Former President Bill Clinton was rushed to the hospital for a heart condition and has reportedly received a stent.
ABC News has details:
Former President Bill Clinton was rushed to a Manhattan hospital late this afternoon, sources tell ABC News.
A look back at presidential history from 1960 to 2008.
Clinton, 63, was transported to Columbia Presbyterian Hospital in Manhattan for a condition related to his heart.
ABC News’ chief political correspondent [and former Clintonite, ABC News forgets to disclose] George Stephanopoulos reported that sources said he was taken to the hospital “likely for a stent procedure.”
ABC also tells us that Hillary Clinton was spotted leaving the Oval Office a short time ago and “did not seem ‘too concerned’ or ‘in a rush.'” For what it’s worth.
Update: Clinton received two stents.
The former president’s counselor Douglas Band released a statement saying that Clinton is in “good spirits.”
“Today President Bill Clinton was admitted to the Columbia Campus of New York Presbyterian Hospital after feeling discomfort in his chest,” said Band. “Following a visit to his cardiologist, he underwent a procedure to place two stents in one of his coronary arteries.”
A stent is a wire mesh tube used to prop open an artery.
Best wishes for the former president’s recovery.
Now, a timely reminder: Stents don’t grow on trees. They were not created, developed, marketed, or sold by government bureaucrats and lawmakers. One of the nation’s top stent manufacturers, Boston Scientific, has weighed in on the Democrats’ proposed massive taxes on medical device makers:
Boston Scientific Corp (BSX.N) warned on Tuesday that a proposed tax in the U.S. health care reform bill that cleared the Senate Finance Committee last week could have serious consequences for the company, including job losses.
“The bill that came out of the committee last week makes absolutely no sense and would be very damaging to Boston Scientific, and the medical device industry as a whole,” Boston Scientific Chief Executive Ray Elliott said during a post-earnings conference call.
“In a nutshell, it would raise costs and lead to significant job losses. It does not address the quality of care but the political scorecard of savings.”
Elliott said that the company’s tax liability would be doubled, adding $150 million to $200 million a year, and it would be forced to make substantial cuts in research and development spending, which could result in 1,000 to 2,000 jobs being lost at Boston Scientific…
…In addition to direct fees on device makers, the industry faces a double tax because hospitals, which have agreed to accept $155 billion in cuts in government payments over 10 years, will pass on part of that burden to device makers, said Elliott.
A teachable moment: Taxing innovation in the name of “health care reform” has consequences.
Related flashback: NHS could ban life-saving heart device ‘because it’s too expensive’blog comments powered by Disqus
March 16, 2016 07:08 AM by Michelle Malkin
December 16, 2015 12:03 PM by Doug Powers
November 5, 2015 12:03 PM by Doug Powers
October 23, 2015 04:48 AM by Michelle Malkin
Hillary’s such an ‘enemy’ of drug companies that she’s the #1 recipient of the industry’s donations (a Sunday open thread)
October 18, 2015 09:11 AM by Doug Powers