Categorized | Commentary/Editorial

Howard Dean: Governor Palin was right about death panels: IPAB’s "essentially a health-care rationing body"; Updated





The excitable former Vermont governor doesn’t come right out and say that, of course, but in a Wall Street Journal op-ed today, he echoed the very point Governor Palin made four years ago:

One major problem is the so-called Independent Payment Advisory Board. The IPAB is essentially a health-care rationing body. By setting doctor reimbursement rates for Medicare and determining which procedures and drugs will be covered and at what price, the IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor by simply setting rates to levels where no doctor or hospital will perform them.

To refresh your memories, here’s what Governor Palin wrote in her famous August 7, 2009 Facebook post which caused many liberals, and even some on the right who should know better, to devolve into blithering idiots:

The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. 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.

There’s no qualitative difference between what Governor Palin wrote four years ago and what Howard Dean wrote today. The primary function of the unaccountable bureaucrats sitting on Obamacare’s IPAB is to ration health care.  There’s no other reason for IPAB to exist. They will deny certain types of medical treatments and procedures to those individuals whom they deem unworthy of the care. For those unfortunate enough to fall into this category, the IPAB is effectively a death panel.

Dean also admits that, despite the rationing, there’s little or no chance the IPAB will be successful in controlling costs:

There does have to be control of costs in our health-care system. However, rate setting—the essential mechanism of the IPAB—has a 40-year track record of failure. What ends up happening in these schemes (which many states including my home state of Vermont have implemented with virtually no long-term effect on costs) is that patients and physicians get aggravated because bureaucrats in either the private or public sector are making medical decisions without knowing the patients. Most important, once again, these kinds of schemes do not control costs. The medical system simply becomes more bureaucratic.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has indicated that the IPAB, in its current form, won’t save a single dime before 2021. As everyone in Washington knows, but less frequently admits, CBO projections of any kind—past five years or so—are really just speculation. I believe the IPAB will never control costs based on the long record of previous attempts in many of the states, including my own state of Vermont.

So basically there’s no upside to the IPAB: We’ll get the downside of arbitrary rationing with zero cost control — which is the nominal reason for the panel’s existence.  In a rational world, an entity which produces only negative consequences would be abolished. Amazingly, Dean agrees:

…getting rid of the IPAB is something Democrats and Republicans ought to agree on.

So not only does Howard Dean agree with Governor Palin on the true purpose of the IPAB, but on the necessity of its elimination as well. Howard Dean is not the first liberal to vindicate Governor Palin on this issue. As I noted in a post over three years ago, two prominent lefties, Paul Krugman and former Obama OMB Director Peter Orszag, confirmed what Governor Palin had been saying all along: IPAB will be a death panel to those for whom the bureaucrats deny treatment. Let’s go to the video:

(h/t Brian Lerch)

Update: (h/t Steve Flesher) Twitchy weighs in: Howard Dean: Sarah Palin was right about death panels! Yeaarrggh!



Tags: , , , , ,

Comment Policy: The Editors reserve the right to delete any comments which in their sole discretion are deemed false or misleading, profane, pornographic, defamatory, harassment, name calling, libelous, threatening, or otherwise inappropriate. Additionally, the Editors reserve the right to ban any registered poster who, in their sole discretion, violates the terms of use. Do not post any information about yourself reasonably construed as private or confidential. Conservatives4Palin and its contributors are not liable if users allow others to contact them offsite.

  • Jthom26837

    Howard Dean, if you would’ve come sooner to defend Sarah Palin, She would not be putting up with so much muck today. In fact, Thanks for nothin’.

  • patnatasha

    I guess better late than never.

    • Budvarakbar

      He is just jumping on the bandwagon — 4 years late — but hopefully they will start a trend — of course after the LSM gets thru with it — Dean and the bandwagon jumpers will get credit for saving the med system while SP will be criticized for ‘jumping the gun’

  • travelingon

    It’s a good thing the House defunded it.

  • unseen1

    the IPAB is the reason that Rove and other GOPE are trying to stop the movement to defund Obamacare. the death panel washes their hands of sticky political issues when they start killing off grandma and grandpa. Medicare needs to be reformed and the IPAB allows the elites to kill off the "unwanted" without major political blowback.
    It is the creation of cowards to protect cowards.

