Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
SK in CV
Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]Oregon Offers to Pay to Kill, but Not to Treat Cancer Patient
“SALEM, Oregon, June 4, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Lung cancer patient, Barbara Wagner, was recently notified that her oncologist-prescribed medication that would slow the growth of cancer would not be covered by the Oregon Health Plan; the plan, however, she was informed, would cover doctor-assisted suicide should she wish to kill herself.”
“‘Treatment of advanced cancer that is meant to prolong life, or change the course of this disease, is not a covered benefit of the Oregon Health Plan,’ read the letter notifying Wagner of the health plan’s decision.”
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jun/08060402.html%5B/quote%5DWhat does this have to do with proposed health insurance legislation?
Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]Oregon Offers to Pay to Kill, but Not to Treat Cancer Patient
“SALEM, Oregon, June 4, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Lung cancer patient, Barbara Wagner, was recently notified that her oncologist-prescribed medication that would slow the growth of cancer would not be covered by the Oregon Health Plan; the plan, however, she was informed, would cover doctor-assisted suicide should she wish to kill herself.”
“‘Treatment of advanced cancer that is meant to prolong life, or change the course of this disease, is not a covered benefit of the Oregon Health Plan,’ read the letter notifying Wagner of the health plan’s decision.”
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jun/08060402.html%5B/quote%5DWhat does this have to do with proposed health insurance legislation?
Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]Oregon Offers to Pay to Kill, but Not to Treat Cancer Patient
“SALEM, Oregon, June 4, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Lung cancer patient, Barbara Wagner, was recently notified that her oncologist-prescribed medication that would slow the growth of cancer would not be covered by the Oregon Health Plan; the plan, however, she was informed, would cover doctor-assisted suicide should she wish to kill herself.”
“‘Treatment of advanced cancer that is meant to prolong life, or change the course of this disease, is not a covered benefit of the Oregon Health Plan,’ read the letter notifying Wagner of the health plan’s decision.”
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jun/08060402.html%5B/quote%5DWhat does this have to do with proposed health insurance legislation?
Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]“On May 21, 2009, Representative Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), cochairman of the Bi-Partisan Congressional Task Force on Alzheimer’s Disease and senior member of the Energy and Commerce Committee which has jurisdiction over health care policy, and Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee which has jurisdiction over health care policy, today reintroduced the Independence at Home Act, H.R. 2560. The bill will create a 3-year pilot program to bring primary care medical services to Medicare beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions in their homes. It will offer incentives for providing patients with care options that offer greater independence and quality of life while reducing costs. Pilot programs will be set up in 26 states, and the legislation has attracted bipartisan support in both the House and Senate, including Representative Chris Smith (R-N.J.), and Senators Richard Burr (R-NC), Ben Cardin, (D- Md.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).” I think this is a more humane solution to some of the problems associated with elderly patients.[/quote]
More humane than what?
Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]“On May 21, 2009, Representative Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), cochairman of the Bi-Partisan Congressional Task Force on Alzheimer’s Disease and senior member of the Energy and Commerce Committee which has jurisdiction over health care policy, and Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee which has jurisdiction over health care policy, today reintroduced the Independence at Home Act, H.R. 2560. The bill will create a 3-year pilot program to bring primary care medical services to Medicare beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions in their homes. It will offer incentives for providing patients with care options that offer greater independence and quality of life while reducing costs. Pilot programs will be set up in 26 states, and the legislation has attracted bipartisan support in both the House and Senate, including Representative Chris Smith (R-N.J.), and Senators Richard Burr (R-NC), Ben Cardin, (D- Md.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).” I think this is a more humane solution to some of the problems associated with elderly patients.[/quote]
More humane than what?
Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]“On May 21, 2009, Representative Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), cochairman of the Bi-Partisan Congressional Task Force on Alzheimer’s Disease and senior member of the Energy and Commerce Committee which has jurisdiction over health care policy, and Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee which has jurisdiction over health care policy, today reintroduced the Independence at Home Act, H.R. 2560. The bill will create a 3-year pilot program to bring primary care medical services to Medicare beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions in their homes. It will offer incentives for providing patients with care options that offer greater independence and quality of life while reducing costs. Pilot programs will be set up in 26 states, and the legislation has attracted bipartisan support in both the House and Senate, including Representative Chris Smith (R-N.J.), and Senators Richard Burr (R-NC), Ben Cardin, (D- Md.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).” I think this is a more humane solution to some of the problems associated with elderly patients.[/quote]
More humane than what?
Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]“On May 21, 2009, Representative Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), cochairman of the Bi-Partisan Congressional Task Force on Alzheimer’s Disease and senior member of the Energy and Commerce Committee which has jurisdiction over health care policy, and Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee which has jurisdiction over health care policy, today reintroduced the Independence at Home Act, H.R. 2560. The bill will create a 3-year pilot program to bring primary care medical services to Medicare beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions in their homes. It will offer incentives for providing patients with care options that offer greater independence and quality of life while reducing costs. Pilot programs will be set up in 26 states, and the legislation has attracted bipartisan support in both the House and Senate, including Representative Chris Smith (R-N.J.), and Senators Richard Burr (R-NC), Ben Cardin, (D- Md.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).” I think this is a more humane solution to some of the problems associated with elderly patients.[/quote]
More humane than what?
