Yep , The Death Panel is Included, But Not Where You Think!

The Lame Stream Media and the Leftist are going crazy over Sarah Palin’s claim of the inclusion of a “Death Panel” provision in the unHealthCare fiasco. All the leftist bashers lined up to take their pot shots at Palin and others who have made the similar claim. The AP and the NYT have pointed out that there is nothing in the legislative proposal that would call for creation of death panels and technically they are correct because they state that end-of life counseling is not the same as a death panel.

HOWEVER both fail to point out that the panel already exists. Yep, that’s what I said! It is contained in H.R. 1 commonly known as the Recovery and Reinvestment Act but more often called by those who are not blind, dumb, or just plain stupid, the Porkulus Bill. There is 1.1 Billion dollars set aside to fund the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research. Former nominee and unqualified individual for Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Daschle made sure that his brain child (I’ll be nice) was included.

Betsy McCaughey, former Lieutenant governor of New York, wrote in detail about he council’s purpose.

Daschle's stated purpose (and therefore Obama's purpose) for creating the Council is to empower an unelected bureaucracy to make the hard decisions about health care rationing that elected politicians are politically unable to make. The end result is to slow costly medical advancement and consumption. Daschle argued that Americans ought to be more like Europeans who passively accept "hopeless diagnoses."

McCaughey goes on to point out that Daschle said health-care reform “will not be pain free” and that Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. I believe “the One” stated that perhaps they should take a pain pill instead of seeking treatment.

Just who is on this council so far? One of its most prominent members is none other than Dr. Death himself Ezekiel Emanuel. Dr. Emanuel's views on care of the elderly should frighten anyone who is or ever plans on being old. He explains the logic behind his discriminatory views on elderly care as follows:

Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years.

On average 25-year-olds require very few medical services. If they are to get the lion's share of the treatment, then those 65 and over can expect very little care. Dr. Emanuel's views on saving money on medical care are simple: don't provide any medical care. The loosely worded provisions in H.R 1 give him and his Council increasing power to push such recommendations.

Similarly hazy language will no doubt be used in the health care bill. What may pass as a 1,000 page health care law will explode into perhaps many thousands of pages of regulatory codes. The deliberate vagueness will give regulators tremendous leverage to interpret its provisions Obama's Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein will play a major role in defining the government's role in controlling medical care.

It seems that Susteins approach to end life care varies in value. In 2003 he wrote a paper for AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies were he made that very argument. He championed a statistical method that gives preference to what the government rates as “quality adjusted life years, what ever that may mean to those who are in charge. Basically it boils down to the fact that government decides whether a person’s life is worth living. Wonder where they would rate Ted Kennedy? Ooop’s of course he would not fall under such ridiculous guidelines, he’s a Senator and also has loads of money. That would mean that his life is worth more than mine or yours so it would be our duty to go ahead and die and free up welfare money for someone who is young and “productive”.

Obama himself gave the real answer to a question in his ABC infomercial when he said that payment determination cannot be influenced by a person’s spirit and “that at least we (meaning the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research) can let doctors know and your mom know that…uh, this , uh, isn’t going to help. Maybe, uh, uh, you’re better off, uh, uh, not having uh, uh, surgery, but uh, taking, uh, the painkiller.

Now you decide, is there a federal “death panel”? My bet is if H.R.1 doesn’t pretty well seal the deal then there will be some language slipped into the last minute bill that is so vague that it can be utilized for setting the “death panel” in place.