Posted by
TOTA on Saturday, August 29, 2009 3:32:07 AM
Few conservatives are naive enough to expect the old media to actually do their jobs, and report accurately on health care legislation. The old media act like the participants in Obama's fake 'town halls'.
Thankfully, some Americans are asking questions of their public servants directly. Here are a few questions that no one is asking, but should:
1. The cost of laser eye surgery and most kinds of cosmetic surgeries have dropped over the last few decades. Ironically, most of the time people pay for these procedures out of their own pockets. Is there be a connection?
2. The population of the US is expected to grow from the current approximately 300 million people to 450 million people in the next 40-50 years. It's conceivable that a less fettered private sector could meet the additional medical demand (on top of the aging baby-boomers), but are the prospects good that a system with more government involvement and control will meet the challenge? Is the fact that the house bill goes in the other direction - making it more difficult to build new hospitals - a hopeful sign?
3. The drug companies appear to have thrown in with Obama completely. Much has been made of the possibility of back room deals regarding prices. But another question is pertinent: Is it possible that the drug companies see the possibility of greater drug use under Obamacare? Fewer procedures and surgeries will mean more need for palliative drugs and painkillers.
4. The President has made a major issue of wasted care and tests, at one time pointing to $2 trillion in possible savings. In order to realize these savings, the house bill gives the government the power to set prices and determine what care private insurance companies will charge and offer. Similar determinations will have to be made in the public sphere - eliminating 'unnecessary' tests and procedures. In order to determine which care is or is not cost-effective for society, the house legislation creates a five person appointed panel to review the effectiveness of tests and procedures. Now, there is little doubt that knee and hip replacements are effective - in almost all cases they provide profound relief to their recipients, every day for the rest of their lives. So that is not really the question this panel will address. They will be charged with determining how best to allocate 'scarce' medical resources in the most cost-effective way. The 60-year-old CEO's knee replacement is cost effective for society - thousands of jobs depend on his stewardship. Not so, demented aunt Sarah. This is the 'death panel' provision. It's a panel, and it will make decisions about which ages and classes of people receive life-saving care - life and death decisions. So the only real question is this: Do we call it a life panel, a life and death panel, or a death panel?
5. Will we be allowed to beg? And will they enjoy it?
Greg Buls