Just so you know who is advising the president on healthcare. Here is but one example:
From "A Hard-Charging Doctor on Obama’s Team"
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: April 17, 2009
Dr. Emanuel is a special adviser to the budget director, Peter R. Orszag. He is also the older brother of Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff.
By all accounts, Dr. Emanuel is a powerful force in his own right. In an interview in his cubbyhole of an office, he said he got his job on his own, with no help from his brother. [Of course, not. I'm sure it never even came up in the interview.] Rahm was “very conscious of the nepotism thing,” he said. Still, he is widely perceived as having extra clout because of his brother.
For two decades, Dr. Emanuel has been writing about how to guarantee health care for all.
Do you want to read one of those articles? Here you go (pay special attention to Table 1 recommendations):
Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions
Lancet 2009; 373: 423–31
Department of Bioethics, The Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA (G Persad BS,A Wertheimer PhD,E J Emanuel MD)
Allocation of very scarce medical interventions such as organs and vaccines is a persistent ethical challenge. We evaluate eight simple allocation principles that can be classifi ed into four categories: treating people equally, favouring the worst-off , maximising total benefi ts, and promoting and rewarding social usefulness. No single principle is suffi cient to incorporate all morally relevant considerations and therefore individual principles must be combined into multiprinciple allocation systems. We evaluate three systems: the United Network for Organ Sharing points systems, quality-adjusted life-years, and disability-adjusted life-years. We recommend an alternative system—the complete lives system—which prioritises younger people who have not yet lived a complete life, and also incorporates prognosis, save the most lives, lottery, and instrumental value principles.It is not much of a leap from their conclusions in this article to how they expect to allocate all medical services once we add 50 million people to the system while at the same time slashing payments to the providers (hence, encouraging many to quit or retire early and fewer to enter the medical field all together)....
I guess Rush is right. Elections do have consequences. In this case, death for the elderly....