In all honesty....no, I wouldn't know how to write a couple of paragraphs on it...i'm not a writer and it's hard to explain. Does that mean it's not worth looking into for yourself?
...
Oh... I already know about the Health Czar Nancy DeParle who is working under Health and Human Services secretary Sebelius. I read HR 3200 (including Sec. 1233, the so-called 'Death Panel' section... which mentions nothing about Death Panels) because i wanted to read the actual text of the House Bill without the outside interpretations of a second party.
I just want your take on the subject. Your claim was that the Czars (in this case, DeParle) was going to do 'something' where I would not be receiving any assistance when I turn 65. I just want to hear... basically... WHAT is it that makes you feel this is going to happen. It was something Glen Beck said... well, what did he say that makes you agreee with him? Are they going to kill me and turn me into Soylent Green? Ship me off to some Island of Old People? What?
...
My guess is you watched Glen Beck... and you just agree with him... even though you aren't even sure what he is saying. He may have said things in the past that you agree with... but, on this... I'm guessing... you just are sure.
That is a total guess on my part... not claiming it's true... just trying to debunk yet another unsubstantiated claim in this whole Health Care debate.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
I'm not against health care reform, I know something needs to be done. But I don't think the government should run it. I feel that somebody should be able to walk into an insurance company and buy into a large group which would make it much more affordable for the average person. I think that's what the Public Options is.....isn't it? This post wasn't strictly based on health care. Look at people collecting unemployment, they could go look for work but even if they find a little bit of work it doesn;t extend there benifits if they start collecting partial unemployment......so where is the incentive for them to look? And how come people on well fare don't get drug screened? I don't need my taxes supporting someones bad habit.
Feedback effects. Improve circumstances for some, improve circumstances for everyone. Basic economics: don't worry about the size of your piece of pie, make the pie bigger. If you sell bananas, you want as many people as possible to be able to buy bananas. Capitalism is not Malthusian.
DeParle is recorded on video saying that it is in americas best interest to care for somebody ill thats 35 when somebody ill and elderly would be a waste of government money. I don't believe everything Beck says, but in the last week he has been on this issue and he has ALOT of video footage. Don't know where or how he got it but in any case, video tape does not lie.
Feedback effects. Improve circumstances for some, improve circumstances for everyone. Basic economics: don't worry about the size of your piece of pie, make the pie bigger. If you sell bananas, you want as many people as possible to be able to buy bananas. Capitalism is not Malthusian.
In all honesty....no, I wouldn't know how to write a couple of paragraphs on it...i'm not a writer and it's hard to explain. Does that mean it's not worth looking into for yourself?
...
Oh... I already know about the Health Czar Nancy DeParle who is working under Health and Human Services secretary Sebelius. I read HR 3200 (including Sec. 1233, the so-called 'Death Panel' section... which mentions nothing about Death Panels) because i wanted to read the actual text of the House Bill without the outside interpretations of a second party.
I just want your take on the subject. Your claim was that the Czars (in this case, DeParle) was going to do 'something' where I would not be receiving any assistance when I turn 65. I just want to hear... basically... WHAT is it that makes you feel this is going to happen. It was something Glen Beck said... well, what did he say that makes you agreee with him? Are they going to kill me and turn me into Soylent Green? Ship me off to some Island of Old People? What?
...
My guess is you watched Glen Beck... and you just agree with him... even though you aren't even sure what he is saying. He may have said things in the past that you agree with... but, on this... I'm guessing... you just are sure.
That is a total guess on my part... not claiming it's true... just trying to debunk yet another unsubstantiated claim in this whole Health Care debate.
how do you read actual texts of the house bills? I am very interested in this. And if they are that easy to read, how come congress doesn't read them?
I don't care which party is in office! How long now has the government been playing bullshit games with everybody? In my opinion, since Kennedy assasination. It's time we stop labeling ourselves as democrat or republican and just start labeling ourselves as American Citizens.....WE THE PEOPLE!!!!We deserve to know what is going on in the White House, we deserve to know what decisions are being made, and we deserve to have a bill that costs billions of dollars read before they pass it. I'm tired of being treated like a bunch of herded cattle.
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 1861 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x) is amended--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(A) in subsection (s)(2)--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(i) by striking ‘and’ at the end of subparagraph (DD);CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(ii) by adding ‘and’ at the end of subparagraph (EE); andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(iii) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(FF) advance care planning consultation (as defined in subsection (hhh)(1));’; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(B) by adding at the end the following new subsection:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘Advance Care Planning Consultation
16
‘(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term ‘advance care planning consultation’ means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such consultation shall include the following:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(A) An explanation by the practitioner of advance care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) An explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families with advance care planning, including the national toll-free hotline, the advance care planning clearinghouses, and State legal service organizations (including those funded through the Older Americans Act of 1965).CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
15
‘(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(F)(i) Subject to clause (ii), an explanation of orders regarding life sustaining treatment or similar orders, which shall include--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(I) the reasons why the development of such an order is beneficial to the individual and the individual’s family and the reasons why such an order should be updated periodically as the health of the individual changes;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(II) the information needed for an individual or legal surrogate to make informed decisions regarding the completion of such an order; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(III) the identification of resources that an individual may use to determine the requirements of the State in which such individual resides so that the treatment wishes of that individual will be carried out if the individual is unable to communicate those wishes, including requirements regarding the designation of a surrogate decisionmaker (also known as a health care proxy).CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(ii) The Secretary shall limit the requirement for explanations under clause (i) to consultations furnished in a State--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(I) in which all legal barriers have been addressed for enabling orders for life sustaining treatment to constitute a set of medical orders respected across all care settings; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(II) that has in effect a program for orders for life sustaining treatment described in clause (iii).CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining treatment for a States described in this clause is a program that--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(I) ensures such orders are standardized and uniquely identifiable throughout the State;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(II) distributes or makes accessible such orders to physicians and other health professionals that (acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law) may sign orders for life sustaining treatment;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(III) provides training for health care professionals across the continuum of care about the goals and use of orders for life sustaining treatment; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(IV) is guided by a coalition of stakeholders includes representatives from emergency medical services, emergency department physicians or nurses, state long-term care association, state medical association, state surveyors, agency responsible for senior services, state department of health, state hospital association, home health association, state bar association, and state hospice association.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(2) A practitioner described in this paragraph is--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(A) a physician (as defined in subsection (r)(1)); andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) a nurse practitioner or physician’s assistant who has the authority under State law to sign orders for life sustaining treatments.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(3)(A) An initial preventive physical examination under subsection (WW), including any related discussion during such examination, shall not be considered an advance care planning consultation for purposes of applying the 5-year limitation under paragraph (1).CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) An advance care planning consultation with respect to an individual may be conducted more frequently than provided under paragraph (1) if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual, including diagnosis of a chronic, progressive, life-limiting disease, a life-threatening or terminal diagnosis or life-threatening injury, or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility (as defined by the Secretary), or a hospice program.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
3
‘(4) A consultation under this subsection may include the formulation of an order regarding life sustaining treatment or a similar order.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(5)(A) For purposes of this section, the term ‘order regarding life sustaining treatment’ means, with respect to an individual, an actionable medical order relating to the treatment of that individual that--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
20
‘(i) is signed and dated by a physician (as defined in subsection (r)(1)) or another health care professional (as specified by the Secretary and who is acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law in signing such an order, including a nurse practitioner or physician assistant) and is in a form that permits it to stay with the individual and be followed by health care professionals and providers across the continuum of care;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
6
‘(ii) effectively communicates the individual’s preferences regarding life sustaining treatment, including an indication of the treatment and care desired by the individual;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(iii) is uniquely identifiable and standardized within a given locality, region, or State (as identified by the Secretary); andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
1
‘(iv) may incorporate any advance directive (as defined in section 1866(f)(3)) if executed by the individual.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) The level of treatment indicated under subparagraph (A)(ii) may range from an indication for full treatment to an indication to limit some or all or specified interventions. Such indicated levels of treatment may include indications respecting, among other items--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(i) the intensity of medical intervention if the patient is pulse less, apneic, or has serious cardiac or pulmonary problems;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(ii) the individual’s desire regarding transfer to a hospital or remaining at the current care setting;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(iii) the use of antibiotics; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(iv) the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration.’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(2) PAYMENT- Section 1848(j)(3) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-4(j)(3)) is amended by inserting ‘(2)(FF),’ after ‘(2)(EE),’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(3) FREQUENCY LIMITATION- Section 1862(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395y(a)) is amended--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(A) in paragraph (1)--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(i) in subparagraph (N), by striking ‘and’ at the end;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(ii) in subparagraph (O) by striking the semicolon at the end and inserting ‘, and’; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(iii) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(P) in the case of advance care planning consultations (as defined in section 1861(hhh)(1)), which are performed more frequently than is covered under such section;’; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(B) in paragraph (7), by striking ‘or (K)’ and inserting ‘(K), or (P)’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(4) EFFECTIVE DATE- The amendments made by this subsection shall apply to consultations furnished on or after January 1, 2011.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(b) Expansion of Physician Quality Reporting Initiative for End of Life Care-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) Physician’S QUALITY REPORTING INITIATIVE- Section 1848(k)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-4(k)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
10
‘(A) IN GENERAL- For purposes of reporting data on quality measures for covered professional services furnished during 2011 and any subsequent year, to the extent that measures are available, the Secretary shall include quality measures on end of life care and advanced care planning that have been adopted or endorsed by a consensus-based organization, if appropriate. Such measures shall measure both the creation of and adherence to orders for life-sustaining treatment.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
1
‘(B) PROPOSED SET OF MEASURES- The Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register proposed quality measures on end of life care and advanced care planning that the Secretary determines are described in subparagraph (A) and would be appropriate for eligible professionals to use to submit data to the Secretary. The Secretary shall provide for a period of public comment on such set of measures before finalizing such proposed measures.’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(c) Inclusion of Information in Medicare & You Handbook-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) MEDICARE & YOU HANDBOOK-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(A) IN GENERAL- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall update the online version of the Medicare & You Handbook to include the following:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(i) An explanation of advance care planning and advance directives, including--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(I) living wills;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(II) durable power of attorney;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(III) orders of life-sustaining treatment; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(IV) health care proxies.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(ii) A description of Federal and State resources available to assist individuals and their families with advance care planning and advance directives, including--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(I) available State legal service organizations to assist individuals with advance care planning, including those organizations that receive funding pursuant to the Older Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 93001 et seq.);CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(II) website links or addresses for State-specific advance directive forms; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(III) any additional information, as determined by the Secretary.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(B) UPDATE OF PAPER AND SUBSEQUENT VERSIONS- The Secretary shall include the information described in subparagraph (A) in all paper and electronic versions of the Medicare & You Handbook that are published on or after the date that is 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act.
I'm not against health care reform, I know something needs to be done. But I don't think the government should run it. I feel that somebody should be able to walk into an insurance company and buy into a large group which would make it much more affordable for the average person. I think that's what the Public Options is.....isn't it? This post wasn't strictly based on health care. Look at people collecting unemployment, they could go look for work but even if they find a little bit of work it doesn;t extend there benifits if they start collecting partial unemployment......so where is the incentive for them to look? And how come people on well fare don't get drug screened? I don't need my taxes supporting someones bad habit.
...
Actually... think of the Public Option as the Post Office. It is a government run service that will take a birthday card that you grandmother in Boston wrote and fly it in an airplane to eventually drop it in your mailbox in Cypress, Califonia... for 48 cents.
Now, she can CHOOSE to have in in your mailbox the next day... by going to UPS or FedEx. The Choices are out there and it's up to you to decide.
Now.. if there was no post office.. and there was just UPS or FedEx... they will charge your grandmother more than 48 cents to delive that birthday card, right? The Public option of the Post Office makes it affordable for her to send that card and it does not drive UPS or FedEx into bankruptcy.
...
***Disclaimer: I am not saying the Post Office is a well tuned machine... it is JUST AN EXAMPLE.***
...
Now... as for Unemployment. You cannot collect unemployment if you haven't paid into it. What do you want to do to those auto workers who got laid off... not just the Union guys.. the Free Enterprise Personel, such as the secretarys, data services and low level supervisors? Tell them, 'Get a fucking job'... when they worked 30 years for the company? Only working people are worth caring for? What?
Finally... Welfare. The easiest people to pick on are the weakest in our society. Sure, there is fraud in Welfare. There is fraud in auto insurance... should we discard the auto insurance companies? I'm all for prosecuting the cheaters and thieves... but, there are families dependent on welfare. I don't mind helping my fellow Americans that are down on their luck... for whatever reasons they got their. All i see is they need a hand, so i offer mine. I can't predict the future... I may be in their shoes someday. I'm just hoping someone offers me a hand up instead of a spit in the face.
...
But, that's just me.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 1861 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x) is amended--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(A) in subsection (s)(2)--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(i) by striking ‘and’ at the end of subparagraph (DD);CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(ii) by adding ‘and’ at the end of subparagraph (EE); andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(iii) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(FF) advance care planning consultation (as defined in subsection (hhh)(1));’; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(B) by adding at the end the following new subsection:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘Advance Care Planning Consultation
16
‘(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term ‘advance care planning consultation’ means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such consultation shall include the following:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(A) An explanation by the practitioner of advance care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) An explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families with advance care planning, including the national toll-free hotline, the advance care planning clearinghouses, and State legal service organizations (including those funded through the Older Americans Act of 1965).CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
15
‘(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(F)(i) Subject to clause (ii), an explanation of orders regarding life sustaining treatment or similar orders, which shall include--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(I) the reasons why the development of such an order is beneficial to the individual and the individual’s family and the reasons why such an order should be updated periodically as the health of the individual changes;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(II) the information needed for an individual or legal surrogate to make informed decisions regarding the completion of such an order; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(III) the identification of resources that an individual may use to determine the requirements of the State in which such individual resides so that the treatment wishes of that individual will be carried out if the individual is unable to communicate those wishes, including requirements regarding the designation of a surrogate decisionmaker (also known as a health care proxy).CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(ii) The Secretary shall limit the requirement for explanations under clause (i) to consultations furnished in a State--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(I) in which all legal barriers have been addressed for enabling orders for life sustaining treatment to constitute a set of medical orders respected across all care settings; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(II) that has in effect a program for orders for life sustaining treatment described in clause (iii).CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining treatment for a States described in this clause is a program that--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(I) ensures such orders are standardized and uniquely identifiable throughout the State;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(II) distributes or makes accessible such orders to physicians and other health professionals that (acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law) may sign orders for life sustaining treatment;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(III) provides training for health care professionals across the continuum of care about the goals and use of orders for life sustaining treatment; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(IV) is guided by a coalition of stakeholders includes representatives from emergency medical services, emergency department physicians or nurses, state long-term care association, state medical association, state surveyors, agency responsible for senior services, state department of health, state hospital association, home health association, state bar association, and state hospice association.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(2) A practitioner described in this paragraph is--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(A) a physician (as defined in subsection (r)(1)); andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) a nurse practitioner or physician’s assistant who has the authority under State law to sign orders for life sustaining treatments.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(3)(A) An initial preventive physical examination under subsection (WW), including any related discussion during such examination, shall not be considered an advance care planning consultation for purposes of applying the 5-year limitation under paragraph (1).CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) An advance care planning consultation with respect to an individual may be conducted more frequently than provided under paragraph (1) if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual, including diagnosis of a chronic, progressive, life-limiting disease, a life-threatening or terminal diagnosis or life-threatening injury, or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility (as defined by the Secretary), or a hospice program.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
3
‘(4) A consultation under this subsection may include the formulation of an order regarding life sustaining treatment or a similar order.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(5)(A) For purposes of this section, the term ‘order regarding life sustaining treatment’ means, with respect to an individual, an actionable medical order relating to the treatment of that individual that--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
20
‘(i) is signed and dated by a physician (as defined in subsection (r)(1)) or another health care professional (as specified by the Secretary and who is acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law in signing such an order, including a nurse practitioner or physician assistant) and is in a form that permits it to stay with the individual and be followed by health care professionals and providers across the continuum of care;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
6
‘(ii) effectively communicates the individual’s preferences regarding life sustaining treatment, including an indication of the treatment and care desired by the individual;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(iii) is uniquely identifiable and standardized within a given locality, region, or State (as identified by the Secretary); andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
1
‘(iv) may incorporate any advance directive (as defined in section 1866(f)(3)) if executed by the individual.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) The level of treatment indicated under subparagraph (A)(ii) may range from an indication for full treatment to an indication to limit some or all or specified interventions. Such indicated levels of treatment may include indications respecting, among other items--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(i) the intensity of medical intervention if the patient is pulse less, apneic, or has serious cardiac or pulmonary problems;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(ii) the individual’s desire regarding transfer to a hospital or remaining at the current care setting;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(iii) the use of antibiotics; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(iv) the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration.’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(2) PAYMENT- Section 1848(j)(3) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-4(j)(3)) is amended by inserting ‘(2)(FF),’ after ‘(2)(EE),’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(3) FREQUENCY LIMITATION- Section 1862(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395y(a)) is amended--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(A) in paragraph (1)--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(i) in subparagraph (N), by striking ‘and’ at the end;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(ii) in subparagraph (O) by striking the semicolon at the end and inserting ‘, and’; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(iii) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(P) in the case of advance care planning consultations (as defined in section 1861(hhh)(1)), which are performed more frequently than is covered under such section;’; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(B) in paragraph (7), by striking ‘or (K)’ and inserting ‘(K), or (P)’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(4) EFFECTIVE DATE- The amendments made by this subsection shall apply to consultations furnished on or after January 1, 2011.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(b) Expansion of Physician Quality Reporting Initiative for End of Life Care-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) Physician’S QUALITY REPORTING INITIATIVE- Section 1848(k)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-4(k)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
10
‘(A) IN GENERAL- For purposes of reporting data on quality measures for covered professional services furnished during 2011 and any subsequent year, to the extent that measures are available, the Secretary shall include quality measures on end of life care and advanced care planning that have been adopted or endorsed by a consensus-based organization, if appropriate. Such measures shall measure both the creation of and adherence to orders for life-sustaining treatment.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
1
‘(B) PROPOSED SET OF MEASURES- The Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register proposed quality measures on end of life care and advanced care planning that the Secretary determines are described in subparagraph (A) and would be appropriate for eligible professionals to use to submit data to the Secretary. The Secretary shall provide for a period of public comment on such set of measures before finalizing such proposed measures.’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(c) Inclusion of Information in Medicare & You Handbook-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) MEDICARE & YOU HANDBOOK-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(A) IN GENERAL- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall update the online version of the Medicare & You Handbook to include the following:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(i) An explanation of advance care planning and advance directives, including--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(I) living wills;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(II) durable power of attorney;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(III) orders of life-sustaining treatment; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(IV) health care proxies.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(ii) A description of Federal and State resources available to assist individuals and their families with advance care planning and advance directives, including--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(I) available State legal service organizations to assist individuals with advance care planning, including those organizations that receive funding pursuant to the Older Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 93001 et seq.);CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(II) website links or addresses for State-specific advance directive forms; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(III) any additional information, as determined by the Secretary.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(B) UPDATE OF PAPER AND SUBSEQUENT VERSIONS- The Secretary shall include the information described in subparagraph (A) in all paper and electronic versions of the Medicare & You Handbook that are published on or after the date that is 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Now I see why congress doesn't read them...alll a bunch of jibba jabba
DeParle is recorded on video saying that it is in americas best interest to care for somebody ill thats 35 when somebody ill and elderly would be a waste of government money. I don't believe everything Beck says, but in the last week he has been on this issue and he has ALOT of video footage. Don't know where or how he got it but in any case, video tape does not lie.
...
I need a reference on that one or the full text of the comment and the speech or conversation it was taken from so i can see the context.
All things being equal... do you disgree?
or... does it matter if the 35 year old is a surgeon and the 65 year old a retired bus driver...
or... the 35 year old is a crack addict and the 65 year old is a college professor?
...
I'm not saying, either way.
But, the elderly can still have the health care if their insurance company's 'Death Panel' is willing to pay for the treatment. If not the insurance... what about the kids. Wouldn't you go broke to extend the life of your grandparents? Your parents?
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
And oh ya,when we're 65 do you really think that government health care is really going to care about you under this new reform?...NOT! Have you heard of the Czars?
...
No, i haven't. Please, explain the Czars to me.
well, I know you probably don't like Beck but give him a listen with an open mind. It can't hurt.
Feedback effects. Improve circumstances for some, improve circumstances for everyone. Basic economics: don't worry about the size of your piece of pie, make the pie bigger. If you sell bananas, you want as many people as possible to be able to buy bananas. Capitalism is not Malthusian.
What is Malthusian?
Thomas Malthus was a sort of population economist in the 18th and 19th century who theorized that there was a fixed amount of food in the world and if you kept making social improvements and helped enough people to be able to eat, they would take the share of food away from other people and the population would die out. Bascially that social development is a zero sum game. Most scholars do not subscribe to Malthusianism anymore, because it fails to account for technological advances, etc. It sort of applies to environmental sustainability theory, but it doesn't apply to social/development economics anymore: making some people better off does not necessarily make everyone else worse off, and in fact, due to feedback effects, can actually make everyone better off.
still can't find any credible links on health czars. looks like glen beck is the only one looking into this, but then again he is the only one looking into communist artwork in the rockefeller center......this is a pulitzer prize waiting to happen.... :roll:
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the ...gover......nment does not first take from someone else. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
And the president took for granted, writing checks on others pay!!!!!
true, but the current legislation has had wages stagnate since the 70s, has nearly outlawed unions, has seen exponential increases in CEO and manager pay, has put us all back into wealth levels not seen since the 1920's.
however the system got to this point.......what its doing is funneling wealth to the top. the rich have been getting richer and the poor poorer.....due in large part to the heavy corporate influence on gov't policy.....
a little legislation to UNDO some of that damage is necessary, if a living wage is of any concern.
I, for one, probably wouldn't mind paying more taxes to help people if so much of the taxes I already pay were not being spent on cigarettes, big screen TVs, and other wasteful things through our current "government programs". I was behind someone the other day buying a Ribeye steak with a Lonestar card...If I were living off someone else's money, I think I would feel a little obligated to stretch the dollar as far as I could instead of buying things that will get me through 1 meal! It's not that I don't want to pay taxes to help people that need the help, I just don't want to pay taxes for people that don't even try to help themselves.
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the ...gover......nment does not first take from someone else. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
And the president took for granted, writing checks on others pay!!!!!
...
You heard this on talk radio... didn't you?
I was driving back from the Home Depot yesterday and heard an on air celebrity utter the same exact words.
The words are not your, rather those of Adrian Rodgers... a conservative and pastor of the Souther Baptist Ministries megachurch.
And the actual quote is this...
"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the industrious out of it. You don't multiply wealth by dividing it. Government cannot give anything to anybody that it doesn't first take from somebody else. Whenever somebody receives something without working for it, somebody else has to work for it without receiving. The worst thing that can happen to a nation is for half of the people to get the idea they don't have to work because somebody else will work for them, and the other half to get the idea that it does no good to work because they don't get to enjoy the fruit of their labor."
...
So... shouldn't the title of this post be:
"Just Wanted to Pass On This Quote..."
because you didn't say these thing... you heard/read them.
...
I'm kind of a stickler for the Truth.
Post edited by Cosmo on
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
I, for one, probably wouldn't mind paying more taxes to help people if so much of the taxes I already pay were not being spent on cigarettes, big screen TVs, and other wasteful things through our current "government programs". I was behind someone the other day buying a Ribeye steak with a Lonestar card...If I were living off someone else's money, I think I would feel a little obligated to stretch the dollar as far as I could instead of buying things that will get me through 1 meal! It's not that I don't want to pay taxes to help people that need the help, I just don't want to pay taxes for people that don't even try to help themselves.
