Good Medicine: Why Not for Everyone?

In the Firedoglake blog, Dean Baker posted an article talking about the health care package by President Obama. Obama proposed to create a commission of medical experts that would figure out the medical procedures for which Medicare will pay. This was an attempt to reduce the costly procedures that gave very little medical benefit and even possibly improve health outcomes. Obama says that this is promoting good medicine.
The author's intended audience are most likely people interested in the health reform. He also seems to be targeting everyone, since he wants everyone to receive this "good medicine." The author supports this measure, but he questions why the elderly are the only ones receiving this Medicare. He wants everyone to receive this benefit. The author provides the reader with information on how the government could follow the experts' judgements on procedures to government supported insurance plans. He asserts that if we are confident that the experts will act on good evidence, we should apply these measures everywhere. He believes if the medical procedures were applied to everyone as opposed to just the elderly, there will be more eyes on the issue. This will help reduce bias and serve to help the panel decide on sound evidence. The author does not overlook the fact that the experts themselves might be biased, since many top researchers take fees from health companies. However, the author is optimistic that they will be able to eliminate this issue by finding top experts who do not accept these fees. The author says that the only question is what procedures these government-subsidized insurances will cover.
I agree with the author. He is convincing in his argument and uses reasoning and persuasion to get his points covered. It would help so many people if unbiased medical experts could set appropriate medical procedures.