Page 425: Not that scary.
There has been some controversy about what is actually included in the new health care bill, including questions about the content of page 425. The controversy about page 425 seems to stem from an interview Fred Thompson conducted on his radio show with Betsy McCaughey, founder of Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths (RID), general patient advocacy and health care policy buff, and former Lieutenant Governor of New York under Republican Governor George Pataki.
She made news in February when she criticized the Obama stimulus package, claiming the legislation hid secret provisions that would “Ruin Your Health.” Her claims were criticized and deemed factually inaccurate by Keith Olbermann and non-partisan site FactCheck.org.
Not unsurprisingly given her history, she is currently claiming that the new legislation hides secret provisions that will force senior citizens to attend counseling sessions about assisted suicide. In other completely expected news, McCaughey’s claims have been thoroughly debunked. This seems to suggest that the controversial claims about page 425 are yet another example of partisan scare tactics designed to frighten the public about legislation without addressing the actual content of the proposed law.
McCaughey
So, should you worry about the bill’s language on page 425? Not unless you’re Betsy McCaughey.
photo from Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths, via Wikipedia (cc)
CATEGORIES: Ethics, Global Health
Related Posts:
Stay Informed with TakePart:
Get Blog Updates:
Blogroll
- AlterNet
- Amnesty International Livewire
- b-listed
- Boing Boing
- Brave New Films
- CauseCast
- Changents
- Climate Crisis
- Democracy Now!
- Ecorazzi
- EdNews
- Environmental News Network
- Ethicurean
- GOOD
- Grist
- Harvard World Health News
- Huffington Post
- Human Rights Watch
- Inhabitat
- Meatless Monday
- Media Matters
- NewsTrust
- NRDC Switchboard
- Rock The Vote
- SEED Magazine
- SocialVibe
- Sustainablog
- TechPresident
- The Daily Dish
- The Democracy Center
- Think Progress
- TreeHugger
- Truthout
- Why Tuesday?
- Worldchanging
I’ve also been fighting against mis-presentations and outright lies about language that is supposedly in the House bill.
please take a look at the post on my blog “Ooooh, that awful House healthcare bill examined page by page - http://www.mavenandmeddler.com -http://mavenandmeddler.squarespace.com/
How about actually reading what it says instead of buying into the scare tactics put forth by such as Fred Thompson. Love you, Mom
HOW ARE THEY GOING TO PAY FOR ALL THIS?
If it’s such a damn good bill then why is it being rushed through before anyone can read? If it’s a good bill then we can surely take our time and make sure. The liberals got their panties in a wad about the way the Patriot Act was rushed through in the same way. I opposed the Patriot Act on that point myself. Common sense–if they’re rushing it through then they’re hiding something.
Why do we need a 1,000 page health bill anyway? Seems to me if we’d give the ‘doctoring’ back to the Dr..s and hospitals we’d all be better off. One thing that rdeally does irritate me ios all the drug companies advertising ev erywhere!!! We can’t turn on the TV or buy a magazine without seeing them. I once took the time to tear out every ad page in a REader’s Digest and ended up with a magazine 1/4 the size!~!!. I have discontinued all magazines with drug ads in them and WOW am I saving money!!. The health care in this country may be flawed but it is still the BEST AND CHEAPEST IN THE WORLD. Sure it’s not free but neither is universal health care. Who does Obama and the congress think is goin g to pay for all this WE ARE and from the experience of other countries the opportunity for fraud, etc is as open as a candy store without of clerk. And when one has to wait for treatment for weeks how can that be better. I’m totally sickened by the way this country is going. Nothing has been free for me since I was 12 and it sure isn’t going to be now. A Jens
When you (the author of this page) use the expression, “In other completely expected news…” you reveal your own personal bias which then renders your post suspect, to me. While I can appreciate FactCheck, the use of Keith Olbermann as a refutation of supposed bias is laughable on its face, just as he is.
Mary Kay, in response to your earlier post, the Democrats in Congress, led by Pelosi, don’t seem to be interested in giving people, or themselves, time to read the bill. This also happened with the Stimulus bill. There is no refuting that the Democrat Congress is trying to push this bill through as fast as they can. Citizens have a right to fear a bill on this scale being rushed through the legislative process without a thorough reading and debate before putting it to the vote!
I love the comments like” If it’s such a good bill why don’t they read the whole thing.” If that is the way that the system worked, we would never have a functioning government. Appropriations bills are often 1000 pages or more. And next to 0 Senators or Representatives read the things in their entirety. They have staffers for that, and specialized committees whose members’ staffers read the bills and summarize them to their bosses who then make recommendations to the other members of which ever house they belong to.
That’s why. Because that is how our system works. The Senators and Reps would get nothing done if they had to read 20,000 pages a year, they would have no time to push their own ideas, and for better or worse, they would have no time to campaign for second terms.
“steve” comment = typical moronic comment by lib. e.g. it doesn’t matter what citizens think, what matter is what gov’t staffers and bureaucrats think. god help us when people like this have the right to vote.
this states doctors will be evaluated on performance? So if this performance is to save the government money then what do you think the doctors are going to pressure old people into yes signing their life away. this is section 1233 not the useless info they give in this article.
(b) Expansion of Physician Quality Reporting Initiative for End of Life Care
(1) Physician’S QUALITY REPORTING INITIATIVE- Section 1848(k)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-4(k)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
‘(3) Physician’S QUALITY REPORTING INITIATIVE-
‘(A) IN GENERAL- For purposes of reporting data on quality measures for covered professional services furnished during 2011 and any subsequent year, to the extent that measures are available, the Secretary shall include quality measures on end of life care and advanced care planning that have been adopted or endorsed by a consensus-based organization, if appropriate. Such measures shall measure both the creation of and adherence to orders for life-sustaining treatment.
‘(B) PROPOSED SET OF MEASURES- The Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register proposed quality measures on end of life care and advanced care planning that the Secretary determines are described in subparagraph (A) and would be appropriate for eligible professionals to use to submit data to the Secretary. The Secretary shall provide for a period of public comment on such set of measures before finalizing such proposed measures.’