That's what bothers me as well... A couple of months ago I was behind a young couple with 2 kids checking out at the grocery store. The vast majority of their food was junk... multiple bags of doritos and other snacks, frozen pizzas, bags of french fries, candy, ice cream etc... and they paid with a food stamp card...
I was just thinking that if they always ate like that, of all the upcoming health problems that they and their kids will develop because of poor nutrition that our tax dollars will have to pay for.
Public assistance is a great thing, and I have no problem with helping people who have landed on tough times or have some sort of health issue preventing them from working, but there are so many people out there who abuse the system, and view it as something to rely on, instead of something to help them get back on their feet.
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
I, for one, probably wouldn't mind paying more taxes to help people if so much of the taxes I already pay were not being spent on cigarettes, big screen TVs, and other wasteful things through our current "government programs". I was behind someone the other day buying a Ribeye steak with a Lonestar card...If I were living off someone else's money, I think I would feel a little obligated to stretch the dollar as far as I could instead of buying things that will get me through 1 meal! It's not that I don't want to pay taxes to help people that need the help, I just don't want to pay taxes for people that don't even try to help themselves.
That's what bothers me as well... A couple of months ago I was behind a young couple with 2 kids checking out at the grocery store. The vast majority of their food was junk... multiple bags of doritos and other snacks, frozen pizzas, bags of french fries, candy, ice cream etc... and they paid with a food stamp card...
I was just thinking that if they always ate like that, of all the upcoming health problems that they and their kids will develop because of poor nutrition that our tax dollars will have to pay for.
Public assistance is a great thing, and I have no problem with helping people who have landed on tough times or have some sort of health issue preventing them from working, but there are so many people out there who abuse the system, and view it as something to rely on, instead of something to help them get back on their feet.
...
The thing is... we don't know.
A possible explanation would be that they both worked multiple minimum wage jobs and don't have the time to cook healthy meals... hell.. i have one well paying job and I eat crap like that. Last night, I had a frozen pizza from Costco, some string cheese and a Hagen Daas bar.
We really don't know what their situation is... unless we ask. But, we don't ask.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the ...gover......nment does not first take from someone else. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
And the president took for granted, writing checks on others pay!!!!!
...
You heard this on talk radio... didn't you?
I was driving back from the Home Depot yesterday and heard an on air celebrity utter the same exact words.
The words are not your, rather those of Adrian Rodgers... a conservative and pastor of the Souther Baptist Ministries megachurch.
And the actual quote is this...
"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the industrious out of it. You don't multiply wealth by dividing it. Government cannot give anything to anybody that it doesn't first take from somebody else. Whenever somebody receives something without working for it, somebody else has to work for it without receiving. The worst thing that can happen to a nation is for half of the people to get the idea they don't have to work because somebody else will work for them, and the other half to get the idea that it does no good to work because they don't get to enjoy the fruit of their labor."
...
So... shouldn't the title of this post be:
"Just Wanted to Pass On This Quote..."
because you didn't say these thing... you heard/read them.
...
I'm kind of a stickler for the Truth.
Rock it, Cosmo....the truth shall set you free.
All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a thousand enemies, and whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first they must catch you, digger, listener, runner, prince with the swift warning. Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be destroyed.
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the ...gover......nment does not first take from someone else. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
And the president took for granted, writing checks on others pay!!!!!
...
You heard this on talk radio... didn't you?
I was driving back from the Home Depot yesterday and heard an on air celebrity utter the same exact words.
The words are not your, rather those of Adrian Rodgers... a conservative and pastor of the Souther Baptist Ministries megachurch.
And the actual quote is this...
"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the industrious out of it. You don't multiply wealth by dividing it. Government cannot give anything to anybody that it doesn't first take from somebody else. Whenever somebody receives something without working for it, somebody else has to work for it without receiving. The worst thing that can happen to a nation is for half of the people to get the idea they don't have to work because somebody else will work for them, and the other half to get the idea that it does no good to work because they don't get to enjoy the fruit of their labor."
...
So... shouldn't the title of this post be:
"Just Wanted to Pass On This Quote..."
because you didn't say these thing... you heard/read them.
...
I'm kind of a stickler for the Truth.
ouch.....good find cosmo. its gotta suck when you get busted like that...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
ouch.....good find cosmo. its gotta suck when you get busted like that...
...
Actually, it's a pretty solid quote.. and i seriously thought the original poster came up with it.
But, hearing it on AM Radio... made me think, What That Heck? So, I looked it up. And it appears mostly on Right Wing Blogs or forums where most people attribute the quote to Adrian Rogers in 1931. Rogers was born in 1931 and died of cancer in 2005. The quote was taken from a his 1996 book, 'Ten Secrets To A Successful Family'.
...
and it is true... you cannot legislate the poor in to freedom and the government cannot give to someone unless it takes it from another.
if the rich cared about the poor, they'd cut out the middle man of the government and help out... freely and voluentarily. But, that ain't happening either because people believe the poor are not less fortunate, but wicked and lazy.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
I, for one, probably wouldn't mind paying more taxes to help people if so much of the taxes I already pay were not being spent on cigarettes, big screen TVs, and other wasteful things through our current "government programs". I was behind someone the other day buying a Ribeye steak with a Lonestar card...If I were living off someone else's money, I think I would feel a little obligated to stretch the dollar as far as I could instead of buying things that will get me through 1 meal! It's not that I don't want to pay taxes to help people that need the help, I just don't want to pay taxes for people that don't even try to help themselves.
That's what bothers me as well... A couple of months ago I was behind a young couple with 2 kids checking out at the grocery store. The vast majority of their food was junk... multiple bags of doritos and other snacks, frozen pizzas, bags of french fries, candy, ice cream etc... and they paid with a food stamp card...
I was just thinking that if they always ate like that, of all the upcoming health problems that they and their kids will develop because of poor nutrition that our tax dollars will have to pay for.
