Obama goes to NH to sell suckers and health care Part 2

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Since my post yesterday, I’ve since had a chance to read the transcript from the NH town hall. You can read it here. I wish I could say that I was surprised by the lies the silvertongue was peddling, but every single broken promise, every half-truth and every slanted syllable that I debunked yesterday was incorporated into his siren's call. I can see why many, disarmed and poorly informed, would have defended every word of the propagandist and chief. What was being told sounded far better than what was being sold; suckers and health care.

Today, I pick up where I left off and will continue to give you an honest perspective on HR3200. Today, we look at Obama’s contemptuous statements regarding taxes, death panels and the AARP.

Obama says: “Health care legislation will be paid for by taxing Americans making more than $250,000 and by creating savings from reforming Medicare, Medicaid and S-CHIP.”

THIS IS AN EMPTY PROMISE, A LIE, AND A HALF TRUTH ALL IN ONE. As I pointed out yesterday, the bill is not deficit neutral. To say that the bill is being paid for and not mention that there is a large unfunded portion is a lie by omission. Since Obama has already signed legislation that would remove the health bill from Pay-Go, I think it’s clear Obama will sign the bill even if it should appear on his desk with a large deficit in tow.

To believe that the White House can and will create the amount of savings they project requires a leap of faith. Recently, the director of the CBO has stated his skepticism regarding the amount of savings that the White House is projecting.

Obama has also promised that health care reform will be paid for by taxing those that make $250,000 or more. Of course, this is not the whole story regarding these taxes. Obama’s promise on the campaign trail was that he would simply repeal the Bush tax cuts. Fast forward to today and the top bracket is not paying 39.5% in income taxes, which was what they were under Clinton, but 45%. The “soak the rich” taxes are not the only taxes in HR3200. There’s an 8% tax on employers who drop or don’t offer insurance (that means the labor will be getting pinched). There is a tax on those that use tax free health care accounts to buy medication and a 2.5% tax on those that have the old, non-government sanctioned plans. These new taxes are a far cry from simply repealing Bush tax cuts. Yes, many of these taxes will be felt by those making less than $250,000.

If Obama was going to be honest, he should have said “I know I said that the bill would be paid for, but I lied. I know I promised that the bill would be paid for by creating savings from current government programs, this isn’t likely to happen. I know I promised that I would only repeal the Bush tax cuts on the rich, but I’m going to do twice that and more.”

Obama says: “The idea that my plan will install death panels is simply not true.”

MOSTLY, TRUE. The assertion that the government will create death panels comes from section 1233 of the bill in congress and the comparative effectiveness board established in the stimulus bill and expanded in HR3200. The bill describes a provision that would have people consult a health care practitioner regarding end of life planning. I do want to point out that one reaps what one sows. If you write a 1,000 page bill chalked full of programs that are invasive to one’s personal decisions (like provisions related to parenting, Chuck Norris to fill you in) you are likely to be alarmed.

Obama stated in the town hall meeting that the purpose of this section is to inform people about health care proxies, advance directives and living wills. However, this is not all the section talks about. Interestingly, health care proxies, advance directives and living wills are covered in two lines of the section. The rest was devoted almost entirely to end-of-life planning and does in fact contain specifics such as whether you will authorize the use of antibiotics, artificially administered nutrition and hydration when at the end of life.

Please keep in mind, the bill does specify that the conversation occurs between your doctor, nurse, or nurse practitioner and not some government bureaucrat.

The simple fact is that the bill doesn’t spell out exactly how these provisions will work. They are up to Obama to run. However, I do not believe section 1233 is setting up a "death panel." Primarily because the sessions are to be carried out by your doctor, nurse, etc. If your doctor is pushing euthanasia, you should find a new doctor.

However and I'll cover this in another post, there is also nothing in the health bill that guards against health care rationing. Implementation of programs will be up to the President, his Czars, and cabinet members.

What we do know is that there will be a board doing research to determine best medical practices and a health commissioner and panel that decides benefits. It is not out of the realm to think that this board will be hands off, but it may also be very imposing. This speaks to the crux of the matter. A simple question really, do you want to give the government the potential power of tyranny? Do you trust the government that much?

This will split down ideological lines. For most on the left, Obama is their Platonian philosopher-king who thinks only for his subjects and never his own interests. For us on the right it doesn’t matter, it’s none of Obama’s business. When, what, and why we want health care is none of the governments business. Leave research to the academics. We should be free to do what we want even if it is a low-percentage treatment.

If Obama was going to be honest, he should have said “You have no reason to believe anything I have to say regarding how I will run the provisions in the bill. They are intrusive.”

Obama says: “AARP supports my plan.”

THIS IS A LIE. The AARP has not endorsed any health legislation as of yet.

If Obama was going to be honest, he should have said “The AARP is so confident in how I’m going to run health care, they haven’t endorsed my plan yet.”

