End of Life Care Rationing?

What do you envision when your time comes to get ready for the exit from the breathing tax paying world to that of the pushing up daisy world?  No matter whether you are a firm believer in "quality vs quantity" or in the "I want to go peacefully" mode, you will no doubt find this debate of interest.  Why should the government decide who lives and who dies?  Why should the government be involved in such a personal private decision?

Does this subject give you chills?  It certainly gives them to me as we wait and see if the government is successful in taking over health care by the reform bill on the table.


Thought you'd want to follow this debate of the analyists for the government potentially using Medicare patients as a way to ration, and therefore, "contain" medical costs.

Does the U.S. Need to Ration Costly End-of-Life Care?

/PRNewswire/ -- With skyrocketing Medicare costs contributing to record-setting budget deficits, does the United States need to ration costly end-of-life care? This compelling topic will be the focus of an upcoming debate produced by the Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia, in partnership with MacNeil/Lehrer Productions and The National Press Club.

The debate will take place at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday, March 24 at 7:00 pm ET. It will be webcast live at www.millercenter.org and air later on PBS stations across the country.

Debaters include:
-- Ken Connor, Chairman, Center for a Just Society, Gov. Jeb Bush's
Attorney in Terri Schiavo case
-- Marie Hilliard, Director of Bioethics and Public Policy, National
Catholic Bioethics Center
-- Dr. Ira Byock, Director of Palliative Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock
Medical Center, Author, "Dying Well"
-- Arthur Caplan, Director, Center for Bioethics, University of
Pennsylvania


Susan Dentzer, Editor-in-Chief of "Health Affairs" and a "PBS NewsHour" analyst, will moderate the debate.

With more than one-fourth of Medicare expenses going to medical treatment in patients' last year of life, debaters will argue what, if anything, the government should do to contain costs. Should the government spend less on costly end-of-life procedures and instead use these resources to care for more patients? Would it be better to ration by choice and let patients and their doctors decide on end-of-life care, such as living wills and pain management? What would be the social implications of a rationing policy? Would the government be deciding who is worth saving and who is not?

This debate will be followed later this spring by debates on the cost of college moderated by Ray Suarez, senior correspondent for "PBS NewsHour" and on the impact of the Internet on democracy moderated by Robin MacNeil of MacNeil/Lehrer Productions.

The Miller Center of Public Affairs is a leading nonpartisan public policy institution aimed at bringing together engaged citizens, scholars, members of the media and government officials to focus on issues of national importance to the governance of the United States, with a special interest in the American presidency.

Scott Brown Moves Past the Campaign and Says....

What? Hmmm....

Brit Hume Says It Loud and Says It Proud

Good for him. Hopefully, others will continue their journey further as they seek The Truth and The Way....

On 'O'Reilly', Brit Hume Reaffirms His Faith; Tells Tiger Woods He Should to Turn to Christianity

National Effort to Amend the Constitution Launched

Thought this interesting----

/PRNewswire/ -- A national effort to add ten specific amendments to the Constitution of the United States was launched this week when the nation's 7,300 state legislators received the book "10 Amendments for Freedom" along with information on how to convene a Constitutional Convention.

The effort is being spearheaded by 10 Amendments for Freedom, Inc., a not-for-profit organization, to provide permanent restraints upon the federal government.

"The initial goal is to have the state legislatures vote to have Congress convene a Constitutional Convention to propose ten specific amendments be added to the Constitution," stated William H. Fruth, Founder and National Director. "After the amendments are proposed by the convention, they will need to be ratified by three-fourths of the states."

The proposed Constitutional amendments include the following topics:

1. Require the federal government to have a balanced budget and stop
incurring debt.
2. Repay the national debt over a 50-year period.
3. Force Congress to be more transparent regarding the legislative
process.
4. Enable the president to have "line-item veto" authority.
5. Limit the number of terms a person can serve in Congress.
6. Mandate Congress control illegal immigration.
7. Provide a legal framework to prevent becoming a bilingual nation.
8. Prevent foreign laws and courts from having authority over the American
people.
9. Restrain the growth of the federal government and prevent "socialism."
10. Allow for the presence of "God" in the public domain.


"The Constitutional Convention will be the most important political event held in 200 years," Fruth continued. "It will reaffirm the belief the American people have in individual liberty and freedom and that government is created to serve the people, not control their lives."

