Palin Details Death Panels From Facebook

This just in from Palin's facebook as part of her educating the public on "Death Panels." Why she keeps signing "governor" is beyond me. She quit...or she could just write "gover" since that is equivalent to the amount of time she served the state of Alaska.

Senator Reverend Ruben Diaz Chair, New York Senate Aging Committee Legislative Office Building Room 307 Albany, NY 12247

September 8, 2009

RE: H.R. 3200: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 and Its Impact on Senior Citizens

Dear Senator Diaz,

Thank you for asking me to participate in the New York State Senate Aging Committee's hearing regarding H.R. 3200, "America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009." You and I share a commitment to ensuring that our health care system is not "reformed" at the expense of America's senior citizens.

I have been vocal in my opposition to Section 1233 of H.R.3200, entitled "Advance Care Planning Consultation."[1] Proponents of the bill have described this section as an entirely voluntary provision that simply increases the information offered to Medicare recipients. That is misleading. The issue is the context in which that information is provided and the coercive effect these consultations will have in that context.

Section 1233 authorizes advanced care planning consultations for senior citizens on Medicare every five years, and more often "if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual ... or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility... or a hospice program."[2] During those consultations, practitioners are to explain "the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice," and the government benefits available to pay for such services.[3]

To understand this provision fully, it must be read in context. These consultations are authorized whenever a Medicare recipient's health changes significantly or when they enter a nursing home, and they are part of a bill whose stated purpose is "to reduce the growth in health care spending."[4] Is it any wonder that senior citizens might view such consultations as attempts to convince them to help reduce health care costs by accepting minimal end-of-life care? As one commentator has noted, Section 1233 "addresses compassionate goals in disconcerting proximity to fiscal ones.... If it's all about obviating suffering, emotional or physical, what's it doing in a measure to 'bend the curve' on health-care costs?"[5]

As you stated in your letter to Congressman Henry Waxman of California:

Section 1233 of House Resolution 3200 puts our senior citizens on a slippery slope and may diminish respect for the inherent dignity of each of their lives.... It is egregious to consider that any senior citizen ... should be placed in a situation where he or she would feel pressured to save the government money by dying a little sooner than he or she otherwise would, be required to be counseled about the supposed benefits of killing oneself, or be encouraged to sign any end of life directives that they would not otherwise sign.[6]

It is unclear whether section 1233 or a provision like it will remain part of any final health care bill. Regardless of its fate, the larger issue of rationed health care remains.

A great deal of attention was given to my use of the phrase "death panel" in discussing such rationing.[7] Despite repeated attempts by many in the media to dismiss this phrase as a "myth", its accuracy has been vindicated. In the face of a nationwide public outcry, the Senate Finance Committee agreed to "drop end-of-life provisions from consideration entirely because of the way they could be misinterpreted and implemented incorrectly."[8] Jim Towey, the former head of the White House Office of Faith-Based Initiatives, then called attention to what's already occurring at the Department of Veteran's Affairs, where "government bureaucrats are greasing the slippery slope that can start with cost containment but quickly become a systematic denial of care."[9] Even Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, a strong supporter of President Obama, agreed that "if the government says it has to control health care costs and then offers to pay doctors to give advice about hospice care, citizens are not delusional to conclude that the goal is to reduce end-of-life spending."[10] And of course President Obama has not backed away from his support for the creation of an unelected, largely unaccountable Independent Medicare Advisory Council to help control Medicare costs; he had previously suggested that such a group should guide decisions regarding "that huge driver of cost . . . the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives...."[11]

The fact is that any group of government bureaucrats that makes decisions affecting life or death is essentially a "death panel." The work of Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, President Obama's health policy advisor and the brother of his chief of staff, is particularly disturbing on this score. Dr. Emanuel has written extensively on the topic of rationed health care, describing a "Complete Lives System" for allotting medical care based on "a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated."[12]

He also has written that some medical services should not be guaranteed to those "who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens.... An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia."[13]

Such ideas are shocking, but they could ultimately be used by government bureacrats to help determine the treatment of our loved ones. We must ensure that human dignity remains at the center of any proposed health care reform. Real health care reform would also follow free market principles, including the encouragement of health savings accounts; would remove the barriers to purchasing health insurance across state lines; and would include tort reform so as to potentially save billions each year in wasteful spending connected to the filing of frivolous lawsuits. H.R. 3200 is not the reform we are looking for.

Thank you for calling attention to this important matter. I look forward to working with you again to ensure that we keep the dignity of our senior citizens foremost in any health care discussion.