  • colint

    This article and videos are confusing. Any medical plan whether public or private needs a panel of experienced MEDICAL professionals to decide what drugs or medical procedures in what circumstances will be included in the plan considering funding restrictions based on available government funds or what premiums people are willing to pay. For the wealthy able to pay the full cost of their health care, there are no limits. For those who can’t, which is most people, they have to accept reality that they cannot have everything. It is likely that within 10 to 20 years a new heart could be grown from any person’s own cells but it will be very expensive, say $1,000,000 (like the cost of VG’s operation). If needed should it be done for say an illiterate 50 year old living on welfare to keep him alive for another 50 years.

    THINK, THINK. Health care is NOT like food, clothing and shelter that people get what they can afford. A medical procedure costs about the same whether it is done for an indigent or billionaire. ALL medical procedures CANNOT be available to everyone. These panels are needed to determine what can be provided for funds available. A panel of MEDICAL experts cannot be elected. They must be hired based on qualifications and experience not based on political pull.

    • lanahi

      When you read the Obamacare bill and understand our system and our wishes for freedom from government interference, then I’ll listen to what you have to say, otherwise you don’t contribute to the discussion.

      Sarah has said that government will simply not pay the costs. That is rationing, and death panels.

      In the Obamacare bill there is no requirement that the health panels be medically knowledgeable. And there is no appeal to their decisions, by doctors or patients.

      During Obama’s 2008 campaign he came right out and said that, if someone needed hip replacement or some such thing, they might just have to be satisfied with pills. Yes, that is what it will come down to…let us just live in pain the rest of our lives when routine surgery would easily take care of it. America does not understand rationing and doesn’t want to go there. But ever since the passage of Obamacare, rationing is what everyone is talking about. It may be a concept you understand and accept, but it is not an American concept and we don’t want it.

      Instead of lowering costs of medical service, Obamacare has drastically increased it, and many are losing health insurance at their work places. This happens every time government steps in…everything is less efficient and ultimately more expensive. A large part of the high costs of medical care here has been caused by government, and we haven’t seen anything yet.

      Medicare for seniors is a good example of this increased cost because of government. Medicare allows and pays for only a small percentage of costs, the rest is disapproved and the patient has to cover the difference or the doctors have to swallow the difference themselves. Many have refused to see new Medicare patients, including the Mayo Clinic, because the hassle is not worth it. But there is also a law that says that patients on Medicare can’t pay more than others. So, the solution for those who continue to see Medicare patients is to raise EVERYONE’s costs! Medicare pays a percentage of the fees that most doctors in the area are charging for that service, so all the doctors charge more for that service, to Medicare and non-Medicare patients both. This is only one small area that affects everyone, and it’s only one area government increases costs of health care. Obamacare causes much more of that.

      The real solution for efficient and affordable health care is for the government to butt out.

      • Tom Ferriday

        Perfect explanation.

        Anyone who doesn’t understand what Obamacare is about – and how it specifically effects them – is either feigning idiocy OR is the real deal. Either option is bad.

        • lanahi

          If you want to see the future of the US under Obamacare, just make a visit to one of the inner city free clinics run by the government.

          When staying in LA for a few months, I developed an alarming lump on one of my eyes and went to a free clinic. There were hundreds of patients and screaming kids waiting to see the doctor. I waited four hours. When I finally got to see a doctor, it was some kid from Pakistan right out of college who didn’t know what was wrong. So he consulted someone else, equally as green, and she didn’t know either. They then brought in still a third doctor who didn’t know what it was. They consulted with each other and finally decided it would go away by itself. I got exactly what I paid for in that free clinic!

          When I got home, I went to a doctor who told me after a slit lamp inspection what it was and said it was likely from irritation from the smog in LA. He gave me some ointment and it cleared right up.

      • colint

        I will continue to comment on health care. It is up to you whether you read what I say. I am not advocating for Obamacare (which is nothing like the Canadian system) and have not and would not waste my time reading it. Both government and private insurers NOW have panels that decide what will be included for the premiums charged. Call them "death panels" if you wish but that does not change reality.
        I mentioned what the qualifications SHOULD BE for those on these panels because the Act only said they would be chosen by political groups which is not how it should be. So maybe we agree on that.
        You wrote "every time the government steps in, everything is less efficient and costs more" That seems to be true in the US but is definitely NOT true in Canada. I have mentioned before that the ADMINISTRATIVE cost of the Canadian system is under 2% compared to about 13% for US private insurance. It covers 100% of citizens at a cost of 2/3rds of US per person costs with outcomes at least as good and is LIKED by over 80% of Canadians. ( I can provide authoritative links supporting anything I say.)
        Affordable health care for all and private (for profit) health insurance is an oxymoron.