Public assistance is a great thing, and I have no problem with helping people who have landed on tough times or have some sort of health issue preventing them from working, but there are so many people out there who abuse the system, and view it as something to rely on, instead of something to help them get back on their feet.
...
The thing is... we don't know.
A possible explanation would be that they both worked multiple minimum wage jobs and don't have the time to cook healthy meals... hell.. i have one well paying job and I eat crap like that. Last night, I had a frozen pizza from Costco, some string cheese and a Hagen Daas bar.
We really don't know what their situation is... unless we ask. But, we don't ask.
Well, in my example I was lucky enough to hear the cashier ask them if they were having a cookout...not that one couldn't figure out that by the beer and charcoal in basket #2. Bullshit me having to fund their BBQ when I'm not even invited, lol. I should have stopped by and grabbed a beer without asking and walked off
Well, in my example I was lucky enough to hear the cashier ask them if they were having a cookout...not that one couldn't figure out that by the beer and charcoal in basket #2. Bullshit me having to fund their BBQ when I'm not even invited, lol. I should have stopped by and grabbed a beer without asking and walked off
....
I know what you are saying... there are cheaters in the system and they need to be punished... not so much that they are taking from you and me... but, they are taking from the poor people who actually need the food.
The problem is the people, not the idea of Food Stamps.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the ...gover......nment does not first take from someone else. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
And the president took for granted, writing checks on others pay!!!!!
...
You heard this on talk radio... didn't you?
I was driving back from the Home Depot yesterday and heard an on air celebrity utter the same exact words.
The words are not your, rather those of Adrian Rodgers... a conservative and pastor of the Souther Baptist Ministries megachurch.
And the actual quote is this...
"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the industrious out of it. You don't multiply wealth by dividing it. Government cannot give anything to anybody that it doesn't first take from somebody else. Whenever somebody receives something without working for it, somebody else has to work for it without receiving. The worst thing that can happen to a nation is for half of the people to get the idea they don't have to work because somebody else will work for them, and the other half to get the idea that it does no good to work because they don't get to enjoy the fruit of their labor."
...
So... shouldn't the title of this post be:
"Just Wanted to Pass On This Quote..."
because you didn't say these thing... you heard/read them.
...
I'm kind of a stickler for the Truth.
yes cosmo, didn't mean to mislead anybody. I actualy got the quote from one of my friends on facebook and she said I could post it
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the ...gover......nment does not first take from someone else. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
And the president took for granted, writing checks on others pay!!!!!
...
You heard this on talk radio... didn't you?
I was driving back from the Home Depot yesterday and heard an on air celebrity utter the same exact words.
The words are not your, rather those of Adrian Rodgers... a conservative and pastor of the Souther Baptist Ministries megachurch.
And the actual quote is this...
"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the industrious out of it. You don't multiply wealth by dividing it. Government cannot give anything to anybody that it doesn't first take from somebody else. Whenever somebody receives something without working for it, somebody else has to work for it without receiving. The worst thing that can happen to a nation is for half of the people to get the idea they don't have to work because somebody else will work for them, and the other half to get the idea that it does no good to work because they don't get to enjoy the fruit of their labor."
...
So... shouldn't the title of this post be:
"Just Wanted to Pass On This Quote..."
because you didn't say these thing... you heard/read them.
...
I'm kind of a stickler for the Truth.
yes cosmo, didn't mean to mislead anybody. I actualy got the quote from one of my friends on facebook and she said I could post it
Comments
Oh... I already know about the Health Czar Nancy DeParle who is working under Health and Human Services secretary Sebelius. I read HR 3200 (including Sec. 1233, the so-called 'Death Panel' section... which mentions nothing about Death Panels) because i wanted to read the actual text of the House Bill without the outside interpretations of a second party.
I just want your take on the subject. Your claim was that the Czars (in this case, DeParle) was going to do 'something' where I would not be receiving any assistance when I turn 65. I just want to hear... basically... WHAT is it that makes you feel this is going to happen. It was something Glen Beck said... well, what did he say that makes you agreee with him? Are they going to kill me and turn me into Soylent Green? Ship me off to some Island of Old People? What?
...
My guess is you watched Glen Beck... and you just agree with him... even though you aren't even sure what he is saying. He may have said things in the past that you agree with... but, on this... I'm guessing... you just are sure.
That is a total guess on my part... not claiming it's true... just trying to debunk yet another unsubstantiated claim in this whole Health Care debate.
Hail, Hail!!!
What is Malthusian?
how do you read actual texts of the house bills? I am very interested in this. And if they are that easy to read, how come congress doesn't read them?
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtex ... Aih%3A2824
SEC. 1233. ADVANCE CARE PLANNING CONSULTATION.
