Smokette and I are listening to Dennis Miller on the radio–more accurately, on the computer–as is our AM wont. He just cracked a great joke about Obamacare’s plan to require seniors to receive reeducation camp indoctrination–er, mandatory counseling–every five years, calling it “end game counseling.” He suggested that seniors basically run for the hills from this plan, and I think he is right.
Which brings me t0 the AARP. Obamacare is going to be partly paid for by deeply cutting the already tight Medicare reimbursement schedules for doctors and other service providers. That means it will be more difficult to receive medical procedures, fewer doctors willing to take Medicare patients, and those who do having to bear an increased patient load, meaning less personal care, if not poorer quality for our eldsters. And with rationing on the horizon, who do you think will bear the brunt? Yes, senior citizens.
And what does AARP do? Endorse the plan and defend the reeducation camps! I have never thought AARP had the best interests of seniors as its core goal. It is primarily a liberal advocacy group advocating for left-wing policies whether they help seniors or not. In this case, the AARP’s endorsement is a betrayal of the very class of people on behalf of whom AARP claims to advocate.
Notable exception:It helped pass the Bush Medicare prescription drug benefit and is now seeking to close the “donut hole,” which raises senior’s drug costs when their yearly bill exceeds $2000. Fair enough.
July 29th, 2009 | 12:48 pm
Wesley,
AARP is essentially an insurance company under the rubic of being an political advocacy group. Always keep this in mind when thinking about them.
July 29th, 2009 | 5:20 pm
Wesley, I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on how the elderly might/would be pressured into attending such counseling sessions. Many elderly people already have written advance directives with the help of their own family members and own legal advisers. I would imagine they might resist reviewing them every five years with some other person. How could they be pressured into it? My own guess is that once the government plan paid for it, it would become “standard of care” and that the doctors would feel obligated to press patients to do it, in much the same way that doctors presently pressure patients to receive mammograms. But in theory, the patient can still refuse. Do you think this is right, or do you think there would be still more overwhelming ways of making patients go through such counseling? Another thought: Would the counseling have to be with someone chosen by the state, or could the patient go to a priest or family lawyer instead?
I imagine a lot of these things are left entirely vague in the bill, but in view of your references to mandatory counseling sessions, I was hoping you might have more info.
July 29th, 2009 | 8:30 pm
This nightmare care is only going to go from bad to worse. I do not understand why it is not pointed out that the very reason our healthcare system is in need of any repair is due to government interference in the private sector. I was working in a hospital during the Clinton years and hospitals see the handwriting on the wall and begin the process of preparation for what is inevitably coming down the pike. The very reason there is a ramrod in the spoke of healthcare is because gov policy has put it there!
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact