. (a) Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research Established-

`(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary shall establish within the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality a Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research (in this section referred to as the `Center') to conduct, support, and synthesize research (including research conducted or supported under section 1013 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003) with respect to the outcomes, effectiveness, and appropriateness of health care services and procedures in order to identify the manner in which diseases, disorders, and other health conditions can most effectively and appropriately be prevented, diagnosed, treated, and managed clinically.

SEC. 2401. IMPLEMENTATION OF BEST PRACTICES IN THE DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE.

(a) In General- Title IX of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 299 et seq.) is amended--

(1) by redesignating part D as part E;

(2) by redesignating sections 931 through 938 as sections 941 through 948, respectively;

(3) in section 938(1), by striking `931' and inserting `941'; and

(4) by inserting after part C the following:

`PART D--IMPLEMENTATION OF BEST PRACTICES IN THE DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE

`SEC. 931. CENTER FOR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT.

`(a) In General- There is established the Center for Quality Improvement (referred to in this part as the `Center'), to be headed by the Director.

`(b) Prioritization-

`(1) IN GENERAL- The Director shall prioritize areas for the identification, development, evaluation, and implementation of best practices (including innovative methodologies and strategies) for quality improvement activities in the delivery of health care services (in this section referred to as `best practices').

The article is wrong. The language is there--sugar-coated and glossed over--but it is still there.
 
I find it equally telling that everything you claimed is in the bill, isn't.

By the way, I can tell you a large portion of what is in the bill, and know where to look for details.

Tell me where in the bill it details how there's going to be adequate funding AND doctors to suddenly deal with the waves of Obama's 40 million uninsured WITHOUT rationing the care given.
 
I find it equally telling that everything you claimed is in the bill, isn't.

By the way, I can tell you a large portion of what is in the bill, and know where to look for details.

Well, actually, it is. Wait until we get into the government nanny program. That's gonna be a doosey.
 
Tell me where in the bill it details how there's going to be adequate funding AND doctors to suddenly deal with the waves of Obama's 40 million uninsured WITHOUT rationing the care given.

And while you're at it, Redress, you can point out where it says that it won't give free healthcare to 15 million illegals and detail how it's going to make health care costs go down, exactly.
 
HR3200




The article is wrong. The language is there--sugar-coated and glossed over--but it is still there.

You should read the question before you correct the answer.

THE POLL: 45 percent said it's likely the government will decide when to stop care for the elderly; 50 percent said it's not likely.

Nothing in what you quoted gives the government the power to decide when to stop care for the elderly. It gives the government the ability to decide what is covered and what is not. It's a rather unsubtle difference. Patients will still have the final say as to when to stop treatments, especially if they have living wills.
 
And while you're at it, Redress, you can point out where it says that it won't give free healthcare to 15 million illegals and detail how it's going to make health care costs go down, exactly.

I'm more worried about medicare fraud like that has happened over the past several years.

BIRMINGHAM, Ala.—- HealthSouth shareholder attorneys are asking a judge to place sanctions on Richard Scrushy for property being stripped from his Vestavia Hills and Lake Martin residences.

In a motion filed Tuesday afternoon, lawyers claimed that “entire rooms had been stripped” from Scrushy’s Vestavia Hills mansion as of last Wednesday.

They argue furniture, art, drapes and other furnishings had been removed along with antiques and silverware from both his Vestavia Hills home and his Lake Martin property.

Shareholder attorneys are trying to seize Scrushy’s property to satisfy a $2.8 billion court judgment after a judge ruled in June that Scrushy directed HealthSouth’s massive accounting fraud scandal.

HealthSouth shareholder attorneys: Scrushy mansion stripped bare | NBC13.com

American citizens ripping off American citizens.
 
Last edited:
You should read the question before you correct the answer.



Nothing in what you quoted gives the government the power to decide when to stop care for the elderly. It gives the government the ability to decide what is covered and what is not. It's a rather unsubtle difference. Patients will still have the final say as to when to stop treatments, especially if they have living wills.

So, in reality, you aren't able to take actual info from the bill, post it and tell us what it means?

Just the same ole, "dat ain't what dat means", line of crap.
 
I'm more worried about medicare fraud like that has happened over the past several years.

A government run health care system would be wide open to fraud.
 
And while you're at it, Redress, you can point out where it says that it won't give free healthcare to 15 million illegals and detail how it's going to make health care costs go down, exactly.

We have been over the illegal immigrant lie already you know. Do you just have zero memory, or do you enjoy having people prove you wrong repeatedly?

Seven Falsehoods About Health Care | FactCheck.org

.R. 3200: Sec 246 — NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS

Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.

Yes, that is right, the bill specifically denies illegal aliens.
 
A government run health care system would be wide open to fraud.

Health south was a private corp and I'm sure I can find more in the private insurance industry. And thank goodness we have a governmental system that brings these thieves to justice.
 
Last edited:
I'm more worried about medicare fraud like that has happened over the past several years.



American citizens ripping off American citizens.

I would love to see more work done on finding and prosecuting any one who defrauds the government. I am very much a law and order type.
 
