While doing my own detective work in terms of studying and learning the facts about HR3200 Health Care Reform Bill, I am discovering that there is a mystery here, to be sure. It's why we all need to start digging into the facts for ourselves. Whether we agree or disagree isn't the point -- disagreeing is what makes a democracy so great. It's getting to the truth that is the point so that when and if we disagree, it will be based on our knowledge of the facts and not just on our knowledge of someone else's opinion of the facts.
So far, in my own research on HR3200, I haven't come across the words "euthanasia" or "government takeover." I suppose that if those actual words appeared in the Bill, it would become pretty clear what some of the fuss is all about.
What I do see on page 30, Section 123 and more on Page 425 Lines 17-25 of HR3200 is that a doctor will have to be included in end-of-life or serious health care situations rather than just the patient and/or his family. On the surface, that doesn't sound like such a bad idea. Except that if you read a little more closely, you find that said doctor will guide the patient into making health care decisions based on a list of government standards -- which I assume are intended to place health care funds where they are most likely to see a positive outcome from the money spent.
I can see a possible scenario arise where a person is diagnosed with a potentially terminal case of cancer. It might be more cost effective to medicate the patient for pain for the duration of the illness rather than spend the health care funds on chemotherapy, radiation treatment or alternative health care since the person will not likely live long enough to appreciate the benefits of the money spent (or live long enough to return some of that money back into the health care coffers).
In essence, no one is being killed or euthanized -- but that seems to be a matter of semantics. Giving a government agency -- no matter what name it goes by -- power over your life and death decisions opens the door to "anything goes." No, we may not see people being written off the health care roles in the beginning, but the current Bill leaves plenty of legal leg room for the government to get a dangerous foot in the door now which will affect us in years to come.
What needs to be understood is that this current Bill will have most impact on the future, and this is where we are leaving the doors wide open in our short sightedness. We already have seen examples of the corruption that unlimited greed and power creates as observed by the activities of certain major corporations in recent years (Enron to name one). We condemn the greed and wantonness of corporate executives who have been lured by power and have accused their corrupt actions as leading us to this economic downfall. Yet, we would allow a Bill to enter onto the scene that would further seek to add governmental control which adds to power which adds to corruption. Government is not above this same lure, and the fail safe measures to protect our nation do not exist in this current Health Care Reform Bill and need to be implemented now while they can still be done.
Since the health care reform changes will take at least ten years to put fully into effect, it will already be too late to turn back the tide by the time we see the outcome with our own eyes. The care we need to take is to make sure that a monster is not created that will emerge many years down the road out of our panic to find an immediate solution to health care reform today.