Dave Ryan Beaumont EnterpriseBy MIKE D SMITH Beaumont Enterprise
Aug. 18, 2009, 11:17PM
...Ten people were treated at Christus St. Elizabeth Hospital for cuts and abrasions caused by storm debris, a spokeswoman said. .
Tim Ocnashek, emergency management coordinator for Beaumont, praised residents and first responders for their quick thinking and actions.
“We were real fortunate that so few people were hurt,” Ocnashek said. “It seems like everyone worked together real well and everybody — even the public — complied.”...
The Republicans won't be joining us, with the exception of one or two in the Senate, in 'cleaning up' the health care industry in the USA. I think there are recommendations from one Republican Senator that have studied the subject and set a goal for reform before President Obama was even a candidate. That would be Senator Baucus. Unless the winds have shifted with him since this article in USA Today.
...Senator Baucus (click here): "Well, we are going to cut spending and that's the basic way we're able to come up with a way not to add to the national debt. People think it adds to the debt. But the dollars spent on health care will not add one thin dime to our national debt."...
...Senator Baucus: "Nothing is certain. But I think that this is a lot different than when President Clinton attempted health care reform. This time around costs are so high and second the major groups are on board."...
The President tried to reach out in bi-partisanship, but, for that effort there are Republicans such as Grassley that rather try to make a fool of Presient Obama for his trust placed with Senator Grassley. It is why I stated, Senator Grassley is incompetent. I defy any member of the Senate or Congress to come forward 'in good faith' to be an advocate and participant in bipartisanship only to laugh behind our President's back for acting in good faith in return. That isn't even politics. That is playing with the future of our nation. Grassley is incompetent. He might be a joker too, but, more than that he is a joke.
It's time for Obama to stop handwringing and put on the boxing gloves (click title to entry - thank you)
...It's beyond ironic that those rallying in rage at town hall meetings portray Obama as some malevo.lent tyrant driving a steamroller over them and their concerns. In fact, though, he's cripplingly starry-eyed about bipartisanship, dialogue and compromise when it's quite clear that his opponents see this as a weakness they can exploit....
Kyl is the Senate Minority Whip. It doesn't take any more words from the GOP to know they have every intention of ending a health care debate.
Secretary Sebelius mentioned the 'idea' of Health Care Insurance Co-ops as an alternative to a Government Option that was being proposed by the Senate. Well, she put faith in the "W"rong people. The Senators that were proposing such a 'competitive' option aren't going to anymore. They have withdrawn from any participation and are completely opposed to health care reform in the USA.
They don't care. It is better that the President, his staff, his cabinet and leadership in the House and Senate come to terms with the fact the only interest Republicans have in health care reform is to stall it as long as possible in hopes of defeating it.
I suggest the President ask Commerce and Treasury to convince any Democratic Senators and House members of the soundness of this measure while they linger in doubt today.
I'll tell you something, this House Bill is really 'dry' reading. From page 30 forward it spells out all the particulars in deployment of the bill after it is passed and how the administrative components will manifest. Sadly to some there is no additional salary to the members of any board. Traveling expenses, but, no additional salary to the one they already receive. In other words, the Surgeon General has to add this to his job description.
The bill requires 'plain language' by any insurance entities, it requires fairness in advertising and this is a good one, it demands timely payment of claims. There will definitively be data collection for the purpose of finding further efficiencies:
Page 43, Lines 19 through 24:
DATA COLLECTION.—The Commissioner shall collect data for purposes of carrying out the Commissioner’s duties, including for purposes of promoting quality and value, protecting consumers, and addressing disparities in health and health care and may share such data with the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Don't fool yourself to believe your insurance companies aren't already doing this for internal purposes such as finding greater profits. In addition, this is like the CIA and FBI sharing information. I don't know if that is a great analogy, but, at least the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the CDC won't be duplicating work. That is a savings all by itself. And the best part is that the data will be real and truthful, not derived statistically by a study group.
The bill provides for clear and concise language to be used that already exists within the USA health care industry. There is no trickery or anything up anyone's sleeve. The language in all documents between the government and any private entity or citizens themselves will reflect words already defined and used by the industry. The 'additional' definitions of the bill that does not exist in the industry today is due to the 'new' entity of that this bill produces.
The bill leaves open the ability of the Commission to consultation with any other entity, including attorneys general, NAIC (National Association of Insurance Commissioners, regulators, appropriate state agencies, etc. The new Commission will be fluid and blend with existing authority without undermining any other authority that already exists. The new entity for our health care reform will consult with any state or federal agency to apply the new standards without misinterpretation.
There will be the creation by appointment of a Qualified Health Benefits Plan Ombudsman. This basically is a consumer advocate that receives complaints and administrates them. Most every state has at least one, especially when it comes to dealing with issues of the elderly. This is just a different level of government that will do basically the same thing to be sure there is equity in the administration of the policy set forward by the bill. As a rule, Ombudsman are blind to government when it comes to advocacy for citizens. The Ombudsman will receive complaints from individuals and not the industry alone. The Ombudsman will answer directly to Congress in oversight by annual reports. That removes any conflict of interest in administering any health care insurance or care.
The way I see the Ombudsman is as a critical component in the first year or two of the new law until everyone gets used to it. The volume of its work will probably diminish as time goes by and there is better understanding of the law.
The House bill goes on to state this new law will not interfer with any previous government health insurance already existing. There is also a provision that laws regarding state laws and their application to any circumstance when providing a greater benefit. I have to mention here that it is my opinion, the passage of this bill help relieve some state budgets of their current health insurance initiatives. There is a good chance that 'charity care' or whatever other verbiage one wants to call it may very well be something of the past if people currently uninsured now find themselves insurable and a member of a plan. That will assist many states with budget issues they are facing today.
There are provisions that prevent discrimination. That is something never addressed by any entity anywhere in the government, except, at some state agencies that administer their own plans. But, that is a vital part of this bill. It will be the first time Americans cannot be discriminated against for any reason in applying for and using the health care industry in this country. It will literally be a brave new world when this bill is passed. Nice. I think that is very appropriate for the USA. Absolutely. It is a matter of civil rights.
There is also protection for Whistleblowers, too. That is always a good thing. No misbehaving by anyone.
This may be one of the big reasons Republicans simply cannot get their minds around reform:
Page 53, Lines 9 through 14
SEC. 154. CONSTRUCTION REGARDING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING.
Nothing in this division shall be construed to alter of supercede any statutory or other obligation to engage in collective bargaining over the terms and conditions of mployment related to health care.
See, if anyone can get Kyl to say 'Collective Bargaining' without fainting. If you do, get it on tape, it will be a once in a lifetime chance.
Page 53, Lines 21 and 22 start talking about 'Ensuring Value and Lower Premiums.' Wow.
Subtitle G—Early Investments
SEC. 161. ENSURING VALUE AND LOWER PREMIUMS.
Ready for this one. Sit down you won't believe this one. Seriously, sit down for this one. Ready? We get money back. This that flyin' amazing or what?
‘‘SEC. 2714. ENSURING VALUE AND LOWER PREMIUMS.
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Each health insurance issuer that offers health insurance coverage in the small or large group market shall provide that for any plan year in which the coverage has a medical loss ratio below a level specified by the Secretary, the issuer shall provide in a manner specified by the Secretary for rebates to enrollees of payment sufficient to meet such loss ratio.
Why don't I end there on a good note. I don't care how long it takes to get through this bill. It has its upside in actually reading this and writing about it. I think it is a historically great document. In sincerely do.
Until tomorrow.
230 miles per gallon.
Nice job !!!
It's over.
The struggle for the future is over.
Chevy gave it to us.
We now have sane transportation with no tropospheric insult.
What would have happened to the Volt if we didn't save GMC? Americans have every reason to be proud of their leadership in saving the American Auto Manufacturer. Look, we all knew it wasn't going to be cheap taking the country back from decades of corruption. This is the future of our children. I think it is worth it. Very worth it.
I don't want to hear about the $40,000 sticker price either. The vehicle will pay for itself in one year or less, on fuel savings alone.
Now, if we could just stop those stacks from emitting !
Iraq's Kurdish Government Negotiating Cabinet Posts; Kurdish Forces Accused of Torture (click here)
...Asayeesh Reported to Torture Prisoners
Chawder newspaper reported that according to a report published by the Ministry of Human Rights for April, May, and June 2009, the Kurdish secret police, Asayeesh, in Bardarash Sub-district used torture against four prisoners. In related news, Rozhnama newspaper reported that one prisoner was beaten by four police officers at the Sulaimanyah Police Station. Also Rudaw newspaper reported that the Youth Empowerment Organization published a report, in which it said that police and Asayeesh are still using torture against prisoners in many forms from assault to rape. The report added that human trafficking is present in Kurdistan Region....
These are local crimes. This has nothing to do with war. The local authorities have to solve their own problems. It would appear as though the Iraqis have many 'rights' organizations policing their government and prisons.
Regional tensions are not new.
Turkey marks 25 years of Kurd rebellion (click here)
By CHRISTOPHER TORCHIA (AP) – 3 days ago
ISTANBUL — Turkey marked 25 years Saturday since the first Kurdish rebel attacks, with political leaders calling for reconciliation, though the government has yet to offer a new plan for ending the conflict.
Fighting has died down since the 1990s, but the Kurdish conflict remains a drag on Turkey's drive to modernity and an obstacle to the country's joining the European Union.