Participant[quote=Zeitgeist]“On May 21, 2009, Representative Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), cochairman of the Bi-Partisan Congressional Task Force on Alzheimer’s Disease and senior member of the Energy and Commerce Committee which has jurisdiction over health care policy, and Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee which has jurisdiction over health care policy, today reintroduced the Independence at Home Act, H.R. 2560. The bill will create a 3-year pilot program to bring primary care medical services to Medicare beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions in their homes. It will offer incentives for providing patients with care options that offer greater independence and quality of life while reducing costs. Pilot programs will be set up in 26 states, and the legislation has attracted bipartisan support in both the House and Senate, including Representative Chris Smith (R-N.J.), and Senators Richard Burr (R-NC), Ben Cardin, (D- Md.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).” I think this is a more humane solution to some of the problems associated with elderly patients.[/quote]
More humane than what?
Participant[quote=afx114]
It’s no different than the “Code Pink” crowd. They do nothing but disrupt what should be a civilized debate about a very important issue, and in the end paint themselves as loonies to those who want to actually accomplish something.[/quote]I have no affinity for Code Pink, but they’re hardly the same thing. Code Pink showed up with 4 or 5 women at a few dozen events over a 3 or 4 year period. And in most cases they were promptly escorted out.
What the opposition has contributed is fear. And it’s worked quite well. Death panels that don’t exist. Socialized medicine which isn’t part of the plan. Rationed care. Those lies have created fear. It’s hard to fight it when even the Republican who initiated the advance directive clause in the House plan is now running from it. Fear is effective.
Participant[quote=afx114]
It’s no different than the “Code Pink” crowd. They do nothing but disrupt what should be a civilized debate about a very important issue, and in the end paint themselves as loonies to those who want to actually accomplish something.[/quote]I have no affinity for Code Pink, but they’re hardly the same thing. Code Pink showed up with 4 or 5 women at a few dozen events over a 3 or 4 year period. And in most cases they were promptly escorted out.
What the opposition has contributed is fear. And it’s worked quite well. Death panels that don’t exist. Socialized medicine which isn’t part of the plan. Rationed care. Those lies have created fear. It’s hard to fight it when even the Republican who initiated the advance directive clause in the House plan is now running from it. Fear is effective.
Participant[quote=afx114]
It’s no different than the “Code Pink” crowd. They do nothing but disrupt what should be a civilized debate about a very important issue, and in the end paint themselves as loonies to those who want to actually accomplish something.[/quote]I have no affinity for Code Pink, but they’re hardly the same thing. Code Pink showed up with 4 or 5 women at a few dozen events over a 3 or 4 year period. And in most cases they were promptly escorted out.
What the opposition has contributed is fear. And it’s worked quite well. Death panels that don’t exist. Socialized medicine which isn’t part of the plan. Rationed care. Those lies have created fear. It’s hard to fight it when even the Republican who initiated the advance directive clause in the House plan is now running from it. Fear is effective.
Participant[quote=afx114]
It’s no different than the “Code Pink” crowd. They do nothing but disrupt what should be a civilized debate about a very important issue, and in the end paint themselves as loonies to those who want to actually accomplish something.[/quote]I have no affinity for Code Pink, but they’re hardly the same thing. Code Pink showed up with 4 or 5 women at a few dozen events over a 3 or 4 year period. And in most cases they were promptly escorted out.
What the opposition has contributed is fear. And it’s worked quite well. Death panels that don’t exist. Socialized medicine which isn’t part of the plan. Rationed care. Those lies have created fear. It’s hard to fight it when even the Republican who initiated the advance directive clause in the House plan is now running from it. Fear is effective.
Participant[quote=afx114]
It’s no different than the “Code Pink” crowd. They do nothing but disrupt what should be a civilized debate about a very important issue, and in the end paint themselves as loonies to those who want to actually accomplish something.[/quote]I have no affinity for Code Pink, but they’re hardly the same thing. Code Pink showed up with 4 or 5 women at a few dozen events over a 3 or 4 year period. And in most cases they were promptly escorted out.
What the opposition has contributed is fear. And it’s worked quite well. Death panels that don’t exist. Socialized medicine which isn’t part of the plan. Rationed care. Those lies have created fear. It’s hard to fight it when even the Republican who initiated the advance directive clause in the House plan is now running from it. Fear is effective.
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
SK: So Big Insurance “invented the plan” to disrupt the town hall meetings? And? How does this affect the vote on Obamacare? Last time I checked, citizens don’t vote on legislation, legislators do.
The Dems control the White House and Congress and don’t need a single GOP vote to pass this legislation.
As to Billy Tauzin’s back room meeting with Obama, it isn’t “past tense” yet. Certain Dems have said they won’t honor the agreement, but that hasn’t happened yet.
And, I’ve heard that Big Insurance has been contributing to advertisements SUPPORTING Obamacare, not opposing it. I could be wrong, and I would need to do some checking in order to assert that properly, but that is my understanding.
Again, so what if there were third parties out there “disrupting” town hall meetings? That has nothing to do with the passage of this legislation, any more than Limbaugh or Hannity yapping about it do.
The Dems completely control the destiny of this legislation, correct? Or do I have that wrong as well?[/quote]
(I think I got this quote thing fixed)
I don’t disagree with anything you say here. The dems are, or at least should be in control. It’s not the deathers at the town hall meetings that will be doing the voting.
My only real issue was your assertion that the insurance companies are supportive of reform. They’re not, unless it is a watered down, do nothing reform that doesn’t include a public option. The kind of reform will do more damage than good for all concerned including democrats and republicans politically, taxpayers, the uninsured, the under-insured and health care providers. (For profit hospitals will probably make out just fine.) Everyone except for insurance companies and big pharma.
Tauzin still has a deal. It just isn’t binding on anyone in Congress. And Obama is unlikely to push it.
-
AuthorPosts