        • lanahi

          80% of Canadians don’t have any remembrance of any other form of health care so don’t have anything to compare it to. But I know two Canadians who tell me about the long waits between procedures or surgeries, lack of available diagnostic testing, long waits in the clinic, difficulty finding an approved doctor who is still taking patients, etc. This appears normal to them, but to me it is alarming to know we’ll be in the same spot soon if we don’t defund this monstrosity.

          • colint

            Baloney. I don’t have a family doctor. I go to a clinic where by phoning the same day for an appointment I have never had to wait more than 20 minutes to see the doctor I have gone to for 15 years. Have been sent to specialists when needed. The twice I went to emergency, as there were no patients there waiting for non emergency health care, I was looked after within 15 minutes.
            Have said several times that I am NOT advocating for Obamacare. Go ahead. Defund the monstrosity.
            It may take 3 months or more to get a hip replacement but if you go to emergency due to a heart attack the response could be faster that the US. The over 80% (up from 73% 5 yrs ago) of Canadians liking their health care system, from news stories, are no doubt aware of the mess in the US. Going from memory, 70% of US personal bankruptcies are due to unpaid medical bills, Canada none. Maybe the reason Canadians on average live 4 years longer than Americans is because they don’t have to worry about health care.

            • lanahi

              You’ve had your doctor for 15 years. Try finding a new doctor, colint…that truly can be a problem in Canada. One of my Canadian friends with serious health issues moved to a new area and waited several months for a new doctor, all the time without health care of any kind. We can pick our doctors and can change them whenever we like. This too will change with Obamacare, starting with the majority of doctors threatening to quit medicine if it takes effect and leading to a shortage of doctors.

              Lifestyle is an extremely important factor in making a possible connection between longevity and good health care. Most Americans have abysmal lifestyles but they get superior health care when they do get sick from it.

              If you want to know how effective medicine is in the US compared with other countries, there is a wealth of information on the web. There is a profound difference between survival rates of cancer in the US and other countries, for instance…and that includes Canada. Google it.

              • colint

                Read the links I gave you. Nearly all you say is refuted therein. The writer knows more than I do. There are no doctors threatening to quit In Canada.
                Living in a large metropolitan area I could easily find another doctor but I prefer the one ten minutes walk away through a park.
                I have not criticised the skills of US doctors. Those who one way or another can pay for care get the best. I liked the story other day about a US congress woman having a baby a John Hopkins hospital that had a normally fatal disability but due to a new procedure this child may well survive.

          • colint
          • Budvarakbar

            And the ones hwo can afford it come south of the border — and I aint talking Mehico

        • dmac8889

          Colint, having read what you state, then when Sarah Palin stated "Death Panels" this should not have come as a surprise. What did you think about America’s press calling Sarah Palin a liar? What did you think about Obama denying something that was obviously true.

        • lanahi

          All insurance companies have to spell out clearly in writing what they will cover and what they will not, and you have a choice of insurance companies and insurance policies. The doctor can also challenge their decisions if they decide they will not cover something, and insurance companies are closely monitored by the states for fraud. If failure to pay according to their written policy, they can rightfully be sued for everything they are worth in a wrongful death suit. Most insurance companies pay without that and are usually reasonable to work with.

          With the government, you take what you get.and cannot appeal their decisions. It doesn’t matter to them what the doctor says…they have a black and white set of rules for everyone and have no incentive to budge from it. They are also arrogant enough to think that they know the prognosis in all cases and will make decisions based on that, again no matter what the actual care-givers say. With government interference, both doctors and patients lose the power to decide health care issues and are essentially helpless.

