« Yet another disturbing fact about Obamacare | Main | Global-Warming Policies Are the Real National-Security Threat, Not Global Warming »
August 11, 2009
Questions to Ask Your Senator and Representative About HR 3200
Topics: Political News and commentariesJust in case you haven't seen it, the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission has a list of common sense, down-to-earth, highly pertinent, questions that you should ask your senator or representative. The list is by no means what I consider to be complete, but it offers some basis for tying your politicians to committing to a few specific positions.
Here's a few examples:
1. ABORTIONIn regard to the issue of euthanasia, while McCaughey's concern for abuse of the sections on pages 425-430 by government bureaucrats may seem to some to be remote or a stretch, one need only look to Oregon's health-care system to see that this is already happening. (Meanwhile, many on the left, like Jay Bookman, call concern over the euthanasia issue - shameless scaremongering, but they have either not read the pertinent sections themselves, fail to recognize the likelihood of abuse, or both.)
Pro-choice groups, like NARAL and Planned Parenthood, are demanding that abortion be covered in any healthcare reform bill. In a recent interview with Politico, Laurie Rubiner, vice president for public policy and advocacy at Planned Parenthood, defends this demand by saying, "the alternative would be slashing benefits for millions of women who currently have [private] coverage for abortions..." In addition, key administration officials refuse to rule out abortion coverage. When asked on Fox News Sunday whether taxpayer money would go to pay for abortions, White House Budget Director Peter Orszag replied, "I am not prepared to say explicitly that right now. It's obviously a controversial issue, and it's one of the questions that is playing out in this debate."Pro-life senators on the Senate's Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee forced a roll call vote on the issue when Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) attempted to add an amendment to the healthcare bill that would, in her words, "include women's health clinics that provide comprehensive services...deemed medically necessary or appropriate." She admitted that such "health clinics" would include Planned Parenthood. The pro-life amendment to prohibit funding of abortion lost 11-to-12.
Question for your Congressmen: Will you oppose any healthcare reform bill that uses my tax dollars to pay for abortions?
2. EUTHANASIA
In a recent New York Post column, Betsy McCaughey, a former lieutenant governor of New York and health care expert, wrote:"One troubling provision of the House bill compels seniors to submit to a counseling session every five years (and more often if they become sick or go into a nursing home) about alternatives for end-of-life care (House bill, p. 425-430). The sessions cover highly sensitive matters such as whether to receive antibiotics and 'the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration.' This mandate invites abuse, and seniors could easily be pushed to refuse care."
Question for your Congressmen: Will you oppose any healthcare reform bill that in any way promotes euthanasia?
3. COSTContinue reading. Additional questions address such issues as quality of care, loss of freedom, racial preferences, and the cost of pre-existing coverage.
The United States faces a debt crisis. According to many analysts, including Senator Judd Gregg (who is so respected by President Obama that he offered Gregg the post of Secretary of Commerce), the Obama budget will give us $11 trillion of debt at the end of five years and $17 trillion of debt at the end of ten years. (Source: PolitiFact.com)Question for your Congressmen: Why is Congress and the president pushing through a healthcare bill that would cost another trillion dollars over the next ten years? Shouldn't we concentrate on getting the debt under control first?
4. RATIONING CARE
According to a July 15th report by The Hill, "The House bill would be paid for by roughly $500 billion in Medicare and Medicaid cuts..." These "cuts" would come as millions of Americans are retiring. Logic suggests that if we are "cutting" hundreds of billions of dollars healthcare would have to be limited or rationed in someway to accommodate more people. And seniors would be most affected by Medicare cuts.In addition, advisors to President Obama, such as Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, have suggested that healthcare should be rationed to certain individuals. Dr. Emanuel once wrote that "services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens...should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia." (Source)
Question for your Congressmen: How can government promise to do more with less? Will you oppose any healthcare reform bill that in any way limits my access to healthcare or medicines recommended by my doctor?
If you're heading off to a town hall meeting, you might want to take these basic questions along with you.
In a related post, "Cutting Health Care Cost = Rationing = Dying," AJStrata addresses an issue that's particularly sensitive to me. If the VA had used the criteria likely to be employed under a public option, I would be dead - twice, having both times been told that there was no chance of surviving my cancer and that I probably should consider "going home and getting my affairs in order." Yet in both cases, I chose to undergo surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation, which the VA provided, and I am now still alive - 7 years later. Good thing for me I didn't live in the UK or was under Oregon's health-care system which will pay for euthanasia but not critical cancer care.
Other related:
Health-care Bill Hints Of Elderly Euthanasia
Will proposal promote euthanasia? (presents the Democrats' side - but notes that in addition to Oregon and Washington, the Montana Supreme Court is reviewing a lower court ruling from December that said physician-assisted suicide is a right protected under the state constitution. So who can state with certainty that HR 3200 sections aren't a slippery slope to euthanasia, and shouldn't we err on the side of caution?)
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25486_Page2.html#ixzz0NtFRCmT8
)
See also: Washington Times Editorial - A euthanasia mandate
Posted by Abdul at August 11, 2009 10:33 AM
Articles Related to Political News and commentaries:
