Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Would you like some facts?

CLAIM: The House bill "may start us down a treacherous path toward government-encouraged euthanasia," House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio said July 23.

Former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey said in a July 17 article: "One troubling provision of the House bill compels seniors to submit to a counseling session every five years ... about alternatives for end-of-life care."

THE FACTS: The bill would require Medicare to pay for advance directive consultations with health care professionals. But it would not require anyone to use the benefit.

Advance directives lay out a patient's wishes for life-extending measures under various scenarios involving terminal illness, severe brain damage and situations. Patients and their families would consult with health professionals, not government agents, if they used the proposed benefit.

Answer Question
 
sweet-a-kins

Asked by sweet-a-kins at 11:35 AM on Aug. 2, 2009 in Politics & Current Events

Level 34 (67,502 Credits)
Answers (41)
  • CLAIM: Health care revisions would lead to government-funded abortions.

    Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council says in a video, "Unless Congress states otherwise, under a government takeover of health care, taxpayers will be forced to fund abortions for the first time in over three decades."

    THE FACTS: The proposed bills would not undo the Hyde Amendment, which bars paying for abortions through Medicaid, the government insurance program for the poor. But a health care overhaul could create a government-run insurance program, or insurance "exchanges," that would not involve Medicaid and whose abortion guidelines are not yet clear.

    Obama recently told CBS that the nation should continue a tradition of "not financing abortions as part of government-funded health care."
    sweet-a-kins

    Answer by sweet-a-kins at 11:35 AM on Aug. 2, 2009

  • The House Energy and Commerce Committee amended the House bill Thursday to state that health insurance plans have the option of covering abortion, but no public money can be used to fund abortions. The bill says health plans in a new purchasing exchange would not be required to cover abortion but that each region of the country should have at least one plan that does.

    Congressional action this fall will determine whether such language is in the final bill.
    sweet-a-kins

    Answer by sweet-a-kins at 11:35 AM on Aug. 2, 2009

  • CLAIM: Americans won't have to change doctors or insurance companies.

    "If you like your plan and you like your doctor, you won't have to do a thing," Obama said on June 23. "You keep your plan; you keep your doctor."

    THE FACTS: The proposed legislation would not require people to drop their doctor or insurer. But some tax provisions, depending on how they are written, might make it cheaper for some employers to pay a fee to end their health coverage. Their workers presumably would move to a public insurance plan that might not include their current doctors.

    CLAIM: The Democrats' plans will lead to rationing, or the government determining which medical procedures a patient can have.

    "Expanding government health programs will hasten the day that government rations medical care to seniors," conservative writer Michael Cannon said in the Washington Times.
    sweet-a-kins

    Answer by sweet-a-kins at 11:36 AM on Aug. 2, 2009

  • CLAIM: The Democrats' plans will lead to rationing, or the government determining which medical procedures a patient can have.

    "Expanding government health programs will hasten the day that government rations medical care to seniors," conservative writer Michael Cannon said in the Washington Times.

    THE FACTS: Millions of Americans already face rationing, as insurance companies rule on procedures they will cover.

    Denying coverage for certain procedures might increase under proposals to have a government-appointed agency identify medicines and procedures best suited for various conditions.

    Obama says the goal is to identify the most effective and efficient medical practices, and to steer patients and providers to them. He recently told a forum: "We don't want to ration by dictating to somebody, 'OK, you know what? We don't think that this senior should get a hip replacement.' What we do want to be able to do is t
    sweet-a-kins

    Answer by sweet-a-kins at 11:36 AM on Aug. 2, 2009

  • What we do want to be able to do is to provide information to that senior and to her doctor about, you know, this is the thing that is going to be most helpful to you in dealing with your condition."

    CLAIM: Overhauling health care will not expand the federal deficit over the long term.

    Obama has pledged that "health insurance reform will not add to our deficit over the next decade, and I mean it."

    THE FACTS: Obama's pledge does not apply to proposed spending of about $245 billion over the next decade to increase Medicare fees for doctors. The White House says the extra payment, designed to prevent a scheduled cut of about 21 percent in doctor fees, already was part of the administration's policy.

    Beyond that, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said the House bill lacks mechanisms to bring health care costs under control. In response, the White House and Democratic lawmakers are talking about creating
    sweet-a-kins

    Answer by sweet-a-kins at 11:37 AM on Aug. 2, 2009

  • The problem with this bill is that so many people are stating assumptions like they are facts and people believe it.  How can anyone even discuss it when people start barking about killing old folks and forced government abortions?


    I appreciate you posting many good things about the bill along with the some negatives.  This is a very realistic post.

    MAUREEN55

    Answer by MAUREEN55 at 11:49 AM on Aug. 2, 2009

  • you've got to stop using democratic underground, dailykos and huffington post as sources for your "facts!"

    oh what does it matter....you will to continue to wear your blinders, and i will continue to fight against this bill, and then you'll wake up and start crying foul if this bill passes, and i will thoroughly enjoy saying "told you so" from my new home country! lol
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 11:50 AM on Aug. 2, 2009

  • I am reading the bill don't listen to people on here or anywhere else. I have called my Democrat Congressman on a few points he sent me a very short email letting me know he has not read the bill and probably won't be. I just wanted clarification on a couple of points and someone who will vote on this has no clue what is in it. I am a Democrat and find it disgusting many don't know what is in this. I am all for reforming the system for those it does not work for. I am not for blowing up what works for 83 percent of Americans currently. This bill is a mess and the fact my own Congressman has no clue what is in it makes me angry. I hope the Blue Dogs and Repubs vote this down.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 11:57 AM on Aug. 2, 2009

  • http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090802/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_fact_check

    No underground
    sweet-a-kins

    Answer by sweet-a-kins at 12:01 PM on Aug. 2, 2009

  • 'Might make it cheaper for some employers to pay a fee and end their health care coverage.'

    Yep, there it is.

    Now, for a moment, contemplate the effect that simple statement has on the economy. The jobs lost.

    And what about the
    CBO's analysis of the bill? It flat out says it DOES NoT provide coverage to a good portion of the presently uninsured, and costs more than projected too.
    Nevermind, you don't care.

    Did you care to post your source?
    lovinangels

    Answer by lovinangels at 12:01 PM on Aug. 2, 2009

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.
close Cafemom Join now to connect to other members! Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN