About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Caught with "pants on fire," McCaughey backtracks, hedges -- again

July 28, 2009 8:58 pm ET — 21 Comments

After repeatedly falsely asserting that House Democrats' health care reform bill makes end-of-life counseling for seniors "mandatory," Betsy McCaughey was forced to backtrack from her claim -- a claim PolitiFact.com called "a ridiculous falsehood." Confronted with accusations that she lied about the bill, she claimed, as she had done with a prior falsehood about another bill, that she was right about the effect (if not the literal wording) of the legislation.

image

For at least the second time, former Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey has been caught making a false claim about pending legislation and then backtracking by claiming that she was describing the effect, if not the literal language of the bill. In February, McCaughey claimed that the economic recovery act would permit the government to dictate treatment but after being confronted about the falsehood, reportedly said the legislation was vague enough to allow it to happen in the future. More recently, after saying that the House health care reform bill would "absolutely require" end-of-life counseling, according to a July 28 Politico article, when asked about criticism of that claim, McCaughey stated that "[i]n so many words" the bill would make end-of-life counseling mandatory because "although it is presented in the bill as a Medicare service, when a doctor or a nurse approaches an elderly person who is in poor health, facing a decline in health, and raises these issues, it is not offering a service. It is pressuring them."

In recent weeks, McCaughey has repeatedly asserted that the House Democrats' health care reform bill makes end-of-life counseling for seniors "mandatory." PolitiFact reported: "On the radio show of former Sen. Fred Thompson on July 16, 2009, McCaughey said 'Congress would make it mandatory -- absolutely require -- that every five years people in Medicare have a required counseling session that will tell them how to end their life sooner.' "PolitiFact.com stated:

For our ruling on this one, there's really no gray area here. McCaughey incorrectly states that the bill would require Medicare patients to have these counseling sessions and she is suggesting that the government is somehow trying to interfere with a very personal decision. And her claim that the sessions would "tell [seniors] how to end their life sooner" is an outright distortion. Rather, the sessions are an option for elderly patients who want to learn more about living wills, health care proxies and other forms of end-of-life planning. McCaughey isn't just wrong, she's spreading a ridiculous falsehood. That's a Pants on Fire. [emphasis added]

After Politico asked McCaughey in July 28 article to respond to criticisms of her claim, she backpedaled, telling Politico that the bill would make end-of-life counseling mandatory "[i]n so many words":

Asked to respond to the criticism of her statements, McCaughey told POLITICO she stands by her interpretation that the consultations are mandatory.

"In so many words, it is -- because although it is presented in the bill as a Medicare service, when a doctor or a nurse approaches an elderly person who is in poor health, facing a decline in health, and raises these issues, it is not offering a service. It is pressuring them," McCaughey said Monday. "I would not want that to occur when I am not at my parents' bedside."

The provision states that as part of an advanced care consultation, an individual and practitioner shall have a consultation that includes "an explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title."

This is not the first time McCaughey has been caught in a falsehood about health care reform and reacted by claiming she was right about the effect, if not the literal wording, of the legislation. After McCaughey repeatedly claimed that provisions in the economic recovery act would permit the government to dictate treatment, she was confronted by CNN health care reporter Elizabeth Cohen, who reported: "I had a PDF of the bill up on my computer. I said, 'Show me where in the bill it says that this bill is going to have the government telling your doctor what to do.' And [McCaughey] directed me to language -- it didn't actually say that. But she said that it was vague enough that it would allow for that to happen in the future."

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by princeofwheels (July 28, 2009 10:08 pm ET)
      7  
      In ONE word, Ms. McCaughey, you are a paid LIAR.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by mary59 (July 28, 2009 11:09 pm ET)
        7  
        Yes she's definitely a liar. But you have to wonder at the stupidity of her never admitting it by saying that the language was "vague enough that it would allow for that to happen in the future."

        That's why our constitution is so dangerous [sarcasm]
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Craig (July 28, 2009 11:56 pm ET)
        7  
        She's a brazen liar who solicited funds from the pharmaceutical industry for the express purpose of influencing the debate. Actually, a stronger word than liar comes to mind.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by cluff7176 (July 28, 2009 10:30 pm ET)
         
      The sad thing about McCaughey's falsehoods is that people believe them. Months ago, I had someone show me McCaughey's "analysis" on Bloomberg, where she insisted that health care reform would allow the government to dictate treatment. I'm sure that the person who showed me the article still believes in McCaughey's assertion. Ol' Betsy; she sure knows how to get the BS "out there," doesn't she?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by InterestedInTheTruth (July 29, 2009 12:22 am ET)
         
      Ms. Betsy McCaughey has only one agenda and that is her own. For some reason people like Mr. McCaughey like to make fear the issue rather than discuss the facts. All I can assume is she is not intelligent enough to discuss the issue point by point, instead she makes things up. It is a shame that people not only listen to her, but also believe her.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by thejbomb65 (July 29, 2009 12:47 am ET)
      4  
      this just gets better and better. along the same vein. bill kristol getting schooled by john stewert
      Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (July 29, 2009 9:32 am ET)
        1  
        That was great. Kristol tried to walk back his comments, but Stewart wouldn't let him.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by achrispage6992 (July 29, 2009 8:07 am ET)
      4  
      Rachel Maddow did a great segment on this type of "conspiracy scare tactic" last night. She pointed out that several congress members are falsely spreading the idea that the government wants to essentially kill old people with this legislation. They are trying to scare the elderly. Anyne interested should look at the comments of Rep. Virginia Foxx of North Carolina on the floor of the house. Unebelievable.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by foghornleghorn (July 29, 2009 10:46 am ET)
           
        This is the same Foxx who uttered from the floor of the house:

        "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on you."
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Conchobhar (July 29, 2009 11:07 am ET)
             
          Also the Foxx of Matthew Shepherd fame or, more properly, shame.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (July 29, 2009 4:07 pm ET)
           
        Thanks for mentioning Foxx, AChris, I was trying to recall her name. I saw the video of her comments about old people being put to death, and was just amazed she was able to say that without either laughter or boos following.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Dradeeus (July 29, 2009 8:09 am ET)
         
      That's way too funny.
      "Show me where it says that."
      "Well, it doesn't say that... but, but it could..!"

      They're just spouting the weirdest, most sinister-sounding things that come to mind. Next week they'll say it'll be mandatory for all Americans to wear IVs and medical bracelets, all the time.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by rdwing (July 29, 2009 4:58 pm ET)
           
        Oh my god what is all the fuss about? Obama said his health care reform would create health care for everyone that is just like him and everyone else in the government. All they have to do is send out what our new coverage is; just like his. I heard him say it several times and oh boy is it ever a good one I have a niece who works in D.C great great coverage. Oh sorry that's not quite the plan they have for us; in fact they will not be eligible for the disaster that will be our coverage. Funny how that is, it is so wonderful but they exempt themselves. Let's just add that to the other lies that chavez or I mean obama has vomited on the airwaves in his daily (multiple times a day sometimes)little fireside brainwashing I mean chats.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by nosyllao6324 (July 29, 2009 12:45 pm ET)
         
      This morning on Morning Joe, Sen. Judd Gregg endorsed the concept of the sort of counseling that McCaughey criticized, implying that it is a partial solution to rationing. Sen. Gregg was trying, successfully, to avoid saying that some sort of rationing is inevitable at the end of life. To follow Ms. McCaughey's logic, Sen. Gregg, Republican, is in favor of mandatory end of life counseling. Also, Gregg pretty much acknowledged that he thinks health care rationing is inevitable. So, does that mean a leading republican FAVORS mandatory counseling and end of life health care rationing?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by mustardman (July 29, 2009 2:06 pm ET)
         
      You can take the whore out of politics but you can't take the politics out of the whore.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jcalton (July 30, 2009 1:50 pm ET)
         
      Excuse me, but WhoTF is Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey?
      That's not rhetorical. Seriously, who is she?

      Aren't there, oh, about 50 lieutenant governors? They're not even governors...which still don't craft legislation.
      WhoTF cares what Betsy McCaughey has to say, outside her home state, whatever it is?

      I can barely name my own lieutenant governor. He doesn't do anything.
      Report Abuse