The doctors are paid in part by “health points” that they earn. If you have a sickness and they cure you they get health points based on a ration on how quickly and cheaply they cured you and how long you stay healthy.
So how many “health points” will the doctor get when confronted with a 66 year old with stage two colon cancer? A person with pancreatic cancer, a premature child that needs intensive care in the first weeks of life to survive?
When the incentives are wrong, bad things happen.
As we asked before:
Solutions?? How about we just add language to the bills saying that, for example : Section XXXX shall never be construed as to force doctors to make certain decisions that the doctor and patient feel are not in their best interests. Or XXX section shall never be construed to use any form of cost/benefit analysis to avoid paying for or authorizing benefits to anyone based on age, mental status, weight, disease etc etc…. OR perhaps a section banning payments for any form of convenience abortion or euthanasia…..
But they aren’t offering that as a solution are they.
But here is the dirty little secret, Republicans had tried to get such language inserted and the Democrats faught it tooth and nail.
More about incentives:
It is correct that the words “death panel” are not in the bill, but Stephanapolous has been around a while and knows full well that he is being disingenuous. The bill sets up 45 bureaucracies that will judge whether you get treatment or not based on “communal standards” and cost benefit analysis that they have free reign to set up under whose value system?. What mathematical formula tells a bureaucrat to put a pacemaker in an 84 year old grandparent? How can you say that “death panels” aren’t a vitally descriptive term for what is going on when people who have advocated population control/euthanasia are so deeply involved in this process?
Who will be getting these bureaucracy jobs??… wonks, political appointees and cronies; groups of people who have an annoying habit of being frightening extreemists just like Cass Sunstien, Dr. Emmanuel and John Holdren who are all advising President Obama.
Why should 45 government bureaucracies be getting between you and your doctor anyways? Is anyone to believe that these bureaucrats and panels will just be handing out advice and nothing will be mandatory???….if so, what would they know that you and your doctor do not know about your treatment and how will all that bureaucracy make health care cheaper?
The far left blogosphere and news are trying to defend Emmanuel’s statements and are trying to say anything to “refute” what is presented here by Gov. Palin and Prof. Jacobson.
The left has several factual problems that amount to arguing that the sky is not blue.
For starters, Obama says that old people should take the pill instead of have the surgery on the ABC News Special. Add to this that Cass Sunstien and John Holdren, two other presidential advisors are on the record and in writing about a policy that can fairly be described as a “death panel” type of rationing.
In essence, case that the far left is trying to make boiled down to this; by adding a trillion dollar bureaucracy between you and your doctor will save money…
1. And will save that money in spite of the fact that they say they will add 50 million people to the health care rolls,
2. And we will save money when another 83 million from people who’s employers will dump their insurance plan and move their employees to the public option,
3. And we wills till save money when we add all those with pre-existing conditions,
4. And we will save that money with that bureaucracy making absolutely NO rationing choices at all about the old or young, or limit your private health choices in any way (in spite of what is on page 16 (LINK 1, 2, 3) …. AND while making sure that wait times for care will not increase as in the cases of Canada and Britain.
5. And we will do it while not passing any meaningful tort (bogus lawsuit) reform.
Give me a break