White House appears ready to drop 'public option'

[Fly Rod]

Originally Posted by spence

We already have a "public option" for million of people, so the notion that this is something new isn't very accurate.

Obama hasn't been able to articulate how the public option won't help costs at the expense of the free market, so to take it off the table isn't a big surprise.

That being said...Right now I'm trying to get Cigna to pay 225 dollars for something they told my wife over the phone was covered, but now say is isn't.

Aside from some meaningless appeals I have little recourse...

All the while the CEO is earning 30 Million+

And people think there's nothing wrong with our system?

-spence

I see nothing wrong with our present system. My family medical plan is roughly $12,000.00 per year at the moment. My medication is $100,000 per year at the moment, my co- pay for the meds is 40.00 per month. With out it I would not be able to drive, fish and hunt let alone leave my home.

Under Obama's plan I would probably be visiting his panel of doctors (death panel) and thrown aside.

Yes we have public option, there is also free medical that the hospitals dole out to the less fortunate. They lose millions in providing this service.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Fly Rod

I see nothing wrong with our present system. My family medical plan is roughly $12,000.00 per year at the moment. My medication is $100,000 per year at the moment, my co- pay for the meds is 40.00 per month. With out it I would not be able to drive, fish and hunt let alone leave my home.

For starters you might wonder why that medication costs 100,000 grand a year.

Under Obama's plan I would probably be visiting his panel of doctors (death panel) and thrown aside.

If they don't exist how can they cast you aside?

Yes we have public option, there is also free medical that the hospitals dole out to the less fortunate. They lose millions in providing this service.

Yes, the root of the problem is the Hippocratic oath!

-spence

[Fly Rod]

The cost does not matter.

In a poor country if some one is taking that same med they are more then likely getting it free, if at all.

I will agree with you that some changes can be made in the health system as far as cost but, not through a government plan. Mass Health is a good exsample of government taking control.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Fly Rod

Under Obama's plan I would probably be visiting his panel of doctors (death panel) and thrown aside.

Except that's not part of the proposal. You must be listening to Rush with Cool Beans.

[Cool Beans]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Except that's not part of the proposal. You must be listening to Rush with Cool Beans.

It sure as hell was,,, it recently got dropped... I'll try to get the exact page and section of the bill for you...

[spence]

Originally Posted by Cool Beans

It sure as hell was,,, it recently got dropped... I'll try to get the exact page and section of the bill for you...

Yea, because Rush would never twist the truth to make a point

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Yea, because Rush would never twist the truth to make a point

not nearly as frequently as you Spence...

[Fly Rod]

I just like to mention the (death panel) just to get spence's attention.

It is just a panel of highly educated people mentality of a democrat (Nazi) they would discuss that you are costing the system to much money for your terminal condition and they would discuss the brown bottle that they would offer you that you would put on your coffee table and when you felt the time was right you take a gulp of the brown bottle and you just fall asleep.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Cool Beans

It sure as hell was,,, it recently got dropped... I'll try to get the exact page and section of the bill for you...

Please do. You might have some trouble though... I looked around Rush's website and couldn't find anything.

[scottw]

Euthanasia and “death panels” are not as clear as the fact that taxpayers will fund abortions in the bill – however there are numerous signs that point to rationing in the bill, that could then lead to such things.

The biggest question mark comes from who wrote Section 1233 of the House health care overhaul bill. The original language was written by assisted suicide supporter Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) alongside a group that once was called the Hemlock Society – the nation’s biggest advocates of euthanasia and assisted suicide. The Hemlock Society helped draft Oregon’s assisted suicide law – legislation that has led some afflicted people in Oregon getting letters “consulting” them that, while the state run plan would not pay for their cancer treatments, the state would be happy to pay for assisted suicide if they choose that "cheaper" option.

Additionally, Section 1401 establishes the Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research. A similar center was established in the economic stimulus bill passed in February. The report issued by the House Appropriations Committee at that time explained what they hoped to accomplish with this “research.”:

“By knowing what works best and (government)presenting this information more broadly to patients and healthcare professionals, those items, procedures and "interventions" that are most effective to prevent, control and treat health conditions will be utilized¸ while those that are found to be less effective and in some cases, more expensive, will no longer be prescribed. ”

Five times in various committees there were attempts to ensure that “comparative effectiveness research” is not used for rationing purposes. Each time the Democrats on the committees voted the amendments down.

Additionally, the Obama plan relies heavily on cuts to Medicare to pay for the new benefits. Despite these cuts he fails to address the solvency issue of Medicare, inevitably leading to reduction of benefits to participants.

Couple these with public comments of supporters of the leading bills in Congress, like President Obama and Senator Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), that the federal government would be making decisions that usually are left up to patients and doctors the onus should be on supporters of the bill to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that their legislation would not lead to rationing of care.

Again, ultimately, this is about creating a single payer government run and rationed system in which you and your children will be subject to the whims of government for your healthcare services with no "OPTIONS"....Obama and his friends, despite claiming to desire to create competition in the system have made it perfectly clear that their true intention is to drive the private sector out of the market over time...they have not given up, they are simply repackaging their lies for another round...