Liberty or Death?

[Don]

PA deleted - LE>

Everything I posted was a direct quote from the wikipedia article YOU provided. I then provided an explanation that said the IPAB can--not "will" or "would"--make recommendations to limit other areas of care--which is exactly what the wikipedia article YOU provided says. So where did I lie?

Your problem is with the article YOU provided us, not me. Either specifically identify where I lied so I can apologize and correct myself-- or please apologize for calling me a liar.

 

[freeatlast]

Everything I posted was a direct quote from the wikipedia article YOU provided. I then provided an explanation that said the IPAB can--not "will" or "would"--make recommendations to limit other areas of care--which is exactly what the wikipedia article YOU provided says. So where did I lie?

Your problem is with the article YOU provided us, not me. Either specifically identify where I lied so I can apologize and correct myself-- or please apologize for calling me a liar.

Yea right Don.

 

[OldRegular]

What is that! :BangHead: That has nothing to do with what is being discussed here.

It does to those with discernment. We have a non elected board placing limits on the actions of an elected body. If that is not of concern to you :tear:

 

[Zaac]

So this board does potentially have the power to do a lot of damage. Perhaps I'm reading this incorrectly, but it looks like if the board makes a recommendation, Congress is allowed very little if any wiggle room to change anything in their recommendations.

 

[OldRegular]

Unfortunately, histrionics are what's defining the IPAB as a "death panel," because such a panel that enacts arbitrary limitations on access and level of care can, and arguably will, lead to a "death sentence" for some people.

We are not at the point of assisted suicide chambers such as in "Soylent Green," however.

I use the name "Death Panel" and I make no apologies for it!

Anyone with discernment should realize that the Bureaucracy of the Federal Government will seize power whenever possible. The 2700 page monstrosity, dubbed Obamacare, is supposedly written in Statutory Language which no one but the bureaucrats can really understand. There are groups with the expertise to understand and translate this language so that "normal" people can understand what is going on. The Heritage Foundation is one of these groups as "mandym" has noted.

I have listen to doctors on TV discuss the possible limitations placed by Obamacare on medical practice. I have personally had two family doctors express serious reservations about the consequences of Obamacare.

Anyone who has experience working with bureaucrats should be concerned about putting 16-20% of the economy in these people's hands. We have already seen that these people have no regard for religious scruples against abortion, contraceptives, the morning after pill, etc. What happens next?

Again, I use the name "Death Panel" and I make no apologies for it!

"fal" and "pj" can get their drawers in a knot if they choose. And they can call me whatever unbinds that knot a little as long as they don't question my salvation.

 

[OldRegular]

So this board does potentially have the power to do a lot of damage. Perhaps I'm reading this incorrectly, but it looks like if the board makes a recommendation, Congress is allowed very little if any wiggle room to change anything in their recommendations.

You got it. Couldn't find out what happens if Congress does not obey but I can guess!

We have 535 Congressmen and hundreds of thousands of bureaucrats. Who exercises the most power?

 

[just-want-peace]

All this "show me" what's in this "shoudda been aborted" bill is a crock of bovine excrement.
I dare say that 100 lawyers independently dissecting this "miscarriage of sanity" will/would come up with 200 different opinions of what it REALLY MEANS!!!
For any of you to demand that 'IT', what ever 'IT' is for you (death panels, higher taxes, rationed healthcare etc) be specifically pointed out, are naive to the n'th degree, and should get a good nights sleep and consider the true possibilities of ANY legislation that had to be passed under the conditions that this abomination of a bill was passed.
Methinks either pride or blind allegiance are in play here.

 

[OldRegular]

All this "show me" what's in this "shoudda been aborted" bill is a crock of bovine excrement.
I dare say that 100 lawyers independently dissecting this "miscarriage of sanity" will/would come up with 200 different opinions of what it REALLY MEANS!!!
For any of you to demand that 'IT', what ever 'IT' is for you (death panels, higher taxes, rationed healthcare etc) be specifically pointed out, are naive to the n'th degree, and should get a good nights sleep and consider the true possibilities of ANY legislation that had to be passed under the conditions that this abomination of a bill was passed.
Methinks either pride or blind allegiance are in play here.

Only the "blind or naive" would believe that a 2700 page bill, written behind closed doors in Harry Reid's suite, by persons unknown, apparently read by no members of Congress, and deemed to be passed, is not full of mischief for the people!

 

[freeatlast]

So this board does potentially have the power to do a lot of damage. Perhaps I'm reading this incorrectly, but it looks like if the board makes a recommendation, Congress is allowed very little if any wiggle room to change anything in their recommendations.

No that is not correct. Congress has full authority to change anything that is suggested.

 

[Don]

Yea right Don.

As I thought. You accused me of lying, but can't prove it; and you refuse to be Christian enough to apologize for it.

 

[Zaac]

No that is not correct. Congress has full authority to change anything that is suggested.

Not according to the law that y'all linked to. Apparently there is a very cumbersome process that must take place if they want to change any of the recommendations. Just look it up. I didn't say Congress COULDN'T change anything. It's just a very tedious process once the advisory board had submitted its proposal.

And as I said before, it would be stupid and redundant to get an advisory board to do all this work and then not take their advice.

 

[freeatlast]

As I thought. You accused me of lying, but can't prove it; and you refuse to be Christian enough to apologize for it.

I always apologize when I am wrong.

