Wisconsin Senator Herb Kohl suggests that "rationing" is all in your head. According to Kohl:
I want to be clear that lowering costs has nothing to do with limiting access to care, though opponents of health care reform will try to convince America otherwise. The idea of "rationing" is a myth, and anything resembling it will not be a part of health care reform. [emphasis added]
From a post back in May, Nancy Schmidt talks about how the myth of "rationing" works in Canada. And while the Senator has the best of intentions when he writes, "We must ensure that all health care systems provide better care in a more efficient way and reward those systems that already do so," at some point in time, someone, somewhere is going to determine what is the appropriate care in a certain situation and deny payment or options for care that doesn't follow the pre-determined guidelines. That's rationing.
On the same blog someone makes this comment:
Someone may want to ask Sen. Kohl why $1.1 billion was included in the $787 billion Porkulus bill earlier this year for the study and/or setting up of a program of "comparative effectiveness." If I'm not mistaken, that will eventually lead to rationing; especially for older America who will be found not qualified for many of the more expensive treatments.
Excellent question. Another question would be why aren't congressmen required to be on this government-controlled health care plan? They're the people writing the bill. Isn't it good enough for them?