Andy Stern: Palin Is Right: House Death Panel Vote “Is Downright Evil” — People Would Die!

Background: the U. S. House of Representatives has voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Andy Stern argues forcibly that there will be a serious human cost.

 

  • 26,100 people between the ages of 25 and 64 died prematurely due to a lack of health coverage in 2010
  • 2,175 people died prematurely every month in 2010
  • Between 2005 and 2010, the number of people who died prematurely each year due to a lack of health coverage rose from 20,350 to 26,100
  • Between 2005 and 2010, the total number of people who died prematurely due to a lack of health coverage was 134,120

Can any of the elected officials who would vote to deny 30 million people coverage imagine voting to increase the possibility of their own death or that of their family members?

Read all about it.

Andy Stern: Palin Is Right: House Death Panel Vote “Is Downright Evil” — People Would Die!.

Advertisements

About patlynch
I am a broadcaster in Arkansas, a former freelance writer and political columnist in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Writing Coach. Speaker. Director of the Christian Foundations for Ministry program, and presently enrolled in the Anglican School of Ministry Master of Ministry program.

6 Responses to Andy Stern: Palin Is Right: House Death Panel Vote “Is Downright Evil” — People Would Die!

  1. Ben Allen says:

    BALDERDASH!!! If you can show me one time where gov’t intervention into private business has either increased efficiency or reduced costs I might believe you. Our federal government is the MOST wasteful, inefficient entity known in this world. Point out to me one thing in this healthcare act which has a chance of decreasing healthcare costs.

  2. Ben Allen says:

    But if you’re only point is that we have turned into a true welfare state where we no longer depend on ourselves and our hard work and ingenuity for our futures but we depend on “Uncle Sugar” to take care of us while none of the people sucking on the federal teat have to worry about where the money is actually coming from then, yes, I’ll agree. LOL But that’s not the kind of society I want to live in. Do you?

  3. Ben Allen says:

    And I hope that when the reasonable, intelligent people take the WH and the senate that this Obamination of a socialist budget destroying bill will be repealed. Do we need healthcare reform? YES, A RESOUNDING YES!!! Do we need our provenly inefficient government to be controlling our healthcare? NO! What we need is for our fed gov’t to get the hell OUT of healthcare. Ask any healthcare administrator what that incredibly stupid HIPAA act costs them every year. The problem is not that there’s not enough fed gov’t involvement in healthcare, it’s that, like most industries, there’s FAR too much!!!! They need to read the 10th amendment and keep it wholly!!!

  4. patlynch says:

    First of all, Ben, I really appreciate that you faithfully follow this blog – and even rather late in the evening! Heck, I’m about ready for bed, but let’s spend a minute on this anyway. If one actually believes in the sanctity of human life, I can hardly see where efficiency comes into play. The most cost-effective and efficient thing is for the weakest to die. That is one good reason we desperately need a single payer system. The private sector has failed to provide a system of reasonably priced health care. Maybe it is not their fault. Americans face the highest health costs on earth while the major industrialized nations have some sort of government sponsored health system. None of the above are perfect, but we can see that the American system kills innocent people. Life is a moral value that many of us hold in high regard. Ben, it is always a pleasure to hear from you! Cheers, Pat

  5. Ben Allen says:

    Well Pat, wasn’t one of the stated goals of this bill to reduce healthcare costs? I’m still waiting for one example of how it will do that. How is this a good bill if, as usual, after gov’t interference it raises healthcare costs and makes it more inefficient. I can see the bleeding heart thoughts about “It’s not about efficiency, it’s about making it more available” but do you really think, after the PROVEN track record of our fed gov’t that it will actually accomplish that? If so I have some coastal property in AZ available for sale and I’ll gladly accept offers on it. The difference between you and I is that you still wear the rose colored glasses that make you believe that when the gov’t gets involved things get better. I tend to go on proven history and believe the opposite. Unfortunately I believe I’ll be proven right.

  6. Ben Allen says:

    And I know the usual comeback to that is “Well we have to try!” Why should intelligent (and that’s a stretch” people keep trying things that have proven to worsen a situation? After a while we have to start learning from history and figure out that letting the feds get involved in our lives has never helped us or made anything cheaper.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: