Pro-Life Group Tells House to Oppose CHAMP Act Over Euthanasia Worries

Bioethics   |   Steven Ertelt   |   Aug 1, 2007   |   9:00AM   |   WASHINGTON, DC

Pro-Life Group Tells House to Oppose CHAMP Act Over Euthanasia Worries Email this article
Printer friendly page

by Steven Ertelt Editor
August 1,

Washington, DC ( — A top pro-life organization is asking members of the House to vote against a bill concerning Medicare over concerns that it could lead to euthanasia. National Right to Life wants lawmakers to oppose the Children’s Health and Medicare Protection Act (CHAMP Act) because it could ration lifesaving medical treatment.

NRLC says the bill, in its current form, would "prevent older Americans from protecting themselves from rationing."

Under the legislation, seniors would be prevented from adding their own money on top of what the government will pay in order to get Medicare health insurance less likely to ration life-saving medical treatment. The bill ends the "private fee-for-service" alternative that gives them this legal option.

"This vote affects the critical issue of involuntary euthanasia — of whether uncounted millions of us (for all of us hope to live to be senior citizens someday) are forced to die against our will because the government makes it illegal even to use our own money to obtain unrationed health insurance," the organization tells members of Congress.

"We urge your ‘no’ vote on the CHAMP Act," top NRLC leaders wrote House members, adding that the group will publish the results of the vote in its annual legislative scorecard.

The group says the bill includes price controls which "effectively eliminates all indemnity private fee-for-service plans as of 2009 and all private fee-for-service plans, including PPOs, as of 2010."

NRLC explains that the bill "actually authorizes limits on what senior citizens themselves are permitted to spend to save their own lives."

"The economic reality is that in order to provide Medicare coverage for the baby boom generation as it retires without unrealistically massive tax increases, government payments per beneficiary will not be able to keep up with medical inflation. If the funds available for health care for senior citizens from all sources are so limited, the only possible result will be rationing," the group says.

"Since senior citizens are required to participate in Medicare, this would amount to government-imposed involuntary euthanasia," the group adds.

The pro-life group has had the same concerns about potential amendments the Senate may adopt to its measure reauthorizing the SCHIP program.