3
(a) Medicare-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 1861 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x) is amended--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(A) in subsection (s)(2)--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(i) by striking ‘and’ at the end of subparagraph (DD);CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(ii) by adding ‘and’ at the end of subparagraph (EE); andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(iii) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(FF) advance care planning consultation (as defined in subsection (hhh)(1));’; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(B) by adding at the end the following new subsection:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘Advance Care Planning Consultation
16
‘(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term ‘advance care planning consultation’ means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such consultation shall include the following:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(A) An explanation by the practitioner of advance care planning, including key questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) An explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living wills and durable powers of attorney, and their uses.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers and their families with advance care planning, including the national toll-free hotline, the advance care planning clearinghouses, and State legal service organizations (including those funded through the Older Americans Act of 1965).CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
15
‘(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available under this title.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(F)(i) Subject to clause (ii), an explanation of orders regarding life sustaining treatment or similar orders, which shall include--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(I) the reasons why the development of such an order is beneficial to the individual and the individual’s family and the reasons why such an order should be updated periodically as the health of the individual changes;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(II) the information needed for an individual or legal surrogate to make informed decisions regarding the completion of such an order; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(III) the identification of resources that an individual may use to determine the requirements of the State in which such individual resides so that the treatment wishes of that individual will be carried out if the individual is unable to communicate those wishes, including requirements regarding the designation of a surrogate decisionmaker (also known as a health care proxy).CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(ii) The Secretary shall limit the requirement for explanations under clause (i) to consultations furnished in a State--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(I) in which all legal barriers have been addressed for enabling orders for life sustaining treatment to constitute a set of medical orders respected across all care settings; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(II) that has in effect a program for orders for life sustaining treatment described in clause (iii).CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining treatment for a States described in this clause is a program that--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(I) ensures such orders are standardized and uniquely identifiable throughout the State;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(II) distributes or makes accessible such orders to physicians and other health professionals that (acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law) may sign orders for life sustaining treatment;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(III) provides training for health care professionals across the continuum of care about the goals and use of orders for life sustaining treatment; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(IV) is guided by a coalition of stakeholders includes representatives from emergency medical services, emergency department physicians or nurses, state long-term care association, state medical association, state surveyors, agency responsible for senior services, state department of health, state hospital association, home health association, state bar association, and state hospice association.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(2) A practitioner described in this paragraph is--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(A) a physician (as defined in subsection (r)(1)); andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) a nurse practitioner or physician’s assistant who has the authority under State law to sign orders for life sustaining treatments.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(3)(A) An initial preventive physical examination under subsection (WW), including any related discussion during such examination, shall not be considered an advance care planning consultation for purposes of applying the 5-year limitation under paragraph (1).CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) An advance care planning consultation with respect to an individual may be conducted more frequently than provided under paragraph (1) if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual, including diagnosis of a chronic, progressive, life-limiting disease, a life-threatening or terminal diagnosis or life-threatening injury, or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility (as defined by the Secretary), or a hospice program.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
3
‘(4) A consultation under this subsection may include the formulation of an order regarding life sustaining treatment or a similar order.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(5)(A) For purposes of this section, the term ‘order regarding life sustaining treatment’ means, with respect to an individual, an actionable medical order relating to the treatment of that individual that--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
20
‘(i) is signed and dated by a physician (as defined in subsection (r)(1)) or another health care professional (as specified by the Secretary and who is acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law in signing such an order, including a nurse practitioner or physician assistant) and is in a form that permits it to stay with the individual and be followed by health care professionals and providers across the continuum of care;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
6
‘(ii) effectively communicates the individual’s preferences regarding life sustaining treatment, including an indication of the treatment and care desired by the individual;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(iii) is uniquely identifiable and standardized within a given locality, region, or State (as identified by the Secretary); andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
1
‘(iv) may incorporate any advance directive (as defined in section 1866(f)(3)) if executed by the individual.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(B) The level of treatment indicated under subparagraph (A)(ii) may range from an indication for full treatment to an indication to limit some or all or specified interventions. Such indicated levels of treatment may include indications respecting, among other items--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(i) the intensity of medical intervention if the patient is pulse less, apneic, or has serious cardiac or pulmonary problems;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(ii) the individual’s desire regarding transfer to a hospital or remaining at the current care setting;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(iii) the use of antibiotics; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(iv) the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration.’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(2) PAYMENT- Section 1848(j)(3) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-4(j)(3)) is amended by inserting ‘(2)(FF),’ after ‘(2)(EE),’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(3) FREQUENCY LIMITATION- Section 1862(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395y(a)) is amended--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(A) in paragraph (1)--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(i) in subparagraph (N), by striking ‘and’ at the end;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(ii) in subparagraph (O) by striking the semicolon at the end and inserting ‘, and’; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(iii) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(P) in the case of advance care planning consultations (as defined in section 1861(hhh)(1)), which are performed more frequently than is covered under such section;’; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(B) in paragraph (7), by striking ‘or (K)’ and inserting ‘(K), or (P)’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(4) EFFECTIVE DATE- The amendments made by this subsection shall apply to consultations furnished on or after January 1, 2011.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(b) Expansion of Physician Quality Reporting Initiative for End of Life Care-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) Physician’S QUALITY REPORTING INITIATIVE- Section 1848(k)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-4(k)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(3) Physician’S QUALITY REPORTING INITIATIVE-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
10
‘(A) IN GENERAL- For purposes of reporting data on quality measures for covered professional services furnished during 2011 and any subsequent year, to the extent that measures are available, the Secretary shall include quality measures on end of life care and advanced care planning that have been adopted or endorsed by a consensus-based organization, if appropriate. Such measures shall measure both the creation of and adherence to orders for life-sustaining treatment.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
1
‘(B) PROPOSED SET OF MEASURES- The Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register proposed quality measures on end of life care and advanced care planning that the Secretary determines are described in subparagraph (A) and would be appropriate for eligible professionals to use to submit data to the Secretary. The Secretary shall provide for a period of public comment on such set of measures before finalizing such proposed measures.’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(c) Inclusion of Information in Medicare & You Handbook-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) MEDICARE & YOU HANDBOOK-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(A) IN GENERAL- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall update the online version of the Medicare & You Handbook to include the following:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(i) An explanation of advance care planning and advance directives, including--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(I) living wills;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(II) durable power of attorney;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(III) orders of life-sustaining treatment; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(IV) health care proxies.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(ii) A description of Federal and State resources available to assist individuals and their families with advance care planning and advance directives, including--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(I) available State legal service organizations to assist individuals with advance care planning, including those organizations that receive funding pursuant to the Older Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 93001 et seq.);CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(II) website links or addresses for State-specific advance directive forms; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(III) any additional information, as determined by the Secretary.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(B) UPDATE OF PAPER AND SUBSEQUENT VERSIONS- The Secretary shall include the information described in subparagraph (A) in all paper and electronic versions of the Medicare & You Handbook that are published on or after the date that is 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act.
Actually... think of the Public Option as the Post Office. It is a government run service that will take a birthday card that you grandmother in Boston wrote and fly it in an airplane to eventually drop it in your mailbox in Cypress, Califonia... for 48 cents.
Now, she can CHOOSE to have in in your mailbox the next day... by going to UPS or FedEx. The Choices are out there and it's up to you to decide.