I have given you three more truths as I expose the sea of lies. I plan on continuing these types of posts until I have exposed all the misinformation from White House. With that said, I will be at this for a long time. I still plan on talking about health care rationing, government competition with the private sector and WHO 2000 report. Please let me know if there is anything else I should cover.

Related Articles:

Obama goes to NH to sell suckers and health care

Heritage Foundation debunks Obama lies (H/T to Lonely Conservative)

Robert Verdi at the 46 posts on Death Panel


Awesome, bring it on, I was reading tonight about the fact that the AARP hasn't quite 'endorsed' the Obama health plan, as he said so in the town hall. What gives? Desperation, flailing and floundering, IMO. I couldn't believe it when I saw with my own eyes Obama denying the 'death panel' allegation. Talk about being on the defensive. We are winning, I think that us 'small bloggers' have played a large part in this......

August 13, 2009 at 1:15 AM

BTW too, I am digging your ever-improving writing style :). Keep it up.

August 13, 2009 at 1:17 AM
blackandgoldfan said...

C-Gen: The AARP hasn't OFFICIALLY endorsed it, but they have in a sense. To try to "dispel the myths" to their members could be a stealth endorsement.


We're winning this, my friend. Keep fighting as well as you do!! :-)

August 13, 2009 at 7:45 AM
The Law said...

While I agree with blackandgold that the scales of this debate may be tipped in your favor, I think that some of the statements you label as half truths and lies is not entirely accurate here.

I will get my statisical links later, since I'm a little busy right now, but I've read reports that indicate that the fat trimming in the healthcare budget will create savings of 700-800 Billion+ dollars, which does not include long term projections for things like information technology, preventative health measures, and fewer emergency room visits.

The real issue here is the right's distrust of the government. And I will concede to some of your points about government efficiency. But don't think for a second that private health insurers care about you. There is talk of death panels, but how is that different from a private health insurer deciding whether to pay your claim as you're bleeding out of your stomach, or paying your claim and adding fees that have to make you choose between getting treatment or going bankrupt to pay private health insurance? Talk about a rock and a hard place... government inefficiency may have you die on the operating table from shuffling through bureaucratic mess while private health will have you die on the table because you STILL can't afford the surgery even after you paid your premium in full!

So the real answer is to reform healthcare first by cutting the fat out the system, and then apply those savings towards ways to promote universal health.

Also I want to address some of your concerns:

If you like your healthplan, you can keep it:
CGen, your stance doesn't make much sense to me. If there is universal healthcare, then you don't have to sign on with your employer's healthcare plan because you'd still be able to apply your healthcare plan with your doctor individually. That's kind of the whole point
of universal healthcare, to maximize your choices. If you got your own provider, it would cost your employer less money.

AARP Endorsement: While I have read no official statement endorsing it, B&G is correct about the stealth endorsement. I happened to read the latest issue because my grandmother is a model, and has her photos in that magazine! Reading it, there is support for Obama's plan on every page of their latest issue, including a story of the top 8 myths about healthcare that try to dispel the very arguments you make here. Therefore, it is safe to say this is not a lie as much as it is hyperbole.

August 13, 2009 at 11:49 AM

@ LCR - I don't believe 1233 is for a death panel, but I do believe 100% that rationing will be coming and will probably be more represive than what many expect. I was mostly appauled when the man asked how he plans to control costs without rationing and he went on to say through health saving and taxes. It didn't answer the question and it's scary because he doesn't know what he's talking about or he does and does not want to be honest.

@ blackandgoldfan - good point.

@tL - "if you like your healthplan, you can keep it"

The concern is 1. experts say I have at least a one in ten chance that I will lose my health care plan 2. the governments plan does not necessarily cover what I had at the prices I had 3. universal health insurance means everyone has insurance, it doesn't mean everyone accepts that insurance (yes hospitals probably will). There are many PCPs that do not accept medicaid or medicare, why? Becuase unlike private insururs, the government is a bad business partner.

Now these issues are important to me, but they are an even bigger issue for someone like my father who had retired from a company that provides his health care in retirement. It's something he's planned on having and if he's dropped because of the public plan, which he now has to pay more for and perhaps have less coverage or if he now has to pay 2.5% tax because it doesn't meet the government standards it will effect his retirement.

August 13, 2009 at 9:05 PM
Teresa said...

The CBO just came out with a statement saying that actually preventative care will not save money in the long run since not all people get diseases etc.

Yes. I do believe that there were "death panels" advising on end of life care. Even though the bill may have said this decision was between you and your doctor and nurse, I believe that the government would be intrusive and use coercion to sway the doctors to advocate a particular end of life decision-meaning euthanasia.
Chuck Norris recently revealed the type of intrusion our government would be authorized to do in this bill, regarding child care. This even would include counseling an individual during a pregnancy. And this is supposed to be a health care bill, not a child care bill. I have recently written an article outlining this on my blog. We need to stop this bill before it takes away our freedom.

August 15, 2009 at 7:48 PM

Post a Comment