The fighting began on Aug. 15, 1984, when separatist rebels attacked police and military units in the southeastern towns of Eruh and Semdinli before fleeing to bases in northern Iraq.
Since then, some 40,000 people have died as the rebels seek autonomy for Kurds concentrated in Turkey's southeast.
Kurdish activists held a festival Saturday in Eruh, where extra security forces were deployed.
Speakers appealed for peace, and crowds listened to traditional music at an open-air concert.
Parliament Speaker Mehmet Ali Sahin called for reconciliation with the country's Kurdish minority.
"I see a great advantage in putting aside all prejudice," he said on Turkish television, dismissing nationalist claims that allowing Kurds to have more rights would "divide Turkey."...
Arrest of US hikers mars Iraqi Kurd tourism boom (click here)
By YAHYA BARZANJI and ERIC TALMADGE (AP) – Aug 4, 2009
SULAIMANIYAH, Iraq — In Iraq's Kurdish region where three American hikers fell into Iranian custody, the attractions for intrepid hikers and travelers are many. Visitors shop for crystal glasses and enjoy long walks in lush mountain resorts renowned for their pistachio groves.
Safety is a big selling point — tourism promoters boast not a single foreigner has been killed or kidnapped since 2003.
Still, in a region without a well-marked border, going off the beaten path in Kurdistan is very risky — as the three Americans discovered after they apparently wandered down the wrong side of a mountain last week and were taken into custody by Iranian border guards. Other than a frantic call to one of their friends, they haven't been heard from since.
The three — Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd and Joshua Fattal — were under arrest in Iran on Tuesday for illegally entering the country, and an Iranian lawmaker said that authorities were deciding whether to accuse them of spying. The U.S. State Department rejected the allegation, and relatives and Kurdish officials said they were merely hikers who got lost. The case is the latest source of friction with Washington at a time of political crisis in Iran.
Kurdish tourism officials are trying to keep the incident from drying up a budding business with the West....
The upcoming Presidential elections favor four candidates, the incumbent Hamid Karzi, the former Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah, the former Finance Minister Ashraf Ghani and a populous favorite Ramazan Bashardorf. None of these candidates are pro-Taliban. The disruption of the elections serve only one purpose and that is to undermine any attempts at democracy for the Afghan people.
"The Christian Science Monitor" makes this observation:
High voter turnout this spring (click title to entry - thank you)
Mr. Hamidzada pointed out that large numbers of Afghans this spring defied the dangers and showed up to register for the elections.
"We have every reason to believe they will show up on election day and will not be deterred," he said. He added that he sees a positive side to the challenges: "This will give us an opportunity to demonstrate our resolve."
Like the car bombing Saturday at the ISAF headquarters, Tuesday's car bomb appeared to be quite large, knocking out windows in a 1,000-foot radius. The bomb struck within hundreds of feet of a British military compound, and also near the Independent Election Commission, the United Nations, and a US military base.
Eyewitnesses described a Toyota Corolla ramming into a convoy of foreign troops.
"I fell unconscious for a moment. When I woke up ... I saw people lying in the road and I tried to help," says Mohammad Ullah. "Later ISAF arrived there and surrounded the area and wouldn't allow anybody inside."
An hour after the blast, ISAF continued to keep out even Afghan Army and police units. At the scene of Saturday's blast, ISAF forces turned away the Kabul police chief in charge of security for elections....
The Monitor points to the fact there were similar dangers in other elections and the people of Afghanistan came to vote regardless the dangers they faced. Basically, the tactics of The Taliban don't work. They have to know they don't work, so why persist? I makes no sense.
Afghanistan has known nothing but war for a very long time. The people of that nation have been visited by every international criminal that is still alive to hide in the mountains and plot against civilization. They have hosted warlords of Poppy cultures, so another turbulent election cycle is nothing for them. Unfortunately, it is nothing for them. I admire these people. I always have. They live their lives in contentment of serving tea to passing guests and bringing to their family new children to love and hold in their arms until tragedy takes them away.
Nothing will deter the vote tomorrow.
And tomorrow services to be a historic Presidential election. For the first time since the inception of the new republic there may very well be a viable challenge to the current President Karzai. All four candidates are worthy, all are concerned for the people of Afghanistan, but, as in any multi-candidate election there will more than likely be a split vote propelling the top two candidates to a final vote later this year.
This may be the year President Karzai will not achieve more than 50% of the vote and that is the sincere challenge of the Afghan people tomorrow. Will they elect a steadfast figure for another five years, or will they elect the two most admired candidates in the country to a run off and still yet another democratically free election in Afghanistan?
I look forward to the results once again of the 'people of conscience' of Afghanistan. It will prove to be an exciting day with promise of more elections or a return to steadfastness of leadership. I wish them all good luck in achieving yet another democratic election with peril so few other democracies have to face. I admire them beyond their knowledge. I look forward to the outcome.
