Death Records Now

GOP hints Dems would deny Republicans health care
From Associated Press
August 28, 2009 1:42 PM EDT
WASHINGTON – The Republican national party has mailed a fundraising appeal suggesting Democrats might use an overhaul of the health care system to deny medical treatment to Republicans.

A questionnaire accompanying the appeal says the government could check voting registration records, "prompting fears that GOP voters might be discriminated against for medical treatment in a Democrat-imposed health care rationing system."

It asks, "Does this possibility concern you?"

Katie Wright, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, said the question was "inartfully worded."

But she said people should worry because government officials would have access to personal financial and medical data.

"The RNC doesn’t try to scare people," said Wright. "We’re just trying to get the facts out on health care. And that’s what we do every day."

Jon Vogel, executive director of the Democratic House campaign organization, called the GOP letter "shameless fear-mongering."

In a fundraising e-mail of his own seeking to raise $100,000 by Aug. 31, Vogel wrote the Republican accusation was "just a preview of the falsehoods, fabrications and outright lies Republicans will be pushing when Congress returns in September."

The allegation is the latest instance in which some critics of the health care effort have made inflammatory unfounded claims – such as conservatives who claimed the legislation would create "death panels" that they said could lead to euthanizing elderly people.

The suggestion that Republicans might not receive care is included in a "Future of American Health Care Survey" containing 13 questions, most of which are critical of the Democratic health care effort. The technique, referred to as a "push poll," is used often in political campaigns by both parties and is designed to spread negative information, not to sample public opinion.

Another question asks, "Do you believe it is justified to ration health care regardless of whether an individual has contributed to the cost of the treatment?"

The survey is accompanied by a two-page letter signed by Michael Steele, chairman of the national Republican party. The letter accuses Democrats of "moving swiftly to bring European-style socialized medicine here," but makes no mention of the possibility that Republicans might be denied coverage.

Wright did not immediately respond when asked who had crafted the wording of the survey questions, and which GOP officials had signed off on it.

The questionnaire was first reported by The Washington Independent, a progressive-leaning nonprofit news and politics Web site based in Washington.

No I do not but however it is an intriguing idea not without merit.Its obvious appeal would be that self-professed sturdy REAL AMERICANS
could put into practice values of self-reliance which they so cherish.Unless these exponents of LIBERTY have not noticed medical care is already rationed by INSURANCE COMPANIES whose only allegiance is to profit realized by denying health care and treatment.

This is in regards to a recent incident in Texas City that took place between April 6 2010 – May 16 2010 in which BP admits(as an estimate) to releasing 538,000 lbs of chemicals (17,000 lbs of benzene, 37,000 lbs of nitrogen oxides, 186,000 lbs of carbon monoxide) due to a failing component in their Texas City plant, that they chose to not shut down due to production losses that would be incurred. The galveston daily news originally reported this on June 5, 2010 with little public attention being paid to it. I recently read, in a small local San Leon publication (San Leon Seabreeze), a follow up article to this which claims the effects of this chemical release were far greater than BP is acknowledging. The publication went as far as to say that people will start developing cancer in 1-2 years, and that there will be a large death toll. From a legal standpoint, would you have to be ill and dying before you could take legal action on this? How would something like emotional distress figure into this? If they were releasing chemicals in the air and I was unaware at the time, I now feel as though I could be breathing dangerous chemicals at any given moment. Not to mention their horrible safety record, and the 2005 explosion that took place in Texas City. Anyone got some legal advice?

First, it sounds like irresponsible journalism and fear mongering…

Second, you have to be damaged before you can take legal action. The question is, when are you damaged? At this point, you don’t even know if you were exposed to the chemicals, much less whether you have been damaged by them. Once you have been damaged, your claim becomes ripe and can be brought.