[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers


View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
 
Web Calitics

Completely Arbitrary Panel-less Death Panels?

by: Brian Leubitz

Tue Feb 08, 2011 at 14:03:33 PM PST


One of the more astonishing proposals of the Governor's budget cuts was a "10 appointment maximum" for Medi-Cal patients.

In an effort to close the state budget gap, California health officials are proposing a "hard cap" of 10 medical visits per year for needy patients who rely on the Medi-Cal program for health care.

Some patients and health advocates are calling the strategy a "death sentence" for patients who need dialysis treatments to clean their blood or chemotherapy to rid them of cancer. The bipartisan(sic) Legislative Analyst's Office recommended a cap that also grants exemptions for certain services or conditions.

The 10-visit cap (PDF), estimated to save the state $200 million a year, would affect the 10 percent of California patients who rely most heavily on the Medi-Cal program to meet their medical needs. (California Watch)

In many ways, this cap is just as scary as the non-existant "death panels" from the health care debate.  This ten-visit cap would mean death for those that are easily treated through consistent, but expensive, care.

This cut is simplistic, and not really reflective of a more thoughtful approach of tightly managing care for the most expensive patients.  As of yet, nobody has acted on the Leg Analyst's suggestion, but one hopes that is something of a given.  A harsh 10-appointment cap is simply unacceptable.

We are still waiting to see how the legislature acts on Brown's proposal, but I would be pretty shocked if this particular one got too far.  

At any rate, why aren't we seeing Tea Party fury on this?  Oh, right, this is poor people, so it's not that big of a deal.

Brian Leubitz :: Completely Arbitrary Panel-less Death Panels?
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

An attempt to shock voters into continuing taxes? (0.00 / 0)
There will be fury on this from many groups. Since it is so arbitrary, and dangerous, I wonder if it wasn't intended to stir outrage and publicity--and from there arguments on why continuing taxes are better than killing poor people.

Ending pension spiking and retroactive hikes I think a lot of people can get behind. Cutting life-saving medical care will be a tougher sell. At least I hope it will. If not, I wonder where our moral values are as a society.


Not buying it. (0.00 / 0)
Then where are the pro-tax arguments? It's never too early to start moving opinion, especially when the stakes here are so high. I'm just not buying this argument; it reminds me of the 11-dimensional chess memes about Obama where everything is part of some grand inscrutable plan that many of us simply fail to grasp.

Can someone explain to me how the lofty goal of maintaining current revenue levels is going to lead to such prosperity that there will be alteration of these proposals to levels that progressives would find acceptable...? Because it seems to me that the upside of this proposal is maintenance of the status quo, and the downside (taxes are voted down etc.) is that we become Texas.

You really think it'd be hard to sell people on this? I don't. We're talking about Medi-Cal: means-tested benefits that go to poor people. If I'm the CA GOP I get behind this proposal, label the tax continuations an increase, laugh all the way to the bank as Jerry Brown and the Dems kill MediCal for me, then spend the next 20 years campaigning against the party that told a bunch of little kids they can't go to the doctor. Let's not have any naive expectations about the public understanding the details of what would've gone down in that scenario; the story would be "I elected Jerry Brown, now my kid can't go to the doctor." That's a story people understand. To the extent that average politically uninterested people would even understand the political calculus of, "We dangled telling your kid he can't go to the doctor in front of the people as incentive to get them to vote how we wanted," my guess is a lot of them wouldn't find it an appealing argument. The attack ad writes itself.

The idea that this should be an acceptable level of risk is completely ludicrous. If a Republican governor proposed this and then told us to trust him, that he didn't really want to enact the cuts he was proposing, etc. I have to think the response would be a bit different, and regardless of the purity of Brown's intentions taking this big of a risk in a climate this anti-tax, anti-government, anti-poor people, etc. when -- and I hate to sound like a broken record -- the upside is maintenance of the status quo is a monumentally stupid calculation.

As a MediCal recipient myself I don't see how I can continue supporting a governor who's willing to put a gun to my head this blatantly. I notice there are no proposals for catastrophic tax increases, whether initiated by proposition or otherwise... funny, that.  


[ Parent ]
yea im glad im not a dem anymore.... (0.00 / 0)
...this is what the party has devolved into.  i think uve got to look more at what needs to be done & less how much there is to spend.  imean what is the point here-to collect a certain % of income, sales, etc in taxes-or to get the job done, job of providing various programs & svcs to Californians.  programs & svcs that promote & protect Californians' life, liberty & pursuit of happiness.

unfortunately this state (and country for that matter) no the price of everything & value of nothing.  its an old, cheap slogan but it is very fitting here.


[ Parent ]
Only people you trust can betray you (0.00 / 0)
because you don't turn your back on your enemies, whereas you think your friends/allies have your back right until the moment they stab you in it.  Jerry will do damage Arnold could only dream of, because party ties and money will cause some of the Dems to hold their fire.

Part of the problem is that the people who would be hurt are poor, and they don't vote as a bloc.  It isn't the voters' kids who will be hurt with this proposal.  There used to be an organization that registered these folks to vote -- oh, right, Acorn.  The one betrayed by the Democratic congress and president when the right targeted them.  Defunded and destroyed, though they broke no laws.

All this grief because the public is still buying into the Rethuglican meme: taxes are bad.  In a sense, they're right.  Private industry has sucked up workers' productivity gains, stagnating wages for several decades, and many people really are tapped out.  And the rich are just too powerful to remit some of their excessive gains in higher taxes.

Jerry Brown is not a fool.  He saw that, in the same election that gave Democrats all statewide offices, California voters approved yet another initiative to require a 2/3 vote to raise "fees."  That's why he promised that we'd get to vote on simply maintaining the current level of taxation a few years longer.  We're not going to get anything revolutionary out of this man, except maybe a new high in betraying traditional Democratic principles of governing.


Only people you trust can betray you (4.00 / 1)
...ive been feeling the same way about gov brown, pres obama, dems in general for awhile & uve put how i feel about this into words-thank u sofia.  btw im not a democrat any more-it was the shirley sherrod thing for me, but that same kind of backstabbing.  i certainly dont need friends like that.

[ Parent ]
Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads


Support Calitics:

Get discounted bestsellers at Barnes & Noble.com!

Advertisers


-->
California Friends
Shared Communities
Resources
California News
Progressive Organizations
The Big BlogRoll

Referrals
Technorati
Google Blogsearch

Daily Email Summary


Powered by: SoapBlox