# Is it okay for government to decieve the public to get laws passed? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 13, 2014, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548 "2014-11-13T18:13:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/61 "2014-11-14T13:07:26Z")
If I may interject a note of reason as an outside observer: 1. Yes, the Republicans lie about the ACA, a lot. 2. It is however the case that the Democrats have lied about it too, and it’s time to accept that. The OP is asking a pretty straightforward question. I say the answer is “no.” ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/62 "2014-11-14T13:08:59Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > I think it’s easier for one side to fire off bumper sticker quotes than another side to fire off paragraphs to debunk them. People don’t want to bother with the details, if it doesn’t fit on a bumper sticker or a one line sound bite, you lose them. That Republicans can mislead low-information voters is hardly news. No, no, no, no. If you have to explain in more than one sentence why “You can keep your insurance if you like it” wasn’t a lie, then it’s a lie. Same goes for anything else. When you tell someone something, it should be true with unspoken caveats. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/63 "2014-11-14T13:11:14Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > That’s not what he said: > > [Obameter: | PolitiFact](http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/521/cut-cost-typical-familys-health-insurance-premium-/) “Promise broken”, not lie, but Obama has subsequently said that he meant that the dollar figure would be a reduction from the cost otherwise. > [@](#): > > Those are characterizations of the law, not lies about things that are actual facts. the Democrats lied about specific things in the law. If the best you can come up with is “Death panels” and “socialism” then it’s pretty clear which side engaged in more deception. “Socialism”, “government takeover”, “disaster”, etc., are all lies – they’re all factually untrue. And they’re all more egregious than any Democratic lies. You can disagree, but this is a difference of opinion, as any judgment on “which lies are worse” would be. > [@](#): > > To the extent they did, it wouldn’t be because Sarah Palin started an anti-death panels movement. It would be because they heard there were no death panels in the law from Democrats, which would have told them that there must certainly be death panels in the law after all. This is pretty weak. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/64 "2014-11-14T13:12:32Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > BTW, you can’t call the “socialism” charge a lie, because many supporters say that ACA is supposed to lead to single payer. “Socialism” is a lie because the ACA has nothing to do with socialism. Some supporters could say that it’s “supposed to lead” to a communist takeover of Earth, but that wouldn’t make the ACA communism. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/65 "2014-11-14T13:13:20Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > “Socialism”, “government takeover”, “disaster”, etc., are all lies – they’re all factually untrue. And they’re all more egregious than any Democratic lies. You can disagree, but this is a difference of opinion, as any judgment on “which lies are worse” would be. Socialism isn’t a lie, period. Many advocates of the law have said it will lead to socialized medicine, aka single payer. That also applies to government takeover. As for whether or not it’s a disaster, if someone says that Ronald Reagan was a disaster as President, is that a lie? By your standard, yes. By any objective standard, it’s just an opinion about the overall impact of Reagan’s Presidency. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/66 "2014-11-14T13:14:02Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > No, no, no, no. If you have to explain in more than one sentence why “You can keep your insurance if you like it” wasn’t a lie, then it’s a lie. I was able to keep my insurance – so were the vast majority of Americans – so this wasn’t a lie. If a politician says “I’m lowering your taxes”, and he lowers taxes for 99% of people, then it’s not really reasonable to say that he lied. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/67 "2014-11-14T13:14:13Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > No, no, no, no. If you have to explain in more than one sentence why “You can keep your insurance if you like it” wasn’t a lie, then it’s a lie. Same goes for anything else. When you tell someone something, it should be true with unspoken caveats. And it was true with unspoken caveats. If your insurance was ACA-compatible and if they choose to stay in the market you can keep it. True statement with unspoken caveats. Thank you for admitting that Obama told the truth. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/68 "2014-11-14T13:14:23Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > “Socialism” is a lie because the ACA has nothing to do with socialism. Some supporters could say that it’s “supposed to lead” to a communist takeover of Earth, but that wouldn’t make the ACA communism. If ACA is indeed designed to lead to socialism, then it’s pretty darn close. Policies designed to lead to socialist policies can fairly be characterized as socialism. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/69 "2014-11-14T13:16:13Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Socialism isn’t a lie, period. The “socialism” charge was a lie, period. > [@](#): > > Many advocates of the law have said it will lead to socialized medicine, aka single payer. That also applies to government takeover. Who cares what “many advocates” (uncited) said? The ACA has nothing socialist in it, and it has nothing like a “government takeover”, so these charges are lies. Period. I supported the Iraq war (at the time, which I now regret)… if I had said “The Iraq war will lead to an invasion of Canada”, then it’s still a lie to say “The Iraq war is about invading Canada”. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/70 "2014-11-14T13:17:29Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > And it was true with unspoken caveats. If your insurance was ACA-compatible and if they choose to stay in the market you can keep it. True statement with unspoken caveats. Thank you for admitting that Obama told the truth. In other words, the voters didn’t read the fine print. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/71 "2014-11-14T13:30:42Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > In other words, the voters didn’t read the fine print. To be fair to the voters, the Democrats fumbled the ball on the ACA debate big time. They assumed the voters were too smart to believe the death panel and socialism bullshit. Republicans knew that if they made continuous charges at the bumper sticker level that they would carry the day in the court of public opinion. It’s hard to get someone to read the fine print when the opposition is putting their message out in 72 point fonts. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/72 "2014-11-14T13:48:20Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I was able to keep my insurance – so were the vast majority of Americans – so this wasn’t a lie. Let’s see a cite that the vast majority of Americans who wanted to keep their insurance as it was when they liked it were able to do so. > [@](#): > > “Promise broken”, not lie… Pathetic. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/73 "2014-11-14T14:04:25Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Let’s see a cite that the vast majority of Americans who wanted to keep their insurance as it was when they liked it were able to do so. I can’t cite stuff that would require reading minds (as to “who wanted to keep their insurance”), but [here](http://www.factcheck.org/2014/04/millions-lost-insurance/)’s a cite that only a small minority had their insurance changed due to the ACA, that there’s no data beyond a few anecdotes about people losing access to their doctors, and far, far more gained insurance. > [@](#): > > Pathetic. I’m outraged that you’re outraged! Anger and rage! Pathetic indeed! ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/74 "2014-11-14T14:31:50Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > I disagree about the cause. The true problem is not voter stupidity. The true problem is voter intelligence. If every law was written in a succinct and straightforward manner so that the voters could know what was actually in it, they would rebel. Politicians would be tarred and feathered and ridden out of town on a rail. (Metaphorically, that is. I’d very much like to see a literal revival of that practice.) > > In order to pass a massively complicated piece of legislation like Obamacare, it’s necessary to lie. “If you like your insurance, you can keep it.” “If you like your doctor, you can keep them.” “Everybody will pay less.” etc… Why is this? Imagine if Obama and his friends had told the truth. “If you like your health insurance, tough shit. I’m taking it away from many of you.” “If you like your doctor, tough shit again.” “Many of you will pay more.” Can you imagine the law getting enough public support to pass in those circumstances? > > The voters are too intelligent to approve of the ACA. If they’d had an accurate picture of what was in the law, it would not have passed. That’s why the deception was necessary. I disagree with that. It’s true that the average person is not capable of figuring out anything as complex as the ACA. But the average person didn’t have to. There was an enormous amount of media coverage of the ACA, and the details were very widely disseminated, and anyone who wanted could have figured these things out. No doubt there are details that have emerged since the law’s passage. But none of those are the lies we are discussing. These were all upfront. Of the ones that Gruber is discussing, the notion that the tax on high cost plans would ultimately be paid by the purchasers of insurance was universally assumed (part of the rationale for doing it was to discourage the purchase of expensive plans, and thereby to deter excessive utilization of healthcare services), and the idea that the ACA would increase spending was known and discussed upfront too. And so on for the rest of what’s being discussed here. Nobody had to rely on Obama’s assurances that if you like your plan you can keep your plan when the provisions in the law which made that impossible were widely known upfront. The only reason people believed Obama’s assurances (besides for self-deluded liberals dedicated to The Cause) is because they were so focused on things like Kim Kardashian’s butt that they couldn’t pay any closer attention to the ACA than an occasional sound-bite. Gruber is right. The people are stupid. And the winner of political debates is whoever does a better job of appealing to their stupidity. Honesty in politics is a losing strategy and it’s not surprising that it’s so rare. > [@adaher](#): > > #4 is true in the absolute sense. The President promised that health costs would drop by $2500 per family, on average. Not true. Prices have continued to rise, albeit more slowly than before. The slowing of the rate of spending increases is largely attributable to the recession, and to the extent that it’s not it’s unclear to what extent it has anything to do with the ACA. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/75 "2014-11-14T14:43:14Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Socialism isn’t a lie, period. Many advocates of the law have said it will lead to socialized medicine, aka single payer. That also applies to government takeover. > > As for whether or not it’s a disaster, if someone says that Ronald Reagan was a disaster as President, is that a lie? By your standard, yes. By any objective standard, it’s just an opinion about the overall impact of Reagan’s Presidency. Let’s analyze that for a second. So your view is that a statement like that about Reagan is merely an opinion, but if someone says that the ACA is “socialism”, that’s objectively factual because it will (factually) lead to socialism! 😃 Aside from the obvious absurdity of that position – since the ACA is about as far from single-payer as you can get and that’s why the insurance industry and their lobbyists supported it – every industrialized country on earth except the US has universal government-regulated health care that is effectively single-payer, and Canada has actual single-payer in each province. I don’t think any rational person would refer to any of those countries as “socialist” or on the road to “socialism”. The “socialism” label is a scaremongering, stupid label used by scaremongering Republicans – a second reason that’s it’s a deception: the ACA has nothing whatsoever to do with single-payer, and it wouldn’t be “socialism” if it did. And finally, I see this whole kerfuffle cited in the OP as a non-issue. If the evil government was engaging in deception to pass the ACA for some nefarious purpose, what was the nefarious purpose? As far as I can tell the purpose of the ACA was to allow more people to have health care and to put a few limits on unethical insurance industry practices. All that Gruber seems to be saying is that the law’s proponents were underplaying the “tax” aspect of the penalty, mainly because so many Americans have such an aversion to the word, and because the penalty isn’t even relevant to anyone who carries health insurance, as every rational person should. Suggesting that the whole law was passed under some kind of false pretenses is absurd. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/76 "2014-11-14T14:55:02Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I can’t cite stuff that would require reading minds (as to “who wanted to keep their insurance”), but [here](http://www.factcheck.org/2014/04/millions-lost-insurance/)’s a cite that only a small minority had their insurance changed due to the ACA, that there’s no data beyond a few anecdotes about people losing access to their doctors, and far, far more gained insurance. From your cite - > [@](#): > > In a March 3 posting on the website of the journal Health Affairs, two researchers from the Urban Institute analyzed findings from a nationwide poll and said, “Our findings imply that roughly 2.6 million people would have reported that their plan would no longer be offered due to noncompliance with the ACA.” And in this case, the methodology is made explicit. > > In December 2013, the Urban Institute’s quarterly Health Reform Monitoring Survey of adults ages 18-64 included this question: “Did you receive a notice in the past few months from a health insurance company saying that your policy is cancelled or will no longer be offered at the end of 2013?” And of the 522 people polled who were covered by non-group policies, 18.6 percent said yes, their old plan would no longer be offered because it didn’t meet the new coverage standards that went into effect Jan. 1. > > And if 14 million people were covered by non-group policies nationwide (as indicated by the National Health Information Survey of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), that percentage translates to 2.6 million non-group policies discontinued, the authors stated. > > To be sure, there is always a statistical margin of error in any random-sample poll. Lead author Lisa Clemans-Cope told us in an email that statistically, there is a 95 percent certainty that the true percentage whose non-group policies were discontinued falls somewhere between 16.2 percent and 23.3 percent. That would put the number at anywhere between about 2.3 million and 3.3 million. IOW Obama’s claim was a lie a couple of million times over. (Your claim that there was no evidence beyond a few anecdotes is, of course, a blatant misstatement of fact). > [@](#): > > I’m outraged that you’re outraged! Anger and rage! Pathetic indeed! Yes, it is pathetic indeed. You have been lied to and systematically deceived, this has been made clear to you, and still you cling to it. Gruber was right but he didn’t go far enough - the American voters who supported the ACA are not only so stupid they would fall for Obama’s lies, they will not even notice it when this is pointed out to them. Not everyone - Obamacare is unpopular with a clear majority of the US populace, and those who did notice turned out to vote the GOP into national and state level office - but support for Obama and Obamacare is apparently blind as well as stubborn. Obama voters seem to agree that “yes, we are too dumb to know what is good for us, and will blindly lick the boots of our betters, especially after they kick us”. Not that this is news, of course, since [it was established years ago](http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/18/video-how-obama-got-elected/). Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/77 "2014-11-14T15:00:07Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > From your cite - > IOW Obama’s claim was a lie a couple of million times over. If so, it was the truth far, far more times. He wasn’t lying to me (not that it really matters to me)! > [@](#): > > (Your claim that there was no evidence beyond a few anecdotes is, of course, a blatant misstatement of fact). This was a claim about people losing their doctors – if you have more data, please cite it. > [@](#): > > Yes, it is pathetic indeed. You have been lied to and systematically deceived, this has been made clear to you, and still you cling to it. What am I clinging to? Everyone’s a liar, including Obama. He’s a lying liar. So what? His policies are far, far better than the alternative. > [@](#): > > Gruber was right but he didn’t go far enough - the American voters who supported the ACA are not only so stupid they would fall for Obama’s lies, they will not even notice it when this is pointed out to them. Not everyone - Obamacare is unpopular with a clear majority of the US populace, and those who did notice turned out to vote the GOP into national and state level office - but support for Obama and Obamacare is apparently blind as well as stubborn. Obama voters seem to agree that “yes, we are too dumb to know what is good for us, and will blindly lick the boots of our betters, especially after they kick us”. Nope. ACA supporters just believe that the ACA is better than no ACA, and the statistics support this. I assume I’m always being lied to. I also believe that Obama lies less often and less severely than his opponents, which is supported by sites like Politifact. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/78 "2014-11-14T16:19:34Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > 1 and 2) The vast majority of people were able to keep their insurance and their doctor. If this was a “lie”, it was a lie for a tiny percentage of Americans, and true for the vast majority. He certainly wasn’t lying to me! The measure of a lie is whether it was true or not, and whether it was intended to mislead. Obama’s statement was categorical, made repeatedly. It was not an off the cuff remark. The fact that by percent most people were not in the group where this was not true does not mitigate the fact that it was a lie. You can qualify it and call it a “lie for a tiny percentage of Americans” but that is a weak defense, not an argument on whether it was a lie or not. Other deflections trying to denigrate the quality of previous coverages to somehow imply Obama’s statement wasn’t a lie are even more weak. Obama lied. He’s not unique. The defense of the lie as not a lie or only a small lie, or a lie for your own good are poor. > [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Who has expressed a sentiment like that? Certainly not me. > [@Twoflower](#): > > Enh. Laws and sausages. I would totally agree that full disclosure would be best, but political reality usually intervenes. In the case of the current situation, when the opposition has clearly demonstrated that honest discussion and full disclosure is not on their agenda, it would seem foolish for the proponents not to try to finesse the situation. > [@Lobohan](#): > > It’s important in that the bill helped millions of people. So they packaged it in a manner that was palatable to the electorate. That’s politics. That’s why we have nonsense law names like, “The Stolen Valor Act” or “The Patriot Act.” It’s a candy coating. > > Calling a tax for not having insurance a mandate penalty is the same thing. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > If so, it was the truth far, far more times. He wasn’t lying to me (not that it really matters to me)! > > … > > What am I clinging to? Everyone’s a liar, including Obama. He’s a lying liar. So what? His policies are far, far better than the alternative. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/79 "2014-11-14T16:29:39Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > If I may interject a note of reason as an outside observer: > > 1. Yes, the Republicans lie about the ACA, a lot. > > 2. It is however the case that the Democrats have lied about it too, and it’s time to accept that. > > The OP is asking a pretty straightforward question. I say the answer is “no.” Change “the” to “some” in “the Democrats” and “the Republicans,” and I agree. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2014, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548/80 "2014-11-14T16:32:52Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Sorry, but the “death panels” thing was believed by no one, nor was it a common talking point among conservatives. It came entirely from the deluded mind of Sarah Palin and was then seized on by supporters of the law to use as a way to discredit opposition. Fair point–it’s not like Republican leaders picked up on it and ran with the torch. I mean, if the House Republican Leader had made “death panel”-ish allegations, you’d be wrong, but he didn’t, did he? > [@John Boehner](#): > > This provision may start us down a treacherous path toward government-encouraged euthanasia if enacted into law. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-okay-for-government-to-decieve-the-public-to-get-laws-passed/704548.md?page=5)