Obamacare has Death Panels

[Greenbeard]

Roo, you seem to be unaware that every exclusions page has a statement to the effect, "Treatment or supplies not medically necessary."

Death panel!!!

(smile) Poor g......hence they never enter into this discussion as anything but a red herring from partisan hacks.

The IPAB has the power to STOP treatment that has been ongoing, an insurance company does not.(unless FRAUD has been committed)

In what you think is the ACA (H.R.4872 (Just for ole Greenbeard)), there isn't any Independent Payment Advisory Board.

So what's the deal? Are you a moron who doesn't even know what the ACA is and couldn't look up its provisions if he tried, or does the IPAB not exist?

Don't answer, rhetorical question!

On second thought, go ahead and answer.

Does the IPAB not exist? Or are you an idiot who's never even looked at the ACA? If the latter, why should anyone give a shit what you think is in it or your opinion of its merits?

 

[Antares]

One of the key questions about the implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA; as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010) is whether and how it will “bend the cost curve” of ever increasing rates of health care expenditures. One of the novel approaches taken in the legislation was the creation of a new board, the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), which is authorized to make proposals to save costs in the Medicare program. Unlike most other boards or commissions created to address cost or health care quality concerns, the IPAB’s proposals are not merely advisorythey will become law unless Congress acts to adopt alternative cost saving proposals that would save at least as much as the IPAB proposals.
In the legislation, Congress made clear that the purpose of the IPAB is to save costs, noting that “It is the purpose of this [Board] to . . . reduce the per capita rate of growth in Medicare spending.”


The IPAB: The Center Of A Political Clash Over How To Change Medicare - Kaiser Health News

Poor g.

 

[NYcarbineer]

"The IPAB is essentially a health-care rationing body. By setting doctor reimbursement rates for medicare and determing which procedures and drugs will be covered and at what price, the IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor by simply setting rates to levels where no doctor or hospital will perform them.

---Howard Dean, former DNC Chair (7/29/2013)

Looks like another broken promise. What do we do now?

Broken promise?

Who ever promised to give Medicare recipients unlimited access to all the money they needed for every medical treatment no matter what the cost?

 

[Antares]

(smile) Poor g......hence they never enter into this discussion as anything but a red herring from partisan hacks.

The IPAB has the power to STOP treatment that has been ongoing, an insurance company does not.(unless FRAUD has been committed)

In what you think is the ACA (H.R.4872 (Just for ole Greenbeard)), there isn't any Independent Payment Advisory Board.

So what's the deal? Are you a moron who doesn't even know what the ACA is and couldn't look up its provisions if he tried, or does the IPAB not exist?

Don't answer, rhetorical question!

On second thought, go ahead and answer.

Does the IPAB not exist? Or are you an idiot who's never even looked at the ACA? If the latter, why should anyone give a shit what you think is in it or your opinion of its merits?

You are a hack Greenie, a shill for Bammy.

See above......the IPAB has way too much power.

 

[Antares]

It all came into existence through the ACA, you aren't going to like it.

 

[Plasmaball]

What a maroon.

You don't know shit about insurance.

There are TWO relevant sections within an insurance policy, the Declaration Page which says what they WILL do, and the exclusion page which says what they WON'T do.

NO company can DENY any treatment unless stipulated by the Policy OR fraud has been committed by the insurered in a non disclosure sense.

That is total bs. Your insurance company can deny ANY TREATMENT if it can rationally demonstrate a different, cheaper, treatment is equally effective in treating a covered med condition. That's HC 101.

You are ignorant and full of shit.

thats quite a rebuttal.....this is fun watching you fail.

 

[Greenbeard]

In what you think is the ACA (H.R.4872 (Just for ole Greenbeard)), there isn't any Independent Payment Advisory Board.

So what's the deal? Are you a moron who doesn't even know what the ACA is and couldn't look up its provisions if he tried, or does the IPAB not exist?

Don't answer, rhetorical question!

On second thought, go ahead and answer.

Does the IPAB not exist? Or are you an idiot who's never even looked at the ACA? If the latter, why should anyone give a shit what you think is in it or your opinion of its merits?

You are a hack Greenie, a shill for Bammy.

See above......the IPAB has way too much power.

I've read the ACA and have opinions on it.

You, on the other hand, don't even know what it is (apparently you couldn't pick it out of a line up of random bills from THOMAS) and are perfectly content to pass along bullshit information someone fed you about it.

That said, I'm genuinely curious--have you reached a stage where you accept that the IPAB exists and thus understand that the bill you were reading and referencing for 3 years wasn't the Affordable Care Act?

 

[Antares]

That is total bs. Your insurance company can deny ANY TREATMENT if it can rationally demonstrate a different, cheaper, treatment is equally effective in treating a covered med condition. That's HC 101.

