Senator Jon Kyl Explains Vote (against Governor Sebelius)

I cannot tell you how many times since I came online in mid 1999 I have tried to tell people that we are in danger, and that T4 thinking was increasing, as well as other aspects of the philosophy/beliefs/actions of the Nazi era, esp in regard to the area of health care, etc.

I cannot tell you how often I have written about it on forums, yahoo groups, or even on my own blog. I cannot tell you how often I have seen glimpses of this in my nursing career, and even, to some small extent, in my dental career...

Today, thanks to Jill Stanek, I have read this, and I cannot tell you how frightening this information is...T4 thinking... who is worthy of life... and who are 'non-productive eaters' or 'useless eaters'... futile care (as determined by others)... too expensive to treat.... As if her pro-abortion activity and association with Dr Tiller isn't enough... we now also have this to think about:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
April 21, 2009

CONTACT:
Andrew Wilder or Ryan Patmintra (202) 224-4521

Senate Republican Whip Opposes Sebelius Nomination

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Senate Finance Committee today reported out the nomination of Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to be Secretary of Human and Health Services. Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl, a member of the panel, voted against her nomination and made the following statement:

"I appreciate Governor Sebelius' efforts to clarify her relationship with Dr. George Tiller and my concern about the use of comparative effectiveness research to deny or delay health care to Americans under proposed health care reform.

"Comparative effectiveness research can be used to provide patients and doctors with information so that they may make informed health care decisions. But, without the appropriate safeguards, the government can misuse comparative effectiveness research to deny coverage.

"Unfortunately, Governor Sebelius' answers made it clear that the Administration is unwilling to support pro-patient safeguards. She left me with no assurance that HHS, federal health care programs, or any new entity—such as the Federal Coordinating Council—will not use comparative effectiveness research as a tool to deny care. And this should be a matter of concern to all of us.

"Her justification relied on two points which were inaccurate and contradicted one another, raising more doubt than providing assurance. I would like to briefly address those points.

"'The law prohibits Medicare from using comparative effectiveness research to withhold coverage.' She is referencing the 2003 prescription drug bill which is considerably insufficient as it only applies to prescription drugs, not all of the other aspects of treatment.

"'When authorizing comparative effectiveness research in both the Medicare Modernization Act and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Congress did not impose any limits on it.' This is precisely the problem—NIH is already taking the steps necessary to make cost-based research a priority.

One recent project description reads 'cost effectiveness research will provide accurate and objective information to guide future policies that support the allocation of health resources for the treatment of acute and chronic conditions.'

"'Allocation of health resources' is a euphemism for denying care based on cost. Yet, Governor Sebelius did not agree to pull this project.

"I believe in the right of every American to choose the doctor, hospital, and health plan of his or her choice. No Washington bureaucrat should interfere with that right or substitute the government's judgment for that of a physician."

"I will oppose Governor Sebelius' nomination because of her insufficient commitment to these principles."

###