Since the USA has returned to the battlefield in Afghanistan there has been increasing stability of the region, including Pakistan.
COST-SHARING.—The term ‘‘cost-sharing’’ includes deductibles, coinsurance, copayments, and similar charges but does not include premiums or any network payment differential for covered services or spending for non-covered services.
So that is the limit on any 'fees' a health insurance company can apply to an insurance policy. It is important to address cost sharing because it limits today and in the future the extent a subscriber will have to pay. It makes it reliable. Cost sharing is necessary to contain the price of health insurance, but, also to deter abuse. So, these are additions to the cost of the health insurance coverage itself, such as deducibles and copayments no different than most policies that are employer based today. The primary differences are the limits on cost and the lack of cost of preventive care. Most folks won't notice any changes in their coverage or costs except for the lack of charges on preventive care and new limits on their copay or deductible responsiblity. Most folks will want to keep their current coverage, but, with greater assurances that costs will not increase in the future.
I wanted to be sure I mentioned that and didn't gloss over it. I think it is important for Americans to realize their legislators are making definitive moves to construct a health insurance reform that is realistic and not idealistic. The 'tone' among the 'angry' in the country is that this is 'another' big Democratic spending bill.
You know, they are trying to 'sterotype' the legislation as a big spending program that will cause all kinds of problems to the country's deficit. That is not the case. The bill sets limits on what insurance companies can expect from their members in the way of 'out of pocket' expenses. But, the bill also holds accountable Americans to carry their own weight in subscription fees and copays, etc. up to the limit the law allows.
The legislation for Health Care Reform is not a give away program, however, it will take care of people and allow for expenses beyond the 'preventive medicine' that is to be without cost. It allows for reasonable cost sharing of services that are needed if diagnosis require same. The legislation is no joke and should be taken seriously. We need this in this country to 'STABLIZE' a grossly unstable industry that robs people of their right to treatment to enhance their profitability. This bill will require health insurance corporations to treat their members with respect and not as if they were chattel.
With that reality comes the understanding, at least from my perspective, as to why there needs to be a public option. We don't want health insurance companies forming cartels and acting in unison against the citizens of the USA so to effect increased profits. A Public Option hinders such exploitation and keeps costs reasonable.Changing the subject just a bit is the 'idea' of portability of health insurance coverage. No. I don't see that any health insurance company should have a corner on the market. As things stand now, each state has their own companies that provide coverage to people. That is not a bad idea. The differences will become more homogenous with the passage of federal laws, but, there is no reason for any one company to hold the entire market in one state while conducting business in all fifty. That will remove competition. Not only that, but, if everyone bought health insurance from a South Carolina company it would reek havoc with economies on other states where companies would be closing their doors and laying off workers. The entire delivery system would be bogged down by only a few insurance carriers. I do not believe in cross border insurance reform. I don't believe portability is a good idea. It will slow down care and damage economies. Just for the record.
I also wanted to mention this 'thing' the press has against Hillary speaking her mind while in Africa. I thought she was great. It was a demanding schedule, but, I simply loved her remarks about the 2000 Election in the USA. Is there anyone besides Walker Bush and Jeb that can state it was a fair election? I mean really. The Secretary of State of Florida, what's her name, disenfranchised thousands of black voters before the elections. She did it deliberately to effect the vote in favor of Walker Bush. Somebody had to say it. I loved the moment Hillary took to 'example' the way a democracy can be derailed by corruption at the highest levels of government. I love that Al Franken is a Senator, too. You know what I mean?
Well. That is all the press needed to hear and they were off and running. It went like this, "Obama is conceding there is no public option that will be a part of the health insurance reform bill."
"W"rong !!!!!!! Everyone got it "W"rong. But, then I really thought media was interested in the truth, not the manipulation of the truth. I forgot they struggle with their own inability to achieve 'ratings' without highly exploitive behavior. There was not one media service yesterday or today that didn't fail at bringing the 'real' message to the American people. Not one. I've lost complete faith in them.
What President Obama was saying is that the Public Option is only a small piece of this legislation. He stated the words, 'with or without' as a point of discussion to the degree the public option was a piece of the legislation. He never, ever implied there would be no public option in the legislation. He was attempting to illustrate how 'over blown' the concern of that aspect of the legislation was being portrayed in the media and otherwise. He never stated he was waving a flag of surrender.With that said, I need to continue to review the bill that is tenatively written by the House of Representative.
There is one thing I believe about the health insurance/care legislation now being written by the House and Senate, and that it is vitally important to achieve a bill to protect the people of the USA. If one more year goes by there will never be legislation written and that would be tragic for this country. The media circus alone is doing incredible damage to a vital part of the American Landscape. We need health care legislation and we need it now. I do believe there are powerful people that want to stall this long enough to stop it. We must be doing something right.