You are ignorant and full of shit.

thats quite a rebuttal.....this is fun watching you fail.

Well except I am the only one with sources kid, pay attention...you could learn something.

 

[Greenbeard]

Well except I am the only one with sources kid, pay attention...you could learn something.

We've seen the value of your understanding of "sources."

http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt.../264040-h-r-4872-just-for-ole-greenbeard.html

How'd that work out for you?

 

[Antares]

On second thought, go ahead and answer.

Does the IPAB not exist? Or are you an idiot who's never even looked at the ACA? If the latter, why should anyone give a shit what you think is in it or your opinion of its merits?

You are a hack Greenie, a shill for Bammy.

See above......the IPAB has way too much power.

I've read the ACA and have opinions on it.

You, on the other hand, don't even know what it is (apparently you couldn't pick it out of a line up of random bills from THOMAS) and are perfectly content to pass along bullshit information someone fed you about it.

That said, I'm genuinely curious--have you reached a stage where you accept that the IPAB exists and thus understand that the bill you were reading and referencing for 3 years wasn't the Affordable Care Act?

Greenie, seriously?

Answer the question, does it exist in the form from the sources I've posted?

Well.....does it?

We both know it does, and we both know it gets to do pretty much anything it wants if costs exceed projections...and perhaps you DIDN'T know that if Congress doesn't over ride it by August its recommendations simply become law?

 

[Greenbeard]

Greenie, seriously?

Answer the question, does it exost in the form from the surces I've posted?

Well.....does it?

We both know it does, and we both know it gets to do pretty much anything it wants if costs exceed projections...and perhaps you DIDN'T know that if Congress doesn't over ride it by August its recommendations simply become law?

Since you ask, you were indeed wrong that the legislation you posted (and cited) repeatedly was the ACA. I'm glad that's finally dawned on you.

As for whether Congress has to override the IPAB's recommendations next month, there are no recommendations to override. The IPAB is only tasked with making recommendations when per capita Medicare growth exceeds a certain target. Per capita Medicare growth is instead currently growing at the slowest rate in the history of the program. It does not not exceed the target, as determined by the CMS Actuary three months ago. Read all the posts in the thread, it'll make participation easier.

 

[Antares]

...and to reiterate......the IPAB can make unilateral that an underwriter cannot....the underwriter is bound by the good faith contract placed into effect by the policy UNLESS fraud has been committed.

 

[Antares]

Greenie, seriously?

Answer the question, does it exost in the form from the surces I've posted?

Well.....does it?

We both know it does, and we both know it gets to do pretty much anything it wants if costs exceed projections...and perhaps you DIDN'T know that if Congress doesn't over ride it by August its recommendations simply become law?

Since you ask, you were indeed wrong that the legislation you posted (and cited) repeatedly was the ACA. I'm glad that's finally dawned on you.

As for whether Congress has to override the IPAB's recommendations next month, there are no recommendations to override. The IPAB is only tasked with making recommendations when per capita Medicare growth exceeds a certain target. Per capita Medicare growth is instead currently growing at the slowest rate in the history of the program. It does not not exceed the target, as determined by the CMS Actuary three months ago. Read all the posts in the thread, it'll make participation easier.

Nope, it is REQUIRED to make cost cutting decisions if the program EXCEEDS projections in a calendar year, sorry.

IF congress does NOT over ride the reccomendations Sebelius is REQUIRED by law to implement the reccomendations.

You lose.

 

[EriktheRed]

Roo, you seem to be unaware that every exclusions page has a statement to the effect, "Treatment or supplies not medically necessary."

Death panel!!!

Careful, you're dealing with the genius who thought every insurer in the exchanges has to sell at the same price and that the public option is real thing that actually exists.

He don't read so good.

Really????

 

[EriktheRed]

What a maroon.

You don't know shit about insurance.

There are TWO relevant sections within an insurance policy, the Declaration Page which says what they WILL do, and the exclusion page which says what they WON'T do.

NO company can DENY any treatment unless stipulated by the Policy OR fraud has been committed by the insurered in a non disclosure sense.

That is total bs. Your insurance company can deny ANY TREATMENT if it can rationally demonstrate a different, cheaper, treatment is equally effective in treating a covered med condition. That's HC 101.

You are ignorant and full of shit.

Can you expand on that a bit?

 

[Antares]

(smile) Poor g......hence they never enter into this discussion as anything but a red herring from partisan hacks.

The IPAB has the power to STOP treatment that has been ongoing, an insurance company does not.(unless FRAUD has been committed)

In what you think is the ACA (H.R.4872 (Just for ole Greenbeard)), there isn't any Independent Payment Advisory Board.

So what's the deal? Are you a moron who doesn't even know what the ACA is and couldn't look up its provisions if he tried, or does the IPAB not exist?

