Time’s Mark Halperin Says Death Panels are Real

A few years back, Sarah Palin was aggressively mocked for her assertion that there were going to be death panels in the Obamacare legislation. Fast forward a handful of years, and liberals are no longer even trying to pretend that these panels done’ exist. Some liberals are even trumpeting them as a good thing for American healthcare. Enter Mark Halperin a reporter and columnist for Time Magazine, who tells us that death panels “are built into the plan.”

It’s built into the plan. It’s not like a guess or like a judgment. That’s going to be part of how costs are controlled.

Where were you during the 2008 election season, Mr. Halperin? Oh, that’s right you were right there covering the entire thing. You even got famous off of the book you wrote about it – Game Change. So, why weren’t you or anyone else in the media defending Governor Palin from the liberal attack machine that was calling her crazy for even suggesting the idea of “death panels?”

take our poll - story continues below

Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Eagle Rising updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

All of you dropped the ball, the only question is whether you did it on purpose or by accident.

Here is Halperin’s interview with Steve Malzberg on Newsmax TV, where he explains how the death panels are a necessary part of the system if Obamacare is to work.

Steve Malzberg: I think they focused on the death panels which will be coming, call them what you will. Rationing is part of it.

Mark Halperin: I agree. Huge. It’s going to be a huge issue, and that’s something else about which the President was not fully forthcoming and straightforward.

Steve Malzberg: Alright, so you believe that there will be rationing, AKA death panels.

Mark Halperin: It’s built into the plan. It’s not like a guess or like a judgment. That’s going to be part of how costs are controlled. But I’ll say something else about that issue which is we do need to do have some of that in this country because we can’t afford to spend so much on end-of-life care. A very high percentage of our healthcare spending is for a very small number of people at the last stages of their life. I’m not saying the system shouldn’t allow that, but there’s too much cost. There are judgments have to be made. We have to decide…

Steve Malzberg: And has, okay, and has the President been forthcoming that we need to have that argument? No.

Mark Halperin: No he was not, and Democrats were not when the law passed. But I’ll say again, there should have been more scrutiny by all the press including the conservative press of the specifics of this. I’m not saying there was none. But there’s going to be a lot of journalism done across the board on this issue coming up just as there has now on the issue of whether people with individual plans could keep them.

There’s going to be a lot of scrutiny. It should start now. It should have started a while ago, but it needs to start now in a serious and substantive way with investigative reporting and explanatory journalism rather than waiting until the crisis is upon us because the law’s the law, and we’re going to have to have a discussion as a country about what kind of healthcare we can afford, particularly at the end of life when a lot of expensive medicine is often done that as a society we’ll have to decide – do we really want to spend that money?

Hey, thanks for waking up Mr. Halperin.


The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com

About the author


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Send this to a friend