Sincerely,

Governor Sarah Palin

Follow Shannyn Moore on Twitter: www.twitter.com/shannynmoore

Comments

[Emerald1943]

I knew after reading the first paragraph that she did not write this! What a joke!

Thanks, Shannyn! Keep up the good work!

[Ronin2uib]

Emerald1943,

I knew someone would beat me to it. You are absolutely right. Kudos! There is NO way Sarah Palin could have written this, herself. Staff members, more at-hired professionals with an education-wrote every, single, word. Ms. Palin said, in a filmed interview, that no one had TOLD her what a vice-president does. How could that ever add up, with her letter?

If, by a vast stretch of imagination, she did write this, cotton balls float on water!

Best wishes,
Ronin Kannushi.

[sski74]

She is so delusional, it's incomprehensible. Isn't she a private citizen now? If so, why in the world is she STILL calling herself "Governor Sarah Palin"? You get the title when you actually hold that position. Lady - you quit. Let it go!

[SharpDressedMan]

Part5of5

Year after year, election after election we were told the free market, not the government, will fix the problems. It's 2009 and decades after hearing the same excuses and false promises, the industry grew to 17% of the economy. Now we are told it's "too big to touch, let the markets solve it." More people find it harder than ever to make ends meet. Many lost their home, family, livelihood and must rebuild their lives. Free marketeers want a law mandating the purchase of health insurance. Where will the unemployed and destitute get the money for insurance when they don't have enough for food and rent? Don't they get it? It's the insurance part of the health care industry that messed things up.

Health care costs nearly doubled in 3 decades. Republicans had the White House for 20 of the past 28 years but failed to provide affordable health care to all individuals and businesses.

Town hall meetings were recently held throughout the country. Political operatives pretended to be aw shucks sixpack folks till they were exposed. Others with real health concerns were humiliated in organized protests staffed by political operatives and goons living outside the town hall constituency. The organizers include representatives and lobbyists of health insurance companies who also "own" politicians.

Respected conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer was correct when he stated Sarah Palin should leave the room so others can handle the health care crisis. When will Sarah get it?

[SharpDressedMan]

Part4of5

Where are the real solutions in the WJS op-ed? Nowhere. All I see is canned rhetoric to appease right wing public opinion and feed the misguided notion that markets solve everything.

Where are real solutions? Out there, in other industrialized countries with functional public health care. Right wingers, fundamentalists and free marketeers must stop lying about how bad health care is in other countries.

Back in the 80s, the health care industry was less than 10% of our economy. We were told the free market provides the best health care if litigation costs are controlled. Tort reform was applied, costs escalated, insurance premiums increased, and insurance became less affordable. Defensive medicine was another culprit. Then the high cost of paperwork and record keeping. Then the skyrocketing cost of pharmaceuticals.

Insurance companies forced doctors to shorten appointments. The high cost of hospital care was also blamed. Doctors were forced to treat more as outpatients and release inpatients early, some even with potential risks, like releasing mothers one day after birth. More corners were cut by refusing certain operations like transplants. Where else to save money? Pre-existing conditions. Just don't allow them and keep the insurance premiums high.

Like a whack-a-mole machine, each aspect was hammered but the health care crisis became worse and worse. The free market had decades to address the health crisis and failed. Instead, it enriched hospitals, labs, pharmaceuticals, medical equipment manufacturers, doctors, insurance companies, and investors.

[SharpDressedMan]

Part3of5

"reforming tort laws to potentially save billions each year in wasteful spending;"

Tort reform stated years before Sarah Palin dribbled a basketball in her high school's gymnasium. In decades past, states passed laws to limit outlandish damage awards and costly liability coverage. Some work remains but this is hardly an issue. Costs must be controlled but claiming tort reform as a solution is deceptive.

"and changing costly state regulations to allow people to buy insurance across state lines. Rather than another top-down government plan,"

This is one of the most ludicrous statements proposed on this issue. Interstate health care companies already exist. They avoid state limits by forming subsidiaries for each state and the parent company controls the subsidiaries. It's more advantageous for them because liability is limited to the subsidiary in the plaintiff's state. That's part of tort reform. No issue here.

"let's give Americans control over their own health care."

Deceptive and naive. Throughout the op-ed, the Author suggested that health care is best controlled by the free market. Now it's suggested Americans control it. This is a contradiction. If you think we control an industry through the free market ask yourself this. Did we control banks, finance, and credit card companies before and after market crashes? No. They control themselves and most were saved with our tax dollars. They even paid themselves bonuses with our tax money. The best way for Americans to control health care is through universal coverage.

