Death Panels A Lie? Maybe Not So Much

In an interview with an award winning journalist last week I was asked why the republicans continue to push the notion of 'death panels' since the whole thing was, as he put it, just a lie.

I had not read this article yet, but now that I have, I wonder: was Sarah Palin making reference to 'death panels' from the Obamacare bill, or might the Stimulus bill give us some reasons to be concerened.  Take a look at this article published back in February 2009 at Medpage Today:

The $787 billion stimulus package signed by President Obama on Tuesday dedicates $1.1 billion for head-to-head research to determine which drugs, devices, and procedures are most effective and carry the lowest risk.

The concept of federal input into effectiveness determinations is, however, controversial.

Doug Elmendorf, CBO's new director, recently said that a comparative effectiveness institute might yield results, but only if it's tied to incentives to control costs and improve efficiency.

". . . the effect of information alone on spending will generally be limited," he told the Senate Budget Committee.

And that's where the controversy comes in -- critics fear the comparative effectiveness information will drive medical decision-making through reimbursement policies.

A report accompanying the version of the bill that passed in the House in late January stated that money would be saved because "less effective and, in some cases, more expensive" interventions "will no longer be prescribed."

Read that "no longer be reimbursed," critics charged, noting that the underlying plan is to give the government control over all nearly all aspects of healthcare.

Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) President and CEO Billy Tauzin has said his group supports the bill, especially after the offending language that would have "limited patient choice," was removed.

But some still worry that the bill would lead to "rationing of care," or denying patients interventions because the comparative effectiveness research deemed something else a better deal.

Comments

[AlternativeCandidate?]

I certainly agree it is worth repeating - and thank you mightily for doing so!

[Marc]

Alternative Candidate:

I know you did and though it was worth repeating.

[AlternativeCandidate?]

I pointed that out the other day. "Death Panels" are indeed the "Comparative Effectiveness" panels established under the Stimulus bill. What is even more astounding is that even the leftist media - NYT, LAT, etc. wrote about the CEP's being part of the stimulus back in February. The fact that they then slammed Sarah for bringing attention to these already established and funded "death panels" is yet another shining example of what passes as journalism in today's society.