Now.. if there was no post office.. and there was just UPS or FedEx... they will charge your grandmother more than 48 cents to delive that birthday card, right? The Public option of the Post Office makes it affordable for her to send that card and it does not drive UPS or FedEx into bankruptcy.
...
***Disclaimer: I am not saying the Post Office is a well tuned machine... it is JUST AN EXAMPLE.***
...
Now... as for Unemployment. You cannot collect unemployment if you haven't paid into it. What do you want to do to those auto workers who got laid off... not just the Union guys.. the Free Enterprise Personel, such as the secretarys, data services and low level supervisors? Tell them, 'Get a fucking job'... when they worked 30 years for the company? Only working people are worth caring for? What?
Finally... Welfare. The easiest people to pick on are the weakest in our society. Sure, there is fraud in Welfare. There is fraud in auto insurance... should we discard the auto insurance companies? I'm all for prosecuting the cheaters and thieves... but, there are families dependent on welfare. I don't mind helping my fellow Americans that are down on their luck... for whatever reasons they got their. All i see is they need a hand, so i offer mine. I can't predict the future... I may be in their shoes someday. I'm just hoping someone offers me a hand up instead of a spit in the face.
...
But, that's just me.
Hail, Hail!!!
Now I see why congress doesn't read them...alll a bunch of jibba jabba
I need a reference on that one or the full text of the comment and the speech or conversation it was taken from so i can see the context.
All things being equal... do you disgree?
or... does it matter if the 35 year old is a surgeon and the 65 year old a retired bus driver...
or... the 35 year old is a crack addict and the 65 year old is a college professor?
...
I'm not saying, either way.
But, the elderly can still have the health care if their insurance company's 'Death Panel' is willing to pay for the treatment. If not the insurance... what about the kids. Wouldn't you go broke to extend the life of your grandparents? Your parents?
Hail, Hail!!!
hahahahahahahahahahah
Thomas Malthus was a sort of population economist in the 18th and 19th century who theorized that there was a fixed amount of food in the world and if you kept making social improvements and helped enough people to be able to eat, they would take the share of food away from other people and the population would die out. Bascially that social development is a zero sum game. Most scholars do not subscribe to Malthusianism anymore, because it fails to account for technological advances, etc. It sort of applies to environmental sustainability theory, but it doesn't apply to social/development economics anymore: making some people better off does not necessarily make everyone else worse off, and in fact, due to feedback effects, can actually make everyone better off.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
true, but the current legislation has had wages stagnate since the 70s, has nearly outlawed unions, has seen exponential increases in CEO and manager pay, has put us all back into wealth levels not seen since the 1920's.
however the system got to this point.......what its doing is funneling wealth to the top. the rich have been getting richer and the poor poorer.....due in large part to the heavy corporate influence on gov't policy.....
a little legislation to UNDO some of that damage is necessary, if a living wage is of any concern.
You heard this on talk radio... didn't you?
I was driving back from the Home Depot yesterday and heard an on air celebrity utter the same exact words.
The words are not your, rather those of Adrian Rodgers... a conservative and pastor of the Souther Baptist Ministries megachurch.
And the actual quote is this...
"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the industrious out of it. You don't multiply wealth by dividing it. Government cannot give anything to anybody that it doesn't first take from somebody else. Whenever somebody receives something without working for it, somebody else has to work for it without receiving. The worst thing that can happen to a nation is for half of the people to get the idea they don't have to work because somebody else will work for them, and the other half to get the idea that it does no good to work because they don't get to enjoy the fruit of their labor."
...
So... shouldn't the title of this post be:
"Just Wanted to Pass On This Quote..."
because you didn't say these thing... you heard/read them.
...
I'm kind of a stickler for the Truth.
Hail, Hail!!!
That's what bothers me as well... A couple of months ago I was behind a young couple with 2 kids checking out at the grocery store. The vast majority of their food was junk... multiple bags of doritos and other snacks, frozen pizzas, bags of french fries, candy, ice cream etc... and they paid with a food stamp card...
I was just thinking that if they always ate like that, of all the upcoming health problems that they and their kids will develop because of poor nutrition that our tax dollars will have to pay for.
Public assistance is a great thing, and I have no problem with helping people who have landed on tough times or have some sort of health issue preventing them from working, but there are so many people out there who abuse the system, and view it as something to rely on, instead of something to help them get back on their feet.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
The thing is... we don't know.
A possible explanation would be that they both worked multiple minimum wage jobs and don't have the time to cook healthy meals... hell.. i have one well paying job and I eat crap like that. Last night, I had a frozen pizza from Costco, some string cheese and a Hagen Daas bar.
We really don't know what their situation is... unless we ask. But, we don't ask.
Hail, Hail!!!
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Actually, it's a pretty solid quote.. and i seriously thought the original poster came up with it.
But, hearing it on AM Radio... made me think, What That Heck? So, I looked it up. And it appears mostly on Right Wing Blogs or forums where most people attribute the quote to Adrian Rogers in 1931. Rogers was born in 1931 and died of cancer in 2005. The quote was taken from a his 1996 book, 'Ten Secrets To A Successful Family'.
...
and it is true... you cannot legislate the poor in to freedom and the government cannot give to someone unless it takes it from another.
if the rich cared about the poor, they'd cut out the middle man of the government and help out... freely and voluentarily. But, that ain't happening either because people believe the poor are not less fortunate, but wicked and lazy.
Hail, Hail!!!
Well, in my example I was lucky enough to hear the cashier ask them if they were having a cookout...not that one couldn't figure out that by the beer and charcoal in basket #2. Bullshit me having to fund their BBQ when I'm not even invited, lol. I should have stopped by and grabbed a beer without asking and walked off
I know what you are saying... there are cheaters in the system and they need to be punished... not so much that they are taking from you and me... but, they are taking from the poor people who actually need the food.
The problem is the people, not the idea of Food Stamps.
Hail, Hail!!!
yes cosmo, didn't mean to mislead anybody. I actualy got the quote from one of my friends on facebook and she said I could post it
yes cosmo, didn't mean to mislead anybody. I actualy got the quote from one of my friends on facebook and she said I could post it