      • jerseyflash

        Great comment lanahi…like most and maybe even you…I had trouble understanding what colint was trying to say in his second sentence ????…here is a fact about Oamacare…my wife’s personal insurance has gone up $$$283.00 from 2/2011 to 2/2013 with a deductable at $500 which is now $3000…(United Healthcare for the people who want to know)…why the increase…I was told by thier operator…OBAMACARE and this is just the beginning !!!!!
        Since 1965 I along with my employers have paid into Medicare and every month STILL I pay into Medicare…with that said here is my question about when does the DEATH PANEL people send me a letter telling me I have to take the RED pill…AND THAT’S IT ????…because ( history of my condition)…in 2002 I went into AFib…recieved 3 Cardioversion…1 Robotic Ablation (which lasted for 9 hours and 14 days later I went back into AFib)…have seen my Cardiologist for 11 years and STILL to this day…he treats and test me without question (how much longer do I have before the "DARK-SIDE" pulls the plug ????)
        An article on the internet last week about the alarming growth of AFib due to ???? (they say STRESS ????) no one seems to know…
        With the large number of baby-boomers coming into the Medicare program every year…due the DEATH PANEL’S work 24/7/365 until we filter out GRAN-MA & GRAN-PA…(don’t worry about pushing them over the cliff…just pull the plug !!!!)…it seems that you would want to get to them first because BIG GOV could STOP thier SS checks… NO MED’S NO CHECK….sounds like a WIN-WIN for the REGIME
        This Gov can’t run a railroad (Amtrack) or the Pony-Express (US Postal)..in 2011 a $$$5 BILLION loss..2012 a $$16 BILLION loss (just feeding the pony??)… and they have the nerve to put "We don’t cost the tax payer a dime-AD on TV…THE TAX-PAYER PUT’S HIS AND HER MONIES IN THE TREASURY..WHICH PAYS TO KEEP THE POSTAL SYSTEM AFLOAT…FACT !!!!
        O-REGIME…STOP TELLING LIES !!!!

        • colint

          My second sentence that starts with "Any medical plan…" seems clear. I repeat I am not in any way a supporter of Obamacare. I don’t know what "health care exchanges" are. Exchange what for what? I pay a premium of $68/month for singles (married with children is $149) plus a maximum of 3% of income for prescription drugs. That is, it is affordable for ALL.
          I don’t know if changes in US healthcare will cause "the plug to be pulled" on some. I am 80. Every 6 weeks I have to go to the hospital for a 15 minute procedure requiring a radiologist + a nurse and the other 5 weeks I go to a clinic. The plug has not been pulled on me (yet???) You do have an imagination that, with a government plan, you will some time get a lethal pill. When my time comes, I am more concerned about them prolonging my life.

          • lanahi

            You forgot the taxes you have to also pay to support health care:
            http://finance.boston.com/boston/news/read?GUID=24757699
            CALGARY, ALBERTA — (Marketwired) — 07/30/13 — A typical Canadian family with two parents and two children will pay $11,320 in taxes, on average, for public health care insurance in 2013, calculates a new report from the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

            "Health care is not free in Canada. The fact is, Canadian families pay thousands of dollars in taxes every year to cover the cost of public health care insurance. And that cost rose 1.5 times faster than average income over the past decade," said Nadeem Esmail, Fraser Institute director of health policy studies and co-author of The Price of Public Health Care Insurance: 2013 Edition."

            • colint

              Read the links. Canada’s FAR LOWER health care premiums more than offset higher income tax for most people.
              In round numbers Canada spends $5000/per person on health care compared to $7500 on the US. This seems to indicates that ON AVERAGE, a family of 4 pays $10,000 more for health care through premiums or taxes than Canadians. Have you tried to find out how healthcare costs have increased in the US vs family incomes. Read today that in FL health care premiums will rise 40%.

              • Joe Durnavich

                Per capita comparisons can be misleading. In the U.S., we individuals have always been free to purchase as much health care as we desire. Some of the spending differences may simply reflect our preference for more or better health care.

    • Joe Durnavich

      Houses are expensive too but we don’t need expert housing panels deciding what sort of house each of us should get.

      • colint

        Am not sure what you mean with your house analogy. When we bought our first house in was in a new subdivision. There were three space layout plans with minor differences in trim and about 5% difference in price between the least and most expensive. So, similarly a health insurance company may have several policies covering more or less and with more or less deductibles. There will not be a custom plan for everyone. The medical expert panel I mentioned will decide what will or not be included in these STANDARD plans for a certain premium.
        You get to decide which of these standard plans you want or can afford.

        • Joe Durnavich

          What we don’t have is a master panel that dictates housing for the entire nation. Sure, a contractor will design the subdivision it is building, but that contractor is in competition with many thousands of other contractors all working to discover the best way to meet the needs of potential customers.

          Likewise, we don’t want a master medical panel deciding what is or is not affordable healthcare-wise. We want many thousands of doctors, clinics, hospitals and insurance companies in competition with each other, each trying to find a new angle or a better way of being of service. Not everybody needs or should have medical insurance either. In those cases, the patient and his doctor serve as their own medical
          panel.

