|
| The Radical Moderate |
| Covering: Big Brother, Propaganda, Theocracy and Liberty By Tim Willoughby, Y.A.W.L. * (* Yet Another Wretched Lawyer) |
|
|
|
Libertarian DemocratA Libertarian Democrat is vigorously pro-personal liberty, and believes government can play a constructive role in regulating our economy and providing a social safety net. Categories:
About
Help Beta Test:
Credits:
Internal Links:A Moderate Motto:"Few things in life are as good or as bad as they seem in the emotions of the moment." |
Third and last post I think today on the Schiavo issue and Bush’s anti-Schiavo Texas law. Confirmation that Bush signed a Texas law allowing hospitals to kill people — against the wishes of their families — if the patients can’t pay their bills, if they are brain dead or maybe if further treatment is futile. What implications does this have for the credibility of the Republican Party on the Schiavo issue now? See my previous two posts for more.
END of article
6 Responses to “HoustonChronicle.com - Life support may be cut based on pay, prognosis”Leave a Reply
PREVIOUS post in SAME category as this post:
CNN.com - Judge denies request to reinsert Schiavo feeding tube - Mar 22, 2005
NEXT post in SAME category as this post:
HoustonChronicle.com - Bush's Texas Law- Case is the first in which a judge allowed a hospital to discontinue care The RM is a "Libertarian Democrat"A Libertarian Democrat is vigorously pro-personal liberty, and believes government can play a constructive role in regulating our economy and providing a social safety net. |
Lawyers Must
Speak Out! We must keep our ears tuned to the degeneration toward tyranny. Recent Rants:
Links:Politics
Anti-Theocracy
Media Watchdogs
Misc
|
March 21st, 2005 at 1:15 pm
Does the Texas law include the poor “brain-dead Republicans” of the state?
Just an attempt at humor, using a Howard Dean quote.
March 21st, 2005 at 3:07 pm
See the comment from a previous post today, 3-21-05, where a visitor posted the text of significant portions of the law at issue.
This law is unbelievable. I must be missing something. Maybe I’ve been brain dead since 1999 when the law was enacted.
And why didn’t we talk about this law during the 2000 or 2004 elections?
Seems that the issue of killing people who cannot pay for health care would be a significant consideration for the bulk of the Republican base.
March 21st, 2005 at 3:44 pm
It may have been enough in 2000. It’s hard to say without today’s context.
Such a shame your party hadn’t brought it up when it mattered. (Sarcasm)
I am mildly curious about this though. Do you know if Texas has a line item veto?
March 21st, 2005 at 4:01 pm
Texas Constitution has the line item veto for “appropriations” items in a bill.
Without legal research, I don’t know if this type of line item veto is broad enough to reach items allowing hospitals to kill people who can’t pay (when further treatment would be futile).
View the Texas Constitution line item veto provision here.
March 22nd, 2005 at 5:40 am
“What implications does this have for the credibility of the Republican Party on the Schiavo issue now?”
For some, it may imply something about the credibility of Bush. I don’t see how the rest of the party gets lumped in. Did Dennis Hastert have anything to do with the Texas law?
Here’s a link to how the House voted:
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll090.xml
March 22nd, 2005 at 6:24 am
By 1999 when Bush signed the bill, he was either a declared candidate for president, or was the number 1 choice of the conservative money players.
Bush probably didn’t do ANYTHING without checking with Carl Rove and others.
On the other hand, as they said on the Daily Show last week in making fun of Bush’s “in your face” choices for important posts —- “The man’s got HUGE balls, ENORMOUS balls!”
So maybe thye national Republican leadership did not bless this death bill. But I think that’s unlikely. since they were grooming Bush for the presidency at the time.