Sen. Grassley Uses Kennedy’s Brain Tumor To Spread Fear Of Rationing

"the intensity of medical intervention if the patient is pulse less, apneic, or has serious cardiac or pulmonary problems." This is what doctors already practice. If you have significant medical problems and you need a hip replacement, it is best for you NOT to go under anesthesia because you will likely not come out of it. My wife's grandfather has PRIVATE insurance and is facing the same limits to care in our current system.

"The Secretary shall consider approaches such as creating a new code (or codes) and payment amount (or amounts) under the fee schedule in section 1848 of the Social Security Act (in a budget neutral manner) for services furnished by an appropriate physician." Because the public option is designed for non-profit, limits have to be set for procedural costs. Do not fear, doctors will still be very rich. And if excessive greed is the only thing that makes my doctor want to save my life, then I will find a better doctor that cares about saving life. Greedy people tend to think that greed is the only driving force to perfection. Some people work hard because they feel they are making a positive difference in the world. That's the kind of doctor I want.

Obviously you haven't read the bill either. The first quote about rationing care was in specific reference to the end of life portion of the bill. It's saying if you are in a condition where the probabiltiy of death is high, your care will be limited.

With regards to the compensation for physicians... If you put a cap on the reward for innovation and success, you limit the effort and therefore limit the quality and availability of care. Look at doctor shortages in social medicine societies and see for yourself.

He has access to the best health care in the world because he's rich. French citizens have access to the best health care system in the world because they're French. If you lack the intellect to understand the difference, I don't know if it can be be explained to you.

I would like to the type of care Ted Kennedy would get in France vs. what he will be receiving in America. Interestingly enough, the life expectancy for cancer is higher in the US. Would you rather have access to better care and a better chance of survival, or rationed care depending of "value of life" that is also dictated by the government? Your choice.

You make little sense and are ill-informed. Please rephrase your comments to conform to conventional English sentence structures or provide supporting links that would illuminate your claims.

And why are you bringing up rationing at all? We're not in France or Britain or Canada, we're in the United States, and no similar system is being seriously proposed here.

I'm sorry if you lack the ability to reason with facts on the issue. If you would've taken the time to read the legislation being proposed and realize that rationing care is a large part of this bill. There are two ways to cut costs with regards to medical care...cut employees wages and cut the services provided, both of which are included in this bill. If you'd like, I'll copy/paste the lines from the bill to prove it to you.

You should also understand that some of the main officials in Obama's administration pushing for this reform (Rahm Emanuel's brother, for example) are basing this entirely on a ration-based system. They evaluate the "value-of-life" for the candidate and then determine the type of treatment they'll receive. If you care to understand the non-propoganda laden facts of the argument, you'll understand what's behind the smoke screen Washington is putting up. Otherwise, keep drinking your Kool-Aid and enjoy your government run life.

"I would like to the type of care Ted Kennedy would get in France vs. what he will be receiving in America."

This sentence makes no sense, and you are a gigantic, fucking moron and a sad, pathetic liar. Put up or shut up, ignorant douchebag (administrative costs are a Jew/liberal lie, I guess? preventative care is a hoax, just like global warming?). You might make more sense if your head isn't so far into your asshole, asshole.

You can't dispute my comments, so you make personal attacks. I would expect nothing less from someone of the Obama-loving type. Classy.

And since I know you Democrats can't think for yourselves...I'll do you a favor and let you know the sentence should have read, "I would like to COMPARE the type of care Ted Kennedy would get in France vs. what he will be receiving in America." Does that satisfy your inability to think for yourself and fill in the blank? I made a fucking typo...and you're too ignorant to attack my actual comments. You'd rather come after me when defeated in legitimate, fact-based argument.

Keep up the good work. You represent your kind well.

If you disagree with me and the rationed care argument...maybe you can answer this question. How do you add health care for 50 million additional people and use this new plan to reduce the federal budget deficit by up to $6 billion like this administration claims it will? One word, ration. Hopefully this post is grammatically correct. I'd hate to waste time explaining myself to you at a 2nd grade level...again.

What is there to dispute? You don't have anything of substance to say (regardless of how inarticulately you say it).

"Git out of my cuntry, librul!!1" doesn't count as substantitive.

Again, put up or shut up. Your hypocritical whining is boring.

"What is there to dispute? You don't have anything of substance to say (regardless of how inarticulately you say it)." I've posed numerous questions to you on this issue. Unforunately, you lack the ability to carry on a real debate and use facts to dispute my claims. It's sad that someone who lacks any understanding on an issue can feel so passionately about it.

"Again, put up or shut up. Your hypocritical whining is boring." I've provided you facts and real life situations to prove my points to you. You're the one that can provide nothing more but propoganda and personal attacks. Maybe YOU should put up or shut up...hypocrite.

"rationing care is a large part of this bill. There are two ways to cut costs with regards to medical care...cut employees wages and cut the services provided, both of which are included in this bill. If you'd like, I'll copy/paste the lines from the bill to prove it to you...."

Just do it already and stop with the bullshit. I've posted a response to the rationing claim above and posted supporting links, most of which came from the above article. You've yet to respond to any of it with anything but unsupported claims and irrelevant scenarios.

@Kyle91
First of all, government-run health care is, unfortunately, not being proposed. A public option for health insurance is what is being proposed, in addition to reforms of private insurance. Second of all, access to recommended treatment is significantly worse in the United States than elsewhere in the developed world precisely because of a lack of universal coverage. The death rate for cancer patients in the United States is higher than in Sweden, despite their "rationing." Also, many of the elderly in this country are already covered by a single-payer health insurance program, Medicare, and they are very satisfied. In case you are unaware, Medicare and Medicaid are government programs. The idea that residents of countries with socialized, single-payer, or some kind of universal health care, something every industrialized nation but ours has, are dying at significant rates from the refusal to treat them is more than a little counter-intuitive when most of them (including Sweden) have higher life expectancies than we do So the argument you make is both irrelevant and false.

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Charts/Survey/2008-International-Health-...
http://www.oecd.org/document/16/0,2340,en_2649_34631_2085200_1_1_1_1,00.html
http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Charts/Survey/2008-International-Health-...
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/07/conservative_myths.html

(This repeats much of what is in the above article, but you clearly didn't read it the first time, so here you go.)

BrendanM...

Medicare and Medicaid are running out of money and almost broke. What's your point? Find a better example of something the government has managed effectively.

Also, you might want to check sources before you post propoganda. According to this link, the US has a higher cancer survival rate than any European country...despite the US health care access issues you posted.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1560849/UK-cancer-survival-rate-lowest-in...