          Don’t think that the need for a group of actuaries that work at an individual insurance company means that we need a master panel of actuaries that dictates medical policy for the entire population.

          For an example of how competition serves the market, see:

          http://reason.com/blog/2012/11/15/oklahoma-doctors-vs-obamacar

          Here’s a tweet that sums it up well:

          "@BradMD

          The patient should be the most powerful person in the healthcare system and physicians should be independent of 3rd party control."

          • colint

            I did not say that there would be ONE panel that tells all health insurers what should be included in there plans. Each insurer will have its expert advisory panel will decide what will be covered in their policies or plans.

            • Joe Durnavich

              But notice that insurers and their actuaries function not to ration care, but to publish a list of services that are possible and what their prices are. Furthermore, consumers have a say-so in these prices and services by the act of shopping around for the most attractive plans. We lose this input of consumer preference under government-run systems.

              In a reasonably-free market, there is also incentive to provide more health care services and at lower cost. What may have cost a fortune a few decades ago, might be affordable today. Progress, however, tends to stagnate under socialism.

              • colint

                There is a free market for food, clothing and shelter etc. The government passed laws that ALL will get SOME (not all) health care whether or not they can pay. One can shop for a new car. This dealer is selling it for a price. Another dealer is selling the identical car for a lower price.
                I have no insurance policies now but I remember they were voluminous with fine print. I don’t read those that come with my bank accounts or credit card. So I have read a "health insurance policy" . I don’t know how detailed they bare in defining what is or is not covered. If there is detail, I doubt if 1% of people are able to access what services included are worth.
                You say that under a free market there is an incentive to provide more health care at lower cost. As under free markets US health cost is the highest in the world, 35% higher than Canada, The US "Free Market" for health care can only be said to be a FAILURE.

      • Budvarakbar

        It’s coming

    • lanahi

      "ALL medical procedures CANNOT be available to everyone. These panels are needed to determine what can be provided for funds available."

      THAT IS THE DEATH PANEL SARAH WAS TALKING ABOUT!

      No, hell no, we don’t want it!

      • colint
        • Joe Durnavich

          There a push in Canada to re-introduce private care:

          http://articles.latimes.com/2009/sep/27/nation/na-healthcare-canada27

          Isn’t outlawing private care barbaric?

          • colint

            As in The US, most Canadian doctors are in private practice. There are services such as cosmetic surgery that is not covered by government plans. There are a few doctors with practices who would make more with private health insurance. I am not sure, but I think GPs cannot take private patients while also serving patients covered by the government plan.
            With approval rate over 80% the present Canadian system will not change. Many of those who don’t want the present system are affluent people who don’t like going to doctors who have ordinary people in their waiting rooms.
            I would see nothing wrong a doctor opting out of the government system and just taking private patients. These patients likely pay 40% tax on high incomes and in effect would get a 40% refund on any medical expenses claimed on a tax return. Most people pay about 20% tax and it would not benefit them to have private insurance.

            • Joe Durnavich

              By the way, by private care, I don’t mean privately owned, but privately payed for. Until recently, that was banned in Canada for hospital and physician core services. The ban had to be lifted because the universal scheme was failing and enough people were desperate for care.

              Now Canada is in a bind. It has squandered the last 30 years paying into a universal system and is now going to try to re-implement a private system to run parallel to it. The private system is not well-developed and is going to be expensive. Using the private system means paying into two health care systems.

              Canadians aren’t going to listen to me of course, but I’d like to see the U.S. become a nation of true health care consumers once again, with private health savings accounts, and where if somebody needs assistance, he is given a voucher to purchase insurance or health care as he sees fit. There is no reason to abandon the advantages of the markets.

    • momofsons

      Of course everything is rationed, food, clothing, and shelter are rationed. The question is why would you want a "government panel" with this much power. I don’t care how professional or how educated and credentialed they are. The power to ration health or life and death is just too much power for a "government panel" Could you not envision a "government panel" deciding not to fund AIDS care, because it was just too expensive? It’s not to far fetched to see denying treatment to all Alzheimer’s patients. But when you consider the IRS and government spying scandal, it is not too out of the realm to think that maybe just yours and my mother’s will not receive needed care….you know since we post on a Pro PALIN site.

      So I urge you to THINK THINK THINK!!!
      Everything is rationed, but the rationing mechanism is the question at hand. And yes heath care can be and must be rationed with a rational supply and demand curve. The current problem is that medicare and government intervention has completely removed rationality from the proper supply and demand curve for health care services.