 

[freeatlast]

Not according to the law that y'all linked to. Apparently there is a very cumbersome process that must take place if they want to change any of the recommendations. Just look it up. I didn't say Congress COULDN'T change anything. It's just a very tedious process once the advisory board had submitted its proposal.

And as I said before, it would be stupid and redundant to get an advisory board to do all this work and then not take their advice.

This is what you said;
"Congress is allowed very little if any wiggle room to change anything in their recommendations."

That is what I was referring to as incorrect. They have as much authority as they ever have. It is true it may be difficult depending on the make up of congress, but in those times when it is one sided it could be a breeze so it is politics as normal and nothing especially difficult.

 

[OldRegular]

While you posted the entire law in hopes no one would wade through it, which was dishonest in itself,

Sport you have a serious problem. The entire law is 2700 pages long!

 

[Zaac]

This is what you said;
"Congress is allowed very little if any wiggle room to change anything in their recommendations."

That is what I was referring to as incorrect. They have as much authority as they ever have. It is true it may be difficult depending on the make up of congress, but in those times when it is one sided it could be a breeze so it is politics as normal and nothing especially difficult.

Why is it incorrect? According to what the law says, there's only certain reasons Congress has for changing the recommendations once the proposal has been submitted.

If they want anything done, because the change process is so long and tedious sounding, they would just about have to accept whatever the board says. In fact, again, the law seems to only give Congress limited power to change or not accept the proposal.

But this is all moot because the board is going to make recommendations that are consistent with our burgeoning socialist state.

The best thing that can happen at this point is that every governor in the Union say that we will not be implementing any of this.

 

[Zaac]

Sport you have a serious problem. The entire law is 2700 pages long!

Nancy Pelosi and her cronies didn't read it before passing it so I don't know why they think anyone else should be tortured by reading that Handbook of the Devil's making?

 

[freeatlast]

Why is it incorrect? According to what the law says, there's only certain reasons Congress has for changing the recommendations once the proposal has been submitted.

If they want anything done, because the change process is so long and tedious sounding, they would just about have to accept whatever the board says. In fact, again, the law seems to only give Congress limited power to change or not accept the proposal.

But this is all moot because the board is going to make recommendations that are consistent with our burgeoning socialist state.

The best thing that can happen at this point is that every governor in the Union say that we will not be implementing any of this.

.

Zaac I am going to have to go back and read this again since you seem so surew about this before I can answer you again.

 

[freeatlast]

Zaac, here is what I am finding. Are you talking about something else?

The Independent Payment Advisory Board, or IPAB, is a fifteen-member United States Government agency created in 2010 by sections 3403 and 10320 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which has the explicit task of achieving specified savings in Medicare without affecting coverage or quality.[1] Under previous and current law, changes to Medicare payment rates and program rules are recommended by MedPAC but require an act of Congress to take effect. The new system grants IPAB the authority to make changes to the Medicare program with the Congress being given the power to overrule the agency's decisions through supermajority vote.
Beginning in 2013, the Chief Actuary of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services will determine in particular years the projected per capita growth rate for Medicare for a multi-year period ending in the second year thereafter (the "implementation year"). If the projection exceeds a target growth rate, IPAB must develop a proposal to reduce Medicare spending in the implementation year by a specified amount. If it is required to develop a proposal, the Board must submit that proposal in January of the year before the implementation year; thus, the first proposal could be submitted in January 2014 to take effect in 2015. If the Board fails to submit a proposal that the Chief Actuary certifies will achieve the savings target, the Secretary of Health and Human Services must submit a proposal that will achieve that amount of savings. The Secretary must then implement the proposal unless Congress enacts resolutions made to override the Board's (or the Secretary's) decisions under a fast-track procedure that the law sets forth.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Payment_Advisory_Board

 

[Zaac]

.

Zaac I am going to have to go back and read this again since you seem so surew about this before I can answer you again.

K. Let us know what you find because I thought it was weird for them to say that the Board could only make "recommendations" but then just about make you have to write a dissertation to change any of the recommendations that are submitted in the yearly proposals.

 

[Zaac]

Zaac, here is what I am finding. Are you talking about something else?

The Independent Payment Advisory Board, or IPAB, is a fifteen-member United States Government agency created in 2010 by sections 3403 and 10320 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which has the explicit task of achieving specified savings in Medicare without affecting coverage or quality.[1] Under previous and current law, changes to Medicare payment rates and program rules are recommended by MedPAC but require an act of Congress to take effect. The new system grants IPAB the authority to make changes to the Medicare program with the Congress being given the power to overrule the agency's decisions through supermajority vote.
Beginning in 2013, the Chief Actuary of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services will determine in particular years the projected per capita growth rate for Medicare for a multi-year period ending in the second year thereafter (the "implementation year"). If the projection exceeds a target growth rate, IPAB must develop a proposal to reduce Medicare spending in the implementation year by a specified amount. If it is required to develop a proposal, the Board must submit that proposal in January of the year before the implementation year; thus, the first proposal could be submitted in January 2014 to take effect in 2015. If the Board fails to submit a proposal that the Chief Actuary certifies will achieve the savings target, the Secretary of Health and Human Services must submit a proposal that will achieve that amount of savings. The Secretary must then implement the proposal unless Congress enacts resolutions made to override the Board's (or the Secretary's) decisions under a fast-track procedure that the law sets forth.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Payment_Advisory_Board

FAL, Actually I was referring to the LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THE BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS IN OTHER LEGISLATION. The pages following that make it seem as though it's pretty difficult to change the recommendations in the submitted proposals from the Board.