• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

It's time to fact check those fact checkers

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
If it's not specifically forbidden in the bill, who will decide later, a czar?

Article published Aug 9, 2009
It's time to fact check those fact checkers

2009-08-09 Most kids learn early that there is a terrible price to be paid for lying: no one believes your words, no matter how much you insist that - this time - you are telling the truth. “I swear to God,” says the perennial liar, “I swear on a stack of Bibles.” And, at first, the emphatic oath may convince us to give them the benefit of the doubt - until experience teaches us that the very strength of the oath is a red flag for dishonesty.

With the explicit adoption of “advocacy journalism” (AP Washington bureau chief Ron Fournier's preferred philosophy of reporting), AP's Washington reporters have turned many of their “news” stories into editorials. They often play fast and loose with the facts.

To counteract their growing (and much deserved) reputation for less-than-accurate reporting, many AP writers have developed the equivalent of the liar's oath: titling their articles “fact checks.” The fact check label sends a clear message: you can believe us this time: we're giving you the facts.

What's amusing about these fact check articles is that they rarely get the facts right. Typical is AP writer Charles Babington's recent “fact check” of the health care debate.

Babington says the current debate is filled with confusing claims and outright distortions. He disputes House Republican Leader John Boehner's claim that HR3200 (the House version of the reform bill) “may start us down the road toward government-encouraged euthanasia.” Babington claims this is counter-factual because no one would be required to use the consultations mandated by the bill.

But looking at the language of Section 1233 of the bill (Advanced Care Planning), it's clear that Boehner's concerns are well founded. The “quality of life” references and much else in the language in this section reflects the thinking of the “death with dignity,” pro-euthanasia crowd. The recommended guidelines specifically call on providers to include a discussion of “the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration” in helping patients develop an “end-of-life care plan.” How great a step is it from, “pull my food and water tubes” to “please call Dr. Kevorkian?” Babington also faults Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council for claiming that Obamacare will lead to taxpayer-funding of abortions. Babington says Perkins' claim is false: the government exchanges set up by the bill have no clear guidelines on abortion one way or another.

But if one looks at what Perkins had to say in context, one sees that his analysis is absolutely correct. He points to three separate sections of the bill that the courts and federal bureaucrats can and probably will use to mandate taxpayer-funded abortion. Just as it took the explicit language of the Hyde amendment to end Medicaid funding of abortion, so it will take explicit language to make sure HR3200 doesn't include abortion as part of “mandatory minimum coverage.”

Unfortunately, Babington's “fact check” of the health care debate misses a key fact. Medicare and Medicaid spending are beginning to bust both federal and state budgets. President Obama and Congress have few options. They can cut government medical spending, raise taxes substantially or try to find some way of controlling medical costs in general. The last is the most palatable and the least politically risky alternative - but not if it means rationing or the elimination of patient choice.

So how will costs be contained? Cost-conscious bureaucrats are going to be mighty tempted to turn to euthanasia and abortion unless such measures are clearly and specifically forbidden. And that's a fact - or, at least, an opinion worth considering.

Art Marmorstein, Aberdeen, is a professor of history at NSU. He can be reached by writing the American News at P.O. Box 4430, Aberdeen, S.D. 57402, or by e-mail at [email protected] His column runs occasionally. The views presented are those of the author and do not represent those of Northern State University.

http://www.aberdeennews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090809/OPINION02/908090334/-1/opinion
 
Top