On the government health care debate--

I have not heard good answers to two issues:

[1] No one has given a definitive answer to the question of what would happen to a patient like one of my family members. He's 85 and in otherwise very robust health, but some weeks ago was diagnosed with an early stage lymphoma in the neighborhood of his sciatic nerve. Now his physician and the cancer specialist both agree and insist that, treated assertively, this is a very remediable condition, and he should have a normal quality of life once the tumor is reduced and eliminated. They've started some chemo treatments, and he has already responded very well. The question is whether, under the government plan, elderly persons like this will receive treatment at all. I have heard this asked a couple of times in interviews of administration officials and their fellow-travelers, and the answers are either to the effect that the respondent does not know this provision of the plan or that they can't talk about specific cases. That bothers me. What if I'm in that position one day?

[2] There is also a lot of temporizing and avoidance of the pro-life question. I don't want my tax money used to extinguish the very human lives of the unborn.

Until I have satisfactory answers to the above, I'm against that legislation from beginning to end. We can't put these issues in the hands of the eugenicists.