|
‘Death panels’ not far off the mark By Michael C. Guilmette Jr. Originally published on Aug. 27, 2009, in the Connersville News-Examiner. Sarah Palin, the former governor of Alaska and the person who is credited for keeping the John McCain campaign from committing an outright forfeit in the 2008 presidential campaign, ruffled some pretty big feathers earlier this month when she said the health care proposal Congress presented would force people to stand before “death panels.”
Almost immediately, Palin’s words drew sharp rebuttals from health care reform defenders — particularly, the president himself. Obama did not address Palin by name, but he was rather indignant about Palin’s claim. “The rumor that’s been circulating a lot lately is this idea that somehow the House of Representatives voted for death panels that will basically pull the plug on grandma because we’ve decided that ... it’s too expensive to let her live anymore,” Obama said during a health care campaign stop in New Hampshire on Aug. 12. According to the president, the provisions in the House health care bill are only for providing information to the sick and elderly. “[T]he intention of the members of Congress was to give people more information so that they could handle issues of end-of-life care when they’re ready on their own terms. It wasn’t forcing anybody to do anything,” Obama said. Other critics blasted Palin for daring to make such a bold claim. James Fallows, blogging for the Atlantic magazine, said with all the class a blog allows that Palin’s claim is nothing more than a distortion promoted by Rush Limbaugh and the Republican Party, calling it “toxic nonsense.” If only that were true. Fallows and other critics base their assertions on the fact that H.R. 3200 and it’s Section 1233 does not explicitly state “death panels” will be created or that end-of-life counseling will be mandated. As myself and others have pointed out, H.R. 3200 also does not explicitly state that all Americans will be required to have health care, but they will. As with most legislation coming from the hallowed halls of Congress, the actual operating parts of this massive proposal will be interpreted from the grey. And that’s what has many Americans feeling scared. And the government gives them more reason to be afraid each day. Last week, a little known Veterans Administration document titled “Your Life, Your Choices” hit the airwaves, allowing Americans to see a preview of how ‘government-encouraged’ end-of-life counseling would manifest itself. The 52-page document, nixed during the Bush administration but seeing new life under Obama, leads injured veterans through a questionnaire that asks them to place a value on their lives, considering their present and future medical conditions. As the title suggests, the document maintains that end-of-life decisions are ultimately up to each person, but it immediately presents a caveat. “There’s only one person who is truly qualified to tell health care providers how you feel about different kinds of health care issues — and that’s you. But, what if you get sick, or injured so severely that you can’t communicate with your doctors or family members? Have you thought about what kinds of medical care you would want? Do your loved ones and health care providers know your wishes?” While these guidelines may sound reasonable on the surface, they could easily be used to coerce people who are vulnerable to make end-of-life decisions contrary to their actual wishes simply because a government bureaucrat quietly suggests they are becoming burdens on the health care system. Again, Obama and health care reform defenders deny there is any intention for this to happen. And they, for the most part, may actually believe that. However, our concerns are not stemmed in what they say now, but decades down the road, well after Obama has ended his benevolent reign and has returned to Chicago, or Hawaii, or Kenya, or wherever he decides to call home. Obama and his supporters can talk about all the good that is in the proposal, but large and invasive government programs have a tendency to expand beyond the original intent of the program. Obama and reform defenders have been quick to offer the tired cliche that these health care decisions are already being made for people by insurance companies who are looking to cut their costs. To an extent, this is true, but one of the beautiful things about a free market system is that we are free to seek out competing providers if we don’t like what one is providing. If the government succeeds in taking over the health care system, there will be no competitors — the government’s decision will be final, if not fatal. The government is the only organization that can legally kill its citizens. Until now, that power has only been exercised against criminals and traitors. But if the government — a government already faced with Social Security and Medicare systems in dire financial straits — decides to take on the financial burden of health care, it is not inconceivable that the government may ask all of us to consider our burden to society. • Guilmette is managing editor of the News-Examiner. He may be contacted at mguilmette@newsexaminer.com. |
|||
|
|||
|
Copyright © 2009, Michael C. Guilmette Jr. |
“The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil,” Palin wrote on Aug. 7 on her Facebook page.
