I was intrigued yesterday by the report of the young man with Hepatitis C who was unable to receive a liver that a dying family friend wished to donate to him. He could not come up with the $200,000 to pay for the transplant operation, and Arizona's Medicaid program (AHCCS) stopped covering such operations (for such patients) in October.
This morning, I saw that Democrats in the State Legislature are calling for a special session to change that decision. I also noticed that - to this day - conservatives around the nation are still trying to equate the new healthcare reform laws with "death panels".
How do Republicans distinguish between the false allegation of "death panels" in a relatively-mild provision of the Democratic HCR proposal and the very true, very direct determination (purse strings) of who may receive a life-saving transplant and who may not which was witnessed in Arizona yesterday? How can you express outrage and whip voters into a froth about the former and then defend the latter?
And, while we are pondering, how do Democrats stress the importance of making healthcare reform at the federal level "deficit neutral" (i.e. "fiscally responsible") and then not be mindful of that in Arizona (when the state is in budget crisis mode)?
We welcome your comments about this post. Or, if you have something unrelated on your mind, please e-mail to info-at-arizonaspolitics-dot-com. Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment