Meet the Press starts out with a 15 minute discussion of how responsible the REpublicans are for the guy standing outside a townhall with a gun and a sign with Jefferson's tree of liberty remark. Now that is interesting. I don't recall the Democrats ever being asked about the anti-war protesters with the constant Bush-Hitler comparisons and protesting at soldier's funerals. Indeed, if you ever brought it up you were engaging in McCarthyism. Why is one side always answerable for its fringe but the other side not only doesn't have to answer for them but can use any attempt to get them to answer for them to discredit their opponents.
Then there are the "death panel" questions. Daschle points out that comparative effectiveness is used at the Mayo Clinic. Now even if they were the same thing it is all the difference in the world when a private organization that has to compete with other private organizations and that you can leave and the government that does not have to compete and which you cannot leave.
Armey gets drawn off in his idea of making Medicare voluntary. It is an interesting discussion. they want to use this to show the seniors that they expected to be supporting the Obama proposal that the right has radical goals that you, Mr. and Mrs. Middle America, do not support. They have a point. The right wants to go much farther down the road to privatization than the media voter. But that doesn't matter right now. The important thing is how far down the road to socialized medicine the left wants to go because they are the ones that are writing the bill. Even reasonable proposals that would do no great harm in themselves might reasonably be opposed by someone that does not want to go as far toward governmental decision making over private decision making as does the left. Rachel tries to do to Armey (and fairly enough as far as I am concerned) that the public has been doing to the Obama administration.
Daschle defends the public option by pointing out that only 6% chose medicare part D. But people chose Medicare Part D individually from a national market. People get their private health care from their employer and from a state market.
"Comparative effectiveness" has become a slippery term. Comparative effectiveness covers everything from comparing two highly similar drugs for the identical condition to comparing the social welfare benefits of preventative measures early in life to surgical interventions late in life.
It is not a debate about finding a way to pull the plug on Granny, it is a debate about getting Granny to just take her pain pills instead of getting that expensive hip replacement.
Then there are the "death panel" questions. Daschle points out that comparative effectiveness is used at the Mayo Clinic. Now even if they were the same thing it is all the difference in the world when a private organization that has to compete with other private organizations and that you can leave and the government that does not have to compete and which you cannot leave.
Armey gets drawn off in his idea of making Medicare voluntary. It is an interesting discussion. they want to use this to show the seniors that they expected to be supporting the Obama proposal that the right has radical goals that you, Mr. and Mrs. Middle America, do not support. They have a point. The right wants to go much farther down the road to privatization than the media voter. But that doesn't matter right now. The important thing is how far down the road to socialized medicine the left wants to go because they are the ones that are writing the bill. Even reasonable proposals that would do no great harm in themselves might reasonably be opposed by someone that does not want to go as far toward governmental decision making over private decision making as does the left. Rachel tries to do to Armey (and fairly enough as far as I am concerned) that the public has been doing to the Obama administration.
Daschle defends the public option by pointing out that only 6% chose medicare part D. But people chose Medicare Part D individually from a national market. People get their private health care from their employer and from a state market.
"Comparative effectiveness" has become a slippery term. Comparative effectiveness covers everything from comparing two highly similar drugs for the identical condition to comparing the social welfare benefits of preventative measures early in life to surgical interventions late in life.
It is not a debate about finding a way to pull the plug on Granny, it is a debate about getting Granny to just take her pain pills instead of getting that expensive hip replacement.
No comments:
Post a Comment