In order to amend the Constitution, an amendment must first be formally "proposed." There are two ways to propose an amendment.

Either Congress, by two-thirds of the vote of both the House and the Senate, or the delegates at a Constitutional Convention may propose amendments.

The Constitution has been amended 27 times. Each amendment was proposed by Congress.

"Since most of the amendments place limits on Congress, it is not likely Congress will propose them," Fruth continued. "As a result, a Constitutional Convention called by the states is needed."

Article V. of the Constitution states that upon the "application" of the legislatures of two-thirds of the states, Congress shall convene a Constitutional Convention.

After the convention is convened, the delegates will decide if each of the amendments should be proposed for ratification.

If they are proposed, 38 states must then ratify them in order for an amendment to become part of the Constitution. The convention itself cannot change the Constitution.

Information regarding this effort and the text of the amendments is posted at http://www.10amendments.org/.

Freddie and Rahm

A very interesting story has appeared about Freddie Mac and Rahm Emanuel.

Thought you'd be interested in reading it as well.

Will anything come of it? Just wondering.....

http://www.opednews.com/articles/2/Jane-Hamsher-Grover-Norqu-by-Jane-Hamsher-091224-642.html

We The People- New Hit Song by Ray Stevens

Love American values? Remember "The Streak"?

You are gonna love this awesome song on Obamacare by Ray Stevens!

Will States Stand Up to Big Brother Taxes for Healthcare?

Will the states listen to their population or will the states realize that the new tax burdens each state (other than Nebraska) will have to impose upon their citizens will be too high for the taxpayers? Will the states stand up to Big Brother Healthcare?

Just wondering....

I thought this opinion piece very interesting. Guess I'll be contacting my local boys to see what they have in mind to do to protect our state.

Health Care Nullification: Things have just gotten underway
21. DEC, 2009

by Michael Boldin

For the past few days, I’ve received loads of emails urging me to get active regarding the healthcare vote – most of which had a subject line similar to: “Last Chance to Stop National Healthcare!”

Well, if you believe the only way to protect your rights is by begging federal politicians to do what you want, then these emails are certainly right. The vote went as expected, and so will the next.

So if you think marching on D.C. or calling your Representatives, or threating to “throw the bums out” in 2010 or 2012 or 20-whatever, is going to further the cause of the Constitution and your liberty – you might as well get your shackles on now. Your last chance has come and gone.

But, those of you who visit this site regularly already know that the Senate’s health care vote is far from the end of things – and you also know that even when it goes into effect (which I assume some version will), it’s still not the end of the road for your freedom.

The real way to resist DC is not by begging politicians and judges in Washington to allow us to exercise our rights…it’s to exercise our rights whether they want to give us “permission” to or not.

Nullification – state-level resistance to unconstitutional federal laws – is the way forward.

When a state ‘nullifies’ a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or ‘non-effective,’ within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as that state is concerned.

It’s peaceful, effective, and has a long history in the American tradition. It’s been invoked in support of free speech, in opposition to war and fugitive slave laws, and more. Read more on this history here.

Regarding nullification and health care, there’s already a growing movement right now. Led by Arizona, voters in a number of states may get a chance to approve State Constitutional Amendments in 2010 that would effectively ban national health care in their states. Our sources here at the Tenth Amendment Center indicate to us that we should expect to see 20-25 states consider such legislation in 2010.

20 States resisting DC can do what calling, marching, yelling, faxing, and emailing has almost never done. Stop the feds dead in their tracks.

For example, 13 states are already defying federal marijuana prohibition, and the federal government is having such a hard time dealing with it that the Obama administration recently announced that they would no longer prioritize enforcement in states that have medical marijuana laws.

Better yet, in the last 2+ years more than 20 states have been able to effectively prevent the Real ID Act of 2005 from being implemented. How did they do that? They passed laws and resolutions refusing to comply with it. And today, it’s effectively null and void without ever being repealed by Congress or challenged in court.

While the Obama administration would like to revive it under a different name, the reality is still there – with massive state-level resistance, the federal government can be pushed back inside its constitutional box. Issue by issue, law by law, the best way to change the federal government is by resisting it on a state level.

That’s nullification at work.

Over the years, wise men and women warned us that the Constitution would never enforce itself. The time is long overdue for people to start recognizing this fact, and bring that enforcement closer to home.

The bottom line? If you want to make real change; if you want to really do something for liberty and for the Constitution…focus on local activism and your state governments.

Thomas Jefferson would be proud!

Michael Boldin is the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center

Copyright © 2009 by TenthAmendmentCenter.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

The Founding Fathers Weren't What They are Cracked Up to Be

There's been a movement out and about. The movement that Hollywood is helping to promote. It's a movement that promotes it was the wealthy slaveholders who wrote the Constitution. Really?

Was history checked before this broad statement was recently uttered? I think not. History shows us that of the 55 delegates who were present at one time or another during the Constitutional Congress that only 14 of these men had slaves. What? Yep, 12 of these brilliant men owned or ran large farms which had slaves. Another one, James Madison, owned slaves. Benjamin Franklin also owned slaves but later freed them.

"Well, they were wealthy," say the members of the movement. Not so fast.

Some of the delegates were well off, even considered wealthy. But remember, these same men were willing to sacrifice both their lives and their fortunes for freedom from the tyranny of the King. These same men were Americans. These same men were patriots who believed in limited government of the people and by the people. Some of these same men were not taught in fancy European schools. They were either self taught or served apprenticeships.

As for their supposed wealth? Eight of these men suffered financial problems after the Constitution was written and ended up either in bankruptcy.

So were these founding fathers who helped to create the world's longest surviving Constitution just a bunch of elitists? I think not. They were the men who worked together during heated debate over a four month period to frame the United States Constitution. Was it perfect? Of course not. After all, we have had over 11000 proposed amendments-- and only 27 of them have passed muster with the American public.

Yep, the founding fathers were leaders of their time. They were so much more than those in the movement want us to believe. Wonder when the folks in the movement are going to give up their lives and fortunes in what they say they believe?

Just wondering......

Oh Goody, Reid's New Taxes for Our Christmas Stockings

Guess if Reid and company get their Christmas wish for the current health care plan to pass, then the rest of us get... well, we don't get coal. Santa won't be able to afford it.

Just thought you'd be interested in seeing some of the new proposed taxes from our delightful Congress.


The Senate Health Bill: Higher Taxes from Harry Reid

In order to pay for a massive health care bill (H.R. 3590), Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) creates a host of new taxes. These taxes will total $370.2 billion in the next ten years, and many of the taxes will start being collected in 2010, even as the economy continues to struggle.
The most shocking tax increase is a payroll tax increase that will permanently sever the link between the Medicare Payroll tax and its contributions to Medicare. This payroll tax increase of .5% on earnings above $200,000 for singles and $250,000 for joint couples will contribute money to the general fund for health care instead of directly for Medicare payments....http://blog.heritage.org/2009/11/19/the-senate-health-bill-higher-taxes-from-harry-reid/

Patriot Gets to Fly His Flag After All

Nice to see the homeowner's association finally agreed to let a World War II veteran fly his flag although why they opposed it in the first place.....

Legion Applauds Resolution of Flagpole Dispute

/PRNewswire/ -- Calling the decision of the Sussex Square Homeowners' Association Board in Va. to withdraw legal action against a WWII hero, "a great decision," the leader of The American Legion congratulated all parties involved.

"This is a victory for reason and I applaud the board for making the correct decision to permit this American hero to honor Old Glory in such a fitting way, every day, on his property," said National Commander Clarence E. Hill. "I also commend Legionnaires and all Americans across the country who flooded Col. Barfoot, the association and The American Legion with letters, emails, phone calls and messages of support and tribute."

Because of the controversy involving the 90-year-old Medal of Honor recipient, Rep. Howard P. "Buck" Mckeon (R-CA) and Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) introduced a resolution, H. Res. 952, allowing Congressional Medal of Honor recipients to properly display the United States flag on their property at all times.

"I thank the law firm of Marchant, Honey & Baldwin for their pro-bono efforts in resolving this issue. There is always room for discussion and solutions to be achieved within the system," Hill added. "In this case, the homeowners' association recognized the remarkable sacrifice and devotion of this true hero and acted wisely within the boundaries of their authority to do the right thing. We understand and appreciate the important role homeowners' associations play in local communities. The American Legion encourages all homeowners to continue to properly display Old Glory."