Sarah Palin, right again on health care reform and 'death panels'

In today's Wall Street Journal:
Obama and the Bureaucratization of Health Care
The president's proposals would give unelected officials life-and-death rationing powers.

As our fearless leader says every five minutes or so, let's be clear. Sarah Palin is that. Democrat-proposed reforms would, according to Mrs. Palin,

significantly alter a large sector of our economy. They will not improve our health care. They will not save us money. And, despite what the president says, they will not "provide more stability and security to every American."

Many have muddled two particularly unpopular aspects of Democrat healthcare reform: rationing boards and end-of-life counseling. Mrs. Palin provides clarity on these:

Now look at one way Mr. Obama wants to eliminate inefficiency and waste: He's asked Congress to create an Independent Medicare Advisory Council—an unelected, largely unaccountable group of experts charged with containing Medicare costs. In an interview with the New York Times in April, the president suggested that such a group, working outside of "normal political channels," should guide decisions regarding that "huge driver of cost . . . the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives . . . ."

Given such statements, is it any wonder that many of the sick and elderly are concerned that the Democrats' proposals will ultimately lead to rationing of their health care by—dare I say it—death panels? Establishment voices dismissed that phrase, but it rang true for many Americans. Working through "normal political channels," they made themselves heard, and as a result Congress will likely reject a wrong-headed proposal to authorize end-of-life counseling in this cost-cutting context. But the fact remains that the Democrats' proposals would still empower unelected bureaucrats to make decisions affecting life or death health-care matters. Such government overreaching is what we've come to expect from this administration.

Thanks in great part to Sarah Palin, the end-of-life counseling provision was removed from HR 3200.


But rationing boards are integral to government healthcare and cannot be avoided or removed. Read the rest of the WSJ piece.

Wesley Smith comments:

And it isn’t just the bill, but the tens of thousands of pages of regulations that would be generated therefrom, resulting in the creation of assorted panels made up of bioethicists and others “experts,” who would be virtually unaccountable and likely to make decisions based on the predominate bioethical “quality of life” view.” That would almost surely result ultimately in rationing of the kind imposed by NICE in the UK–the very model Sen. Tom Daschle, perhaps the most influential non government player in this whole drama, wants for America.

Mr. Smith elaborates on Daschle's noxious influence here and here.
*Update: Hot off the press, more on Daschle from Michelle Malkin.

Comments welcome.
Linked at Michelle Malkin (buzzworthy)
Most recent posts here.