Don't answer, rhetorical question!

On second thought, go ahead and answer.

Does the IPAB not exist? Or are you an idiot who's never even looked at the ACA? If the latter, why should anyone give a shit what you think is in it or your opinion of its merits?

Beginning with fiscal 2015, if Medicare is projected to grow too quickly, IPAB will make binding recommendations to reduce spending. Those recommendations will be sent to Capitol Hill at the beginning of the year, and if Congress doesn't like them, it must pass alternative cuts -- of the same size -- by August. A supermajority of the Senate (at least two-thirds of those present) can also vote to amend the IPAB recommendations. If Congress fails to act, the secretary of health and human services is required to implement the cuts.


The IPAB: The Center Of A Political Clash Over How To Change Medicare - Kaiser Health News

Is Kaiser lying dad?

 

[Greenbeard]

Nope, it is REQUIRED to make cost cutting decisions if the program EXCEEDS projections in a calendar year, sorry.

IF congress does NOT over ride the reccomendations Sebelius is REQUIRED by law to implement the reccomendations.

You lose.

What's wrong with you? Seriously?

The CMS Actuary's IPAB Determination through 2015 is readily available. Medicare cost growth is slow enough that Sebelius/the non-existent IPAB isn't charged with doing anything to slow it.

Learn to read (and comprehend)! It'll pay dividends, I swear.

 

[Greenbeard]

Beginning with fiscal 2015, if Medicare is projected to grow too quickly, IPAB will make binding recommendations to reduce spending.

Here's an idea, genius: find a source from this year. The CMS Actuary's 2015 determination was due in April 2013. Spoiler alert: they issued it and Medicare is growing so slowly that the IPAB isn't asked to do anything to slow it.

See above post.

 

[rdean]

Where do you think "let him die" comes from? Sheesh!

I can tell you exactly where that erroneous meme comes from.

That meme was started during the GOP presidential primary debates. Ron Paul was asked a question.

It was this: "A healthy, 30-year-old young man has a good job, makes a good living, but decides: 'You know what? I'm not going to spend 200 or 300 dollars a month for health insurance, because I'm healthy; I don't need it.' But you know, something terrible happens; all of a sudden, he needs it. Who's going to pay for it, if he goes into a coma, for example? Who pays for that?"



Understand? The question was not about someone who has cancer. It was not about some indigent who is sick.

It was about someone who could afford insurance who chose not to buy it.

So, if you wish to be accurate, the GOP plan is to let people choose whether or not to buy insurance for themselves, and suffer the consequences of the decisions they made under their own power.


After Ron Paul pointed this out, Blitzer then said, ““But Congressman, are you saying that society should just let him die?”


An audience member then shouted, "Yeah.”

But, and here comes the important part, RON PAUL DID NOT SAY THAT. In fact, he said society should NOT allow the man to die. He just said the answer to the healthcare problem was not a large government.


Some dickhead brainless fuck then started the meme that the GOP plan was to let sick people die.

Blitzer's question reveals he plainly wants a single payer plan so you don't have to end up in a situation where you pay the price for your avoidable fuckups.

In Blitzer's mind, you should not have to depend on yourself to make the right decisions. You should let the goverment make those decisions for you. When you depend on the government, you can be as much of an irresponsible jackass as your heart desires. The government should always be there to catch you.

That's the Democratic plan for everything. Not just healthcare.

An audience member? A single person? And where were voices of "disagreement"? I know, let's listen to the video:



Oops.

 

[Bfgrn]

Of course it has death panels. We said it would and since we base our statements on facts, logic, and knowledge, we are usually right.

Except you folks are dead wrong.


The Facts About the Independent Payment Advisory Board

Here’s how IPAB works:

• 15 experts including doctors and patient advocates would be nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to serve on IPAB.

• IPAB would recommend policies to Congress to help Medicare provide better care at lower costs. This could include ideas on coordinating care, getting rid of waste in the system, incentivizing best practices, and prioritizing primary care.

• IPAB is specifically prohibited by law from recommending any policies that ration care, raise taxes, increase premiums or cost-sharing, restrict benefits or modify who is eligible for Medicare.

• Congress then has the power to accept or reject these recommendations. If Congress rejects the recommendations, and Medicare spending exceeds specific targets, Congress must either enact policies that achieve equivalent savings or let the Secretary of Health and Human Services follow IPAB’s recommendations.

more

IPAB is specifically prohibited by law from recommending any policies that ration care, raise taxes, increase premiums or cost-sharing, restrict benefits or modify who is eligible for Medicare.

Nothing prohibits them from deciding that care is unneccessary.....but you are too stupid to understand that.

THAT would be rationing care and or restricting benefits, something the IPAB is prohibited from doing BY LAW.