The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
Politics & Current Events / Health Care Reform
|Subject: Fact-checking the fact checkers||Date: 10/9/2012 1:35 PM|
|Author: fleg9bo||Number: 3938 of 4335|
There Isn't a Single Honest Health Economist Who Agrees with the LA Times on IPAB
I am not aware of a single fact-checker who has grasped that basic point. Not PolitiFact, not the Associated Press, not FactCheck.org, not The Washington Post's Fact-Checker, not this Washington Post health reporter. The Los Angeles Times called Romney's claim "erroneous" and writes:
This is a myth advanced repeatedly by critics of the Affordable Care Act and debunked consistently by independent fact-checkers... the panel is explicitly prohibited from cutting benefits for people on Medicare. And there is no provision in the law that empowers the advisory board to make any decisions about what treatments doctors may provide for their patients.
Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of medicine and economics at Stanford University, responds: "The media 'fact check' business is incredibly tiresome given how pedantic and downright inaccurate it is, but I wanted to weigh in on this one before it hardens. The LA Times somehow thinks that the ACA (aka Obamacare) will have no effect on determining what care patients can get, and consequently dings Romney for saying it will. There isn't a single honest health economist out there who agrees with the LA Times on this one."
Bhattacharya explains that IPAB will be able to influence care by cutting payments to providers. But that's not the half of it. IPAB has the power to do exactly what the fact-checkers think it can't: deny specific treatments to Medicare enrollees. It can even raise taxes and do other things the fact-checkers think it cannot.
Given that the fact-checkers are all part of the liberal media, why would anyone expect anything other than a deceitful defense of the indefensible?
|Copyright 1996-2015 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us|