Health south was a private corp and I'm sure I can find more in the private insurance industry. And thank goodness we have a governmental system that brings these thieves to justice.

So, government beaurocrats are going to watch things closer than private industry employees? You're gonna have to work hard to sell me on that one.
 
Tell me where in the bill it details how there's going to be adequate funding AND doctors to suddenly deal with the waves of Obama's 40 million uninsured WITHOUT rationing the care given.

Can you explain your way over this small bump for me. You know, just so I can put my mind at ease.
 
Can you explain your way over this small bump for me. You know, just so I can put my mind at ease.

Funding is still in the works, and is a real sticking point. So far no real proposal has gotten anywhere.
 
Indeed. Funny how they all know how it's going to turn out when the President himself doesn't have all the details... Then again, that's never stopped HIM from opening his mouth before.

Oh the President is right on top of things. He knows important details such as the fact that the AARP is behind health care reform 100%. Check that. :doh
 
If you are tired of all the right-wing lies....check the facts:


FACT CHECK: Health overhaul myths taking root - Yahoo! News

It's a bit depressing that journalists keep on missing the nuance of arguments and are so focused on strawmen. Absolutely piss poor reasoning on their part.

THE POLL: 45 percent said it's likely the government will decide when to stop care for the elderly; 50 percent said it's not likely.

Fact #1: THE FACTS: Nothing being debated in Washington would give the government such authority. Critics have twisted a provision in a House bill that would direct Medicare to pay for counseling sessions about end-of-life care, living wills, hospices and the like if a patient wants such consultations with a doctor. They have said, incorrectly, that the elderly would be required to have these sessions.


Yes, it absolutely would. That's probably the best part of the plan.

Any government plan, just like any private insurance, involves decisions of cost-efficiency. If there is a 95 year old person in poor health develops a cancer that will kill them in 5 months, the government plan will not (or at least should not) pay for an expensive cancer drug that will expand that prognosis from 5 months to 10.

That is the very definition of government making end-of-life decisions. And it's completely okay.

THE POLL: 54 percent said the overhaul will lead to a government takeover of health care; 39 percent disagree.

THE FACTS: Obama is not proposing a single-payer system in which the government covers everyone, like in Canada or some European countries. He says that direction is not right for the U.S. The proposals being negotiated do not go there.

Is this writer retarded? Does he not understand that "government takeover" =/= immediate single-payer? It's completely reasonable to believe that the house bill will eventually lead to a government takeover even though it is obviously not single payer.

THE POLL: 50 percent expect taxpayer dollars will be used to pay for abortions; 37 percent don't.

THE FACTS: The House version of legislation would allow coverage for abortion in the public plan. But the procedure would be paid for with dollars from beneficiary premiums, not from federal funds. Likewise, private plans in the new insurance exchange could opt to cover abortion, but no federal subsidies would be used to pay for the procedure.

:rofl Saying that abortions will be paid for only by private premiums, when the system will be (in no trivial part) subsidized by the government is absolutely idiotic. It's like saying that we're going to pass the stimulus, but it won't come out of your tax dollars. It's all coming out of and going into the same place.

Really a poor showing all around.
 
Yes, it absolutely would. That's probably the best part of the plan.

Any government plan, just like any private insurance, involves decisions of cost-efficiency. If there is a 95 year old person in poor health develops a cancer that will kill them in 5 months, the government plan will not (or at least should not) pay for an expensive cancer drug that will expand that prognosis from 5 months to 10.

That is the very definition of government making end-of-life decisions. And it's completely okay.

From all I can find out, it is not a personal, "you are 95 and dying, you are out of luck", it's just like normal insurance, deciding what is "covered" and what is not. The government is not getting involved on a personal level.
 
And while you're at it, Redress, you can point out where it says that it won't give free healthcare to 15 million illegals and detail how it's going to make health care costs go down, exactly.

I'm more worried about medicare fraud like that has happened over the past several years.

BIRMINGHAM, Ala.—- HealthSouth shareholder attorneys are asking a judge to place sanctions on Richard Scrushy for property being stripped from his Vestavia Hills and Lake Martin residences.

In a motion filed Tuesday afternoon, lawyers claimed that “entire rooms had been stripped” from Scrushy’s Vestavia Hills mansion as of last Wednesday.

They argue furniture, art, drapes and other furnishings had been removed along with antiques and silverware from both his Vestavia Hills home and his Lake Martin property.

Shareholder attorneys are trying to seize Scrushy’s property to satisfy a $2.8 billion court judgment after a judge ruled in June that Scrushy directed HealthSouth’s massive accounting fraud scandal.

HealthSouth shareholder attorneys: Scrushy mansion stripped bare | NBC13.com

Americans ripping Americans off what a great nation when they are in need.:doh
 
From all I can find out, it is not a personal, "you are 95 and dying, you are out of luck", it's just like normal insurance, deciding what is "covered" and what is not. The government is not getting involved on a personal level.

Sounds like rationing to me.
 
Back
Top Bottom