[SharpDressedMan]

Part2of5

"such policies include giving all individuals the same tax benefits received by those who get coverage through their employers;"

There is that deceptive buzzword, "tax benefit". Employer provided insurance is good only when people are employed. What good is employer provided insurance when people are out of work and without coverage? What good is coverage if it doesn't include pre-existing conditions? Ask the millions currently unemployed, uninsured, or underinsured. COBRA is a joke with premiums higher than mortgage notes.

"providing Medicare recipients with vouchers that allow them to purchase their own coverage;"

Vouchers increase bureaucracy because offices around the country are needed to manage and hand them out. Vouchers will provide less money and lower health care. The Author's comment shows how far out of touch free marketeers are with the realities of Medicare recipients and retirees. Most barely make enough money to eat well. Many have part time jobs. Some are subsidized by their kids where possible. Many can't afford new clothes and buy them at thrift, charity, and consignment stores. Some have the fortune of steadily working year after year then the misfortune of an early retirement, unable to get another job and forced to take lower retirement pay. Some lose their livelihood because companies went belly up for one reason after another. Remember Enron and others? Their executives made out like bandits and stashed millions.

[SharpDressedMan]

Part1of5

Solutions offered in today's WJS op-ed submitted by Sarah Palin are hardly workable and offered as buzz words and slogans to dupe Republican supporters.

Whoever wrote this article will be referred to as "Author" and not as Sarah Palin. It's obvious she didn't write the op-ed. Another sign is the absence of biblical and incendiary terms.

"Instead of poll-driven "solutions," let's talk about real health-care reform: market-oriented, patient-centered, and result-driven."

The Author has it wrong. The Democratic version of the health care bill isn't offered to match polls, It reflects the decades long need for health coverage for all . The "market-oriented", "patient-centered", "result-driven" are rhetorical cliches offered in similar proposals for other industries. The Author says keep the status quo but the status quo is the culmination of a decades long national crisis. The Author avoids the crux of the issue.

"As the Cato Institute's Michael Cannon and others have argued,"

The Cato Institute is a confirmed free market conservative think tank that historically failed to think objectively in the best interest for the country. They produced volumes of work, hours of programming and interviews to support free markets and the rich getting richer at the expense of the poor.

[kareemachan]

Yeah, that "Governor Sarah Palin" had me wondering, too. Note to Sarah: You can't have it both ways. Either you quit being gov or you didn't. Next time sign your name "Ex-Governor Sarah Palin".

[Billar]

Sarah Palin, a waste of ink.

[Billar]

Why does this individual still get ink at Huffpo is beyond me.

[SimJack]

Isn't it plagiarism to publish the work of someone else as your own? And isn't the WSJ guilty of complicity in knowingly doing so?

[halbhh]

At first this seemed only another Sarah Palin attempt to create an illusion.

But then I realized there is a specific, common fear Palin has that is *real*, not fake.

Here's the specific fear, and how to answer it well:

http://findingourdream.blogspot.com/2009/09/considering-palins-real-fears.html

[TimtheEnchanted]

Sitting in on Sarah's "Death Panel" -- Santa, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy.

[WhiteHat]

Uh, Sarah,

Anyone with a gnat's brain could tell you that there is not now and never has been a single elected politician who would ever sign up for pulling the plug on grandma. You yourself have approached that level of cruelty by cutting funding for a battered women's shelter in Alaska, but Congress is made up of real pros who want to get elected again sometime.

In addition, nothing anywhere suggests that the government will (a) choose to ration health care, or (b) need to. Doctors will remain in private practice, not become government employees. Insurance companies will still be in business. ERs will stay open.

If you're concerned that we won't have enough doctors when health care is available for all, then the problem is that we don't have enough doctors, and the solution to that is not that poor people should continue to suffer with minimal care. Affordable education for doctors would help, as would health maintenance programs. Your "rationale" for rationing doesn't add up. You irresponsible ass.

[CJWebber]

Well said.

[SharpDressedMan]

The military has a good way of distinguishing active from retired or inactive officers. When active, the title syntax is "Rank Name." When retired, it is "Ret. Rank Name" or "Fmr. Rank Name."

Politicians should follow this example and use "Fmr. Office Name."

As in Fmr. Governor Sarah Palin. She owes at least that much to current Governor Sean Parnell.

[annie0107]

Sarah Palin who quit as Governor of Alaska ... Sarah Palin, Qtr.

[mootown]

Sarah Palin, Hsbn.