Audio: Health Care Advocate Betsy McCaughey Blasts ObamaCare’s “Vicious Assault On The Elderly”


Picture credit iOWNTHEWORLD

Health policy expert and former Lt. Governor of New York State, Betsy McCaughey has been on a mission to expose ObamaCare to the masses. She’s read through these bills, cover to cover, and wants to get the word out – ObamaCare would be hazardous to your health, especially the elderly’s. I listened to substitute host, Raymond Arroyo interview her, this morning on the Laura Ingraham Show, and she didn’t mince words – Obama is lying about ObamaCare. (Shut up! Obama’s lying?!) You will NOT get to keep your health care if you’re satisfied with it. It’s a point she’s making on talk show after talk show. She also said that the AARP is doing seniors a huge disservice in its avocation of nationalized health care. She says the rationing that will take place will hurt them the most. These  bills do little to cut waste and fraud as promised but would throw billions of dollars toward shady and undefined enterprises such as “community reinvestment”. IYKWIMAITYD.

Here she is on the Mark Levin Show on the 17th:

Here, she appears on the Fred Thompson Show, after reading the new House bill, which she characterizes as a vicious assault on the elderly and boomer generation:

“On page 425, the Congress would make it mandatory, absolutely required that every five years, people in Medicare have a required counseling session that will tell them how to end their life sooner: how to decline nutrition, how to decline hydration, how to go into hospice care…and by the way, the bill expressly says that if you get sick, somewhere in that five year period, if you get a cancer diagnosis, for example,  you have to go through that session, again….all to do what’s in societies best interest, or your family’s best interest and cut your life short…these are such sacred issues of life and death – government should have nothing to do with it”.

I’m sorry about the Nazi imagery in the second video, but there really is something deeply wrong with the worldview of people who have that much disregard for the sanctity of life.  Add Obama’s choice for “Science Czar”, John Holdren, a man who has advocated forced abortions, and sterilizations, and a truly ghastly and alarming picture emerges.

You can get more information at McCaughey’s website, Defend Your HealthCare.


Via Doug Ross, excerpted from The NYT’s April 28, article, After The Great Recession:

THE PRESIDENT: So that’s where I think you just get into some very difficult moral issues. But that’s also a huge driver of cost, right?

I mean, the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here.

So how do you — how do we deal with it?

THE PRESIDENT: …you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance. It’s not determinative, but I think has to be able to give you some guidance. And that’s part of what I suspect you’ll see emerging out of the various health care conversations that are taking place on the Hill right now.

Read between the lines, people.

See also Catholic Online via  Punk Rock Republican

Is Euthanasia Included in National ‘Health Care’ Reform? By Deacon Keith Fournier

Betsy McCaughey is a patient advocate, the founder of the “Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths” and a former lieutenant governor of New York. She was interviewed Monday morning by former Senator Fred Thompson. In that interview she claimed that this same “Health Care Reform” would require that anyone on Social Security undergo a mandatory counseling session every five years.

After receiving that ninth E-mail on this matter, I actually listened to the entire interview. Frankly, it was deeply disturbing. Her further claim is that this mandatory counseling would include a discussion of what are euphemistically called “end of life” options.As a pro-life lawyer of several decades, I know what that phrase entails.

A quick search of Dr. McCaughey on the internet revealed a flurry of attacks on her claims that this National Health Reform encourages euthanasia. However, it was interesting that none of the attackers refuted her specific claims as they related to the legislation and her references to page numbers in the voluminous bill. They all sought to destroy her credibility through the use of guilt by association tactics.

Therefore, the question still remains on the table. Will this National “Health Care” Plan encourage our elderly to take their own lives rather than somehow become a “drain” on the rest of us? Will it withhold medical care from them based upon a bureaucrat’s decision regarding so called “quality of life” issues? Will it encourage the rationing of medical services? Will it counsel the withdrawal of nutrition and hydration in order to expedite their death? In short, is Euthanasia included in this National ‘Health Care’ Reform?


Rush also covered this issue on his show:

Dastardly Obamacare Plan Seeks Government Control of Life, Death

RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, we have found something else in the health care bill. Page 425 to page 430. The House version of the health care bill is going to require mandatory counseling for all seniors at a minimum of every five years, more often if the senior is sick or in a nursing home. Just how many government trained counselors will that put into the workforce? With an over-65 population of 38 million according to the US Census 2007, if you have an over-65 population of 38 million people you’re going to need four counseling sessions daily, that’s 37,000 at a minimum counselors plus their supervisors, then the people who read their reports, and the oversight agency. You know what we ought to do? We ought to put together a single page cut-and-paste fact sheet at that people could cut and paste and fax to the White House so that Obama will know what is in the bill.

I’ll bet he doesn’t know that there is end-of-life counseling for senior citizens on page 425 to 430. What is this counseling going to be? Why would you need mandatory counseling for all seniors, and who’s going to pay for this? Mandatory counseling for all seniors at a minimum of every five years, more often if the seasoned citizen is sick or in a nursing home. And as Don Parker writes here at the American Thinker, “Don’t even think that anyone should receive mandatory counseling regarding the end-of-life issues surrounding abortion.” That’s an invasion of the right to privacy. We can’t have counseling for mothers who are thinking of terminating their pregnancy, but we can go in there and counsel people about to die. I’m sure you could get some counselors from the Hemlock Society to go in and do this. Kevorkian might want to come back to life and handle this. End-of-life counselors, end-of-life treatment for senior citizens, mandatory.


NRO’s Freddie Freddoso says the claims about concerning page 425 in the health care bill are  bit overwrought:

A breathless e-mail is circulating the Internet about ObamaCare’s attempt to badger senior citizens into offing themselves. Here is an example:

On Page 425 of Obama’s health care bill, the Federal Government will require EVERYONE who is on Social Security to undergo a counseling session every 5 years with the objective being that they will explain to them just how to end their own life earlier.”

As with many Internet rumors, this is not true. But it does have elements of truth to it.

The House Democrats’ health care bill does not compel counseling sessions. It does authorize Medicare to pay for one end-of-life care consultation every five years.

That is very different from the Betsy McCaughey’s characterization of page 425. Here are the relevant pages from the bill:

P. 425

”(FF) advance care planning consultation (as defined in subsection (hhh)(1));”; and

(B) by adding at the end the following new subsection: ”Advance Care Planning Consultation ”(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term ‘advance care planning consultation’ means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such consultation shall include the following:

”(A) An explanation by the practitioner of advance care planning, including key questions and
considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to.

”(B) An explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses.

”(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.

”(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families with advance care planning, including the national toll-free hotline, the ad-

P. 426

advance care planning clearinghouses, and State legal service organizations (including those funded through the Older Americans Act of 1965).

”(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title.

”(F)(i) Subject to clause (ii), an explanation of orders regarding life sustaining treatment or similar orders, which shall include–

”(I) the reasons why the development of such an order is beneficial to the individual and the individual’s family and the reasons why such an order should be updated periodically as the health of the individual changes;

”(II) the information needed for an individual or legal surrogate to make informed decisions regarding the completion of such an order; and

”(III) the identification of resources that an individual may use to determine the requirements of the State in which such individual resides so that the treatment wishes of that individual will be carried out if the individual is un-

P. 427

able to communicate those wishes, including requirements regarding the designation of a surrogate decisionmaker (also known as a health care proxy).

”(ii) The Secretary shall limit the requirement for explanations under clause (i) to consultations furnished in a State–

”(I) in which all legal barriers have been addressed for enabling orders for life sustaining treatment to constitute a set of medical orders respected across all care settings; and

”(II) that has in effect a program for orders for life sustaining treatment described in clause (iii).

”(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining treatment for a States described in this clause is a program that–

”(I) ensures such orders are standardized and uniquely identifiable throughout the State;

”(II) distributes or makes accessible such orders to physicians and other health professionals that (acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law) may sign orders for life sustaining treatment;

P. 428

”(III) provides training for health care professionals across the continuum of care about the goals and use of orders for life sustaining treatment; and

”(IV) is guided by a coalition of stakeholders includes representatives from emergency medical services, emergency department physicians or nurses, state long-term care association, state medical association, state surveyors, agency responsible for senior services, state department of health, state hospital association, home health association, state bar association, and state hospice association.

”(2) A practitioner described in this paragraph is–

”(A) a physician (as defined in subsection (r)(1)); and

”(B) a nurse practitioner or physician’s assistant who has the authority under State law to sign orders for life sustaining treatments.

”(3)(A) An initial preventive physical examination under subsection (WW), including any related discussion during such examination, shall not be considered an advance care planning consultation for purposes of applying the 5-year limitation under paragraph (1).

P. 429

”(B) An advance care planning consultation with respect to an individual may be conducted more frequently than provided under paragraph (1) if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual, including diagnosis of a chronic, progressive, life-limiting disease, a life-threatening or terminal diagnosis or life-threatening injury, or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility (as defined by the Secretary), or a hospice program.

”(4) A consultation under this subsection may include the formulation of an order regarding life sustaining treatment or a similar order.

”(5)(A) For purposes of this section, the term ‘order regarding life sustaining treatment’ means, with respect to an individual, an actionable medical order relating to the treatment of that individual that–

”(i) is signed and dated by a physician (as defined in subsection (r)(1)) or another health care
professional (as specified by the Secretary and who is acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law in signing such an order, including a nurse practitioner or physician assistant) and is in a form that permits it to stay with the individual and be followed by health care professionals and providers across the continuum of care;

P. 430

”(ii) effectively communicates the individual’s preferences regarding life sustaining treatment, including an indication of the treatment and care desired by the individual;

”(iii) is uniquely identifiable and standardized within a given locality, region, or State (as identified by the Secretary); and

”(iv) may incorporate any advance directive (as defined in section 1866(f)(3)) if executed by the individual.

”(B) The level of treatment indicated under subparagraph (A)(ii) may range from an indication for full treatment to an indication to limit some or all or specified interventions. Such indicated levels of treatment may include indications respecting, among other items–

”(i) the intensity of medical intervention if the patient is pulse less, apneic, or has serious cardiac or pulmonary problems;

”(ii) the individual’s desire regarding transfer to a hospital or remaining at the current care setting;

”(iii) the use of antibiotics; and

”(iv) the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration.”.


Gateway Pundit: GOP Lawmakers Confirm Dem’s Health Bill Promotes Euthanasia

Still MORE:

Via IBD Editorials:

At a town hall meeting at AARP headquarters in Washington, D.C., President Obama was asked by a woman from North Carolina if it was true “that everyone that’s Medicare age will be visited and told they have to decide how they wish to die.”

At first, the president joked that not enough government workers existed to ask the elderly how they wanted to die. The idea, he said, was to encourage the use of living wills and that critics were misrepresenting the intent of the “end of life” counseling provided for in the House bill. He did not say, “No, they wouldn’t be contacted.”

Rest here.


Video: Health Care Rationing And You + Link Round-up

Report: ObamaCare Bill Includes “Largest Expansion of Abortion Since Roe v. Wade”

ACORN Girls Convincingly Sell ObamaCare

ObamaCare=Public Option=Single Payer=Socialized Medicine

How To Counter ABC’s Health Care Propaganda On June 24

Obama’s Dishonest Debate

More Thug Politics: Health Care Lobbyists Threatened By Senate Finance Chairman

Video:Republicans Speak Out On ObamaCare

ObamaCare Photoshop

Daschle: Health-Care Reform “Will Not Be Pain Free”


7 thoughts on “Audio: Health Care Advocate Betsy McCaughey Blasts ObamaCare’s “Vicious Assault On The Elderly”

  1. betsy m. ross is doing us all a great service..thanks..
    this “reform” effort is tricky, sleazy and a fraud….. and you thought nixon was tricky. i doubt the president spent a day in economics class. i spent 11 years administering government programs and prefer the marketplace and individual choice.


  2. Sorry – READ the bill. What Betsy is claiming is not written.
    To read this into “code” is simple. There is no code. The only madetory requirement is that, weather you want it or not, the insurance is required to pay for under those terms.
    Not that you have to have it. Been informed of your Health Care directive lately? That is required too. You can do it, or not. That is what it really says. It confuses me. Betsy does do some okay things here, but she is not telling you the truth. You can read the bill yourself. READ page 425 on the bill. Then – have someone else read it if you must. Nothing weird here – really. Listen to what ever you want to, but always keep mind to find the real truth out for yourseld. Two things come into play on any show/person/TV etc.
    Ratings and money. Which is why – when you hear this – you should find out if it is true. If it sounds outragous – you probably should.


  3. Betsy – perhaps you’d like to explain yourself over this? The perfectly fine Republican who was instrumental in crafting the part of Obama’s health care legislation you shamefully claim is Obama’s euthanasia and rationing plan for the elderly. Shame on you, Ms. McCaughey.

    Last week former Republican vice presidential candidate and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin posted a statement to her Facebook page in which she warned that President Obama’s health care reform plan would result in a so-called “death panel” with the power to kill elderly people and those with disabilities:

    “The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.”

    U.S. Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) also recently accused the Democrats’ health care reform plan of putting seniors “to death.”

    But there is nothing resembling the alleged “death panel” in the health care reform plan. A spokesperson for Palin told ABC News that the former governor was referring to a section promoting advance care planning that appears on page 425 of the House Democrats’ bill . Advance care planning includes living wills and durable powers of attorney that allow individuals to make clear their wishes for end-of-life care, whatever they may be.

    And as it turns out, the cause of advance planning has been championed especially strongly by a pro-life Republican — U.S. Sen. Johnny Isakson of Georgia.

    Isakson is a member of Senate Health committee that played a key role in shaping the health care reform legislation. He successfully offered an amendment in committee that allows funds for a government-funded program that provides in-home services to people with disabilities to be used for advance care planning, according to the national Hospice and Palliative Care Organization.

    Isakson has been promoting advance care planning for years. In 2007, for example, he co-sponsored two bills to encourage such planning — the Medicare End-of-Life Care Planning Act and the Advance Planning and Compassionate Care Act.

    In 2005, Isakson joined with state lawmakers to publicly sign a personal “Directive for Final Health Care” to encourage Georgians to discuss their personal wishes for end-of-life care. He cited the controversial case of Terry Schiavo — a Florida woman who lived for several years in a persistent vegetative state before her husband had her disconnected from a feeding tube — to illustrate the importance of advance planning.

    “I believe it is every person’s right and responsibility to make sure their loved ones are prepared to make decisions on their behalf by discussing and documenting their wishes,” Isakson said at the time. “It is my sincere hope that all Georgians will join me in following the lead of the Georgia General Assembly’s Resolution and make their final wishes known.”

    Isakson is a pro-life politician who opposes abortion as well as stem cell research entailing the destruction of human embryos.

    So far Isakson has remained silent publicly on the “death panel” brouhaha.

    Focus South


  4. Pingback: ObamaCare: Facts are a Funny Thing

  5. And if there was any truth in this AT ALL, then why was McCaughey not able to find it, during her pathetic interview on The Daily Show?

    Why, incidentally, did she lose her lobbying job what after it aired, and anyone paying attention could see she was talking out of her ass (at best)?


  6. Pingback: ObamaCare Beast One Step Closer To Being Slayed: Appeals Court Strikes Down Mandate « Nice Deb

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s