      The same thing has happened to the cost of higher education with the federal government intervention into student loans. I am not calling for zero involvement, but more rational involvement. Involvement keeping in mind just how the mechanism works. It is not rocket science, just good government. The problem is that there is always plenty of money on some side buying the government deciding bodies away from what works best. So…. we must elect representatives with more integrity.

  • DocBarry1

    I’m waiting to hear and read all of the apologies going out to Gov Palin – waiting – I am still hearing crickets

    • Budvarakbar

      Uh – I posted above — these are the bandwagon jumpers – will be trying to eventually get credit — while Sarah will be citicised for ‘jumping the gun’ >>>> the old ‘shoot the messenger’ syndrome

  • Tom Ferriday

    Well, Karl Rove. Still think the GOP shouldn’t defund Obamacare?

    Oh, wait. I forgot. You’re a complete idiot as is every Republican in Congress, except Ted Cruz and Jeff Sessions.

  • qtdb7

    Let me get this straight. Many people think Obama is ‘smart’ even
    though Obama is bankrupting America. Those people call Gov. Palin
    ‘stupid’ even though Gov. Palin’s JOB PERFORMANCE in Alaska was
    ABOVE 80%.
    Those people also call the Tea partiers ‘terrorist’ even though
    the Tea partiers are trying to save America from bankruptcy.
    Am I living in a TWILIGHT zone?

    Margaret Thatcher:
    The problem with socialism is soon or later it will run out of other
    people’s money.

    "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the
    gospel of envy. Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
    - Winston Churchill

    • dmac8889

      It not about common sense. It is about power. The LEFT has it, and they will do and say anything to maintain it. Even if it is Alice in Wonderland stuff.

  • http://lenbilen.com/ Lennart Bilén

    On Obamacare IPAB
    Howard Dean, Sarah Palin agree.
    Once “the lie of the year”
    That “Death Panel” we fear,
    It will fail to the utmost degree.
    http://lenbilen.com/2013/07/29/howard-dean-sarah-palin-agree-obamacare-ipab-death-panels-will-fail-a-limerick/

  • angeleno

    They are death panels just as Palin said. Isn’t it interesting that Palin always tells the truth, and Obama never tells the truth? That’s why he leads the liberal lynch mob that’s always chasing Palin.

    In his famous speeches even before he became President, Ronald Reagan warned clearly and brilliantly what socialized medicine would bring– not only the destruction of our great health care system, but the destruction of our freedom.

  • Quit_or_Work

    This problem is a lot bigger than just the mess in the White House. Texas has had death panels since before Gov Palin brought them into the national discussion.

    "Death Panel Slips DNR Order Into 12-Year-Old’s Medical File"

    http://www.lifenews.com/2012/08/29/death-panel-slips-dnr-order-into-12-year-olds-medical-file/

    http://www.politijim.com/2012/03/paging-governor-perry-death-panels-in.html

    • lanahi

      That first link says:

      "Texas Right to Life advised Jessica to confront the doctor immediately. Removing food and water without a death panel’s proper approval is criminal. And as Zach’s legal guardian and medical decision maker, it was Jessica’s right — and not the doctor’s — to direct her son’s care.

      Secret “in-hospital” DNRs, however, are legal in Texas. Zach’s doctor
      neither needed the death panel’s nor Jessica’s consent to place one in
      Zach’s chart. When confronted, the doctor reluctantly removed the DNR and reinstated Zach’s food and water, but again stressed to Zach’s parents that he no longer wished to treat their son.

      Afterwards, the hospital threatened to reconvene the death panel —
      presumably following all the rules — and continued threatening Zach’s
      parents up until the day Zach was moved to a hospital closer to home."

      Gosh, I wouldn’t want that first doctor to treat my son either! This case should receive national attention!

  • Quiet_Righty

    "YEAAARRRRGH!"

    OK, someone did that before me. :-(

  • Victoria Richardson

    Most of us on this website and others knew that Governor Palin was right about the Death Panels. I swear, its no wonder Gov Palin is a threat because she has been right on the issues and the liberals know it and now some liberals are breaking ranks and FINALLY coming out with the truth. Gov Palin was right all along.

  • dmac8889

    They all believe she is the ‘Fool on the Hill’, but "she never listens to them, she knows they are fool".

Open Thread

Governor Palin’s Tweets