I wonder if Layton talked about the 9 nine hour waits in emergency rooms and the lack of proper treatment being available to dying patients.
Amanda Carpenter writes:
The leader of Canada’s New Democrat Party Jack Layton linked the future of his country’s universal health care system to President Obama’s public health care program in a Washington speech Wednesday.
Many conservative groups have pointed to Canada’s universal health care system as a reason to keep the American health care system in the private sector. Americans for Prosperity, for example, launched an ad campaign last week featuring a Canadian woman named Shona Holmes who was diagnosed with brain cancer and says in the ad the only way she survived was by seeking treatment in America.
Mr. Layton accused groups like this of “sowing the seeds of fear with myths and lies about Canadian health care” and said the futures of the two health care programs are dependent on each other in an address delivered at the Woodrow Wilson Center.
“There is no doubt that strengthening of our system in Canada will be easier with public health care in the United States,” Mr. Layton said. “Just as Canada built a strong public health system through a united effort, and just as America must do the same, so too can we strengthen and reinforce the health of all of our citizen through partnership.”
When reached for comment Ms. Holmes quipped “The only partnership we have is a place for desperate Canadians to run.”
Mr. Layton’s trip comes at the beginning of an aggressive effort to ramp up grassroots support for President Obama’s health care plan by Organizing for America. While in Washington, Mr. Layton met with Democrats on Capitol Hill as well as White House Communications Director Anita Dunn.
Do you realize this will cost up to $2 Trillion dollars? For a program that has failed miserably every it has been tried? It's socialism and it will fail and it will cost generations.
Still sound good?
President Obama launched his "bold" nationalized health-care plan.
Just as Rahmbo The Ballerina said never let a good crisis go to waste, Obama has used the economic crisis as the impetus for passing his radical nationalized health-care agenda.
It's our view, that the President is not terribly concerned with actually fixing the economy.
Instead, he will use smoke and mirrors to covertly pass a radical Socialist agenda, establish a vast power grab for voting supremacy, and attempt to implode America from within.
The Obama Budget contains a $634 Billion "down payment" on national health-care that will ultimately top $1 Trillion!
Sneaky Democrats on Capitol Hill quietly sneaked "stealth-care" into the $800 Billion CRAPulus Socialism Bill.And all of this crap to get health care that Europe has proven as a complete and utter failure.
British PM Gordon Brown recently issued an apology for a "Third World Hospital".
Sen. Jim DeMint wrote a great op/ed in the Washington Examiner a few months ago on the dangers of national health care.
In Great Britain last year, a 24-year old woman named Katie Hilliard was diagnosed with cervical cancer. The disease has since spread to her lungs and lymph nodes. In October, she took time off from her course of chemo and radiation therapy to marry her fiancée because, in her words, “We didn’t know how ill I would get.”
The family of Claire Everett does know. She died in September, of the same disease, with her parents, husband, and two-year old son by her side. She was 23.
Both could have been diagnosed early and possibly saved by a routine screening test. But the British National Health Service does not allow women under the age of 25 to receive that test.
These kinds of stories are commonplace in nations with government-controlled health care, with good reason. As the miracle workers in the global medical research field develop treatments to keep us alive and healthy much longer than ever before, the costs of health care inevitably rise. Government health services looking to cut costs usually choose to ration coverage.
In Great Britain, Canada, Sweden, and elsewhere, government bureaucrats decide which patients may receive which treatments based on how beneficial the treatment will be – beneficial to the government, that is, not the patient.
The process by which government health departments decide who gets what is called “Comparative Effectiveness Research” (CER). And you might be surprised to know there was more than $1 billion allocated for CER in the so-called economic stimulus bill passed last month by Congress.
No comments:
Post a Comment