Monday, February 16, 2009
Ice-Breaker
This is to serve as a bit of an ice-breaker to get folks used to discussing topics on a blog. The question is (thanks Kenny!): Can you be a practical Catholic and still vote for Barack Obama?
Thursday, February 12, 2009
What A Difference One Word Can Make!
Like any good parent, I make an effort to ensure that my children are well-versed in the classics. I use it as a bargaining chip. “Okay, you can read Green Eggs and Ham, but first you have to finish that essay by Jonathan Swift…” Well, the other day I was making sure that the classics were receiving attention by surreptitiously adding songs to my 11-year old daughter’s MP3 player. Imagine my surprise when I heard her singing “Excuse me, while I kiss this guy…”
What a difference a word makes!
I just finished reading the proposed stimulus bill that just passed the Senate, and comparing it to the bill that recently passed the House. Here is another case where one word makes a big (BIG) difference. See if you catch it.
Snipped from the Senate bill, page 133:
For an additional amount for ‘‘Healthcare Research and Quality’’ to carry out titles III and IX of the Public Health Service Act, part A of title XI of the Social Security Act, and section 1013 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, $700,000,000 for comparative clinical effectiveness research, which shall remain available through September 30, 2010:…
And now from the House bill, page 151:
ESTABLISHMENT.—There is hereby established a Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research…
Did you see that? The word was “clinical.” In the Senate bill, the Council will study comparative clinical effectiveness, whereas the House bill only mentions comparative effectiveness. By not qualifying the word “effectiveness,” the council is free to make its determination of comparative effectiveness on any number of factors, the most horrifying (but most likely) one is cost. Was it an honest oversight? Did the House just not think of the ramifications of such vague phrasing? Given Nancy Pelosi’s voting record, coupled with the fact that I’m pretty sure whoever writes this garbage gets paid by the word, I highly doubt it.
Let’s look at how the results of these two bills would look in real life. I’m just looking at this particular section right now, and don’t want to touch the impact of $80 gazillion being fabricated with the wave of a wand.
The Senate version has an up-side and a down-side. The down-side is that new research, that holds a lot of promise, particularly for diseases that currently have some level of existing treatment, may very well be cut if comparatively superior results can’t yet be shown. The up-side is that we may very well get rid of embryonic stem-cell research, because there has been almost nothing in the way of results and adult stem cells are reaching clinical trials on new diseases every day.
The House version is bit more Logan’s Run-ish. Once “The Council” decides what is (and is not) cost-effective (by what definition?), the government will stop paying for any treatments, medicines, therapies or devices deemed not cost effective.
Don’t believe me? Let’s look at the current national health care system in the United Kingdom. They’re the pioneers of socialized medicine, and as such, are now running into the fiscal shortfalls inherent in such a system.
From the [UK] Daily Mail in August of last year:
Thousands of kidney cancer patients have been handed an 'early death sentence' under plans to ban life-extending new drugs.
Four drugs which can offer patients extra years with their loved ones have been rejected by the Government's rationing body because they cost too much. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence admits the drugs work, but says that if they are approved, patients with other diseases will have to go without. Campaigners claim the Health Service is being plunged into the Dark Ages, as other western European countries use the drugs as standard.
Instead, NICE has limited treatment to a drug called interferon that doctors claim is ineffective for 75 per cent of patients. Kidney specialist Tim Eisen, professor of medical oncology at the Cambridge Research Institute, said: 'Patients here are receiving medieval treatment. Together these drugs are the single greatest advance for kidney cancer patients in the last 20 years, yet I and my colleagues face the prospect of being unable to offer treatment that is absolutely standard in every other western European country.'
'This decision will mean that the UK will have the poorest survival figures in Europe.”
Wow! That’s the kind of health care system I want for my country! “Bill, you’re really sick, and we find it a lot more efficient to treat people who are just a little sick, after all, you don’t want to be selfish and use up the money that could treat twenty or thirty not-so-sick people, do you? So…uh…buried or cremated?”
Look, it’s a cinch that this stimulus package is going to be opening the door for socialized medicine. Let’s try to keep the camel’s whole head and neck out of the tent by making sure that the one word “clinical” is included in the reconciled bill that will be put before the Congress for final ratification. Make sure your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representative know that one word can make a huge difference. I think you should contact them very quickly, as the Conference Committee already is working on the reconciled bill.
Don’t worry, I did correct my daughter as to the Purple Haze lyrics, but then, rather than having to explain a homosexual reference, I had to explain the drug-induced imagery of “kiss the sky.” Maybe the Jonas Brothers aren’t so bad after all.
What a difference a word makes!
I just finished reading the proposed stimulus bill that just passed the Senate, and comparing it to the bill that recently passed the House. Here is another case where one word makes a big (BIG) difference. See if you catch it.
Snipped from the Senate bill, page 133:
For an additional amount for ‘‘Healthcare Research and Quality’’ to carry out titles III and IX of the Public Health Service Act, part A of title XI of the Social Security Act, and section 1013 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, $700,000,000 for comparative clinical effectiveness research, which shall remain available through September 30, 2010:…
And now from the House bill, page 151:
ESTABLISHMENT.—There is hereby established a Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research…
Did you see that? The word was “clinical.” In the Senate bill, the Council will study comparative clinical effectiveness, whereas the House bill only mentions comparative effectiveness. By not qualifying the word “effectiveness,” the council is free to make its determination of comparative effectiveness on any number of factors, the most horrifying (but most likely) one is cost. Was it an honest oversight? Did the House just not think of the ramifications of such vague phrasing? Given Nancy Pelosi’s voting record, coupled with the fact that I’m pretty sure whoever writes this garbage gets paid by the word, I highly doubt it.
Let’s look at how the results of these two bills would look in real life. I’m just looking at this particular section right now, and don’t want to touch the impact of $80 gazillion being fabricated with the wave of a wand.
The Senate version has an up-side and a down-side. The down-side is that new research, that holds a lot of promise, particularly for diseases that currently have some level of existing treatment, may very well be cut if comparatively superior results can’t yet be shown. The up-side is that we may very well get rid of embryonic stem-cell research, because there has been almost nothing in the way of results and adult stem cells are reaching clinical trials on new diseases every day.
The House version is bit more Logan’s Run-ish. Once “The Council” decides what is (and is not) cost-effective (by what definition?), the government will stop paying for any treatments, medicines, therapies or devices deemed not cost effective.
Don’t believe me? Let’s look at the current national health care system in the United Kingdom. They’re the pioneers of socialized medicine, and as such, are now running into the fiscal shortfalls inherent in such a system.
From the [UK] Daily Mail in August of last year:
Thousands of kidney cancer patients have been handed an 'early death sentence' under plans to ban life-extending new drugs.
Four drugs which can offer patients extra years with their loved ones have been rejected by the Government's rationing body because they cost too much. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence admits the drugs work, but says that if they are approved, patients with other diseases will have to go without. Campaigners claim the Health Service is being plunged into the Dark Ages, as other western European countries use the drugs as standard.
Instead, NICE has limited treatment to a drug called interferon that doctors claim is ineffective for 75 per cent of patients. Kidney specialist Tim Eisen, professor of medical oncology at the Cambridge Research Institute, said: 'Patients here are receiving medieval treatment. Together these drugs are the single greatest advance for kidney cancer patients in the last 20 years, yet I and my colleagues face the prospect of being unable to offer treatment that is absolutely standard in every other western European country.'
'This decision will mean that the UK will have the poorest survival figures in Europe.”
Wow! That’s the kind of health care system I want for my country! “Bill, you’re really sick, and we find it a lot more efficient to treat people who are just a little sick, after all, you don’t want to be selfish and use up the money that could treat twenty or thirty not-so-sick people, do you? So…uh…buried or cremated?”
Look, it’s a cinch that this stimulus package is going to be opening the door for socialized medicine. Let’s try to keep the camel’s whole head and neck out of the tent by making sure that the one word “clinical” is included in the reconciled bill that will be put before the Congress for final ratification. Make sure your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representative know that one word can make a huge difference. I think you should contact them very quickly, as the Conference Committee already is working on the reconciled bill.
Don’t worry, I did correct my daughter as to the Purple Haze lyrics, but then, rather than having to explain a homosexual reference, I had to explain the drug-induced imagery of “kiss the sky.” Maybe the Jonas Brothers aren’t so bad after all.
The Future in Chicken Guts
The art of aruspicy is still relatively common for practitioners of voodoo. It’s the art of divining the future by analyzing the entrails of sacrificed chickens, the practice of which can be traced all the way back to the Bronze Age Mesopotamian cultures, which used a wide variety of animals for this purpose. Until very recently, I would have simply dismissed such a notion as pagan poppycock. Now I’m not so sure.
I believe I’ve seen the future in chicken guts.
Senator Julia Lynn is preparing a bill in the Kansas Senate that would make cockfighting a Class 10 Non-Person felony, punishable by a loss of property for the offender. That sounds reasonable to me, but it caused me to wonder why such a bill was being proposed. What I found was a story about a cockfighting operation that was broken up right here in my neck of the woods. Disturbing, to be sure, but the image of the future contained in those chicken guts sent chills down my spine.
Not being a voodoo practitioner myself, I pulled out my own super-secret divination equipment to confirm this reading. I’ll tell you my findings in a moment, but first, let me give you a little back story.
On June 25, 1998, Murillo Fernando Tapia was arrested after a two year investigation for operating a cockfighting operation. He was charged with 172 misdemeanor counts of cockfighting, one for each fighting cock found on the premises. Each of those misdemeanors carried a penalty of up to one year in jail. That makes sense. If you were caught with one fighting cock, I’d imagine you’d be tried for one count, two for two, etc. After all, we probably shouldn’t treat a person who fights one cock the same as someone who operates a huge operation like this, should we?
Apparently, in Kansas we should. Mr. Tapia was sentenced to a one-year diversion program – no jail time if he refrains from breaking the law any more for one year. One wholly unreliable rumor reports Michael Vick as saying, “Hmm…I wonder if the Chiefs need a quarterback.”
How did Mr. Tapia receive such a light sentence, less than the maximum penalty for even one of the 172 misdemeanor charges filed against him? Well, either he had an awesome defense attorney, a lackluster prosecutor or some combination in between. The answer is that he had a defense attorney with a long buddy-buddy history with the man prosecuting the case.
Paul Morrison, the disgraced ex-Attorney General was defending Mr. Tapia (I guess business is slow for Paul these days), and Johnson County District Attorney Steve Howe was prosecuting the case. You may recall that Steve worked with Paul for something like 15 years prior to Paul running for and winning the AG position, at which time Paul’s replacement in the DA’s office, Phill Kline, terminated Steve’s employ. Paul Morrison’s defense of Mr. Tapia involved questioning the evidence in court hearings, although I have a hard time understanding exactly how the seizure of 172 fighting cocks after a two year investigation can really be questioned. It seems to me that the Sheriff’s office ought to be pretty irritated by that defense. Paul also argued that it was unfair to stack so many misdemeanor charges up against his client. Unfair? Really? Is that the defense? Is it “unfair” because your client didn’t commit these crimes, or because Phill Kline filed the charges?
Apparently it worked, because Steve Howe uttered his best Rochester impression (“Yes, Boss!” for all you young whipper-snappers) and plea bargained the diversion deal. Said Howe, “It would have involved a week of trial and pay for outside experts to fly in and testify, he said. Also, Tapia was a first-time offender and met the criteria for diversion.” With such tough prosecutorial acumen, it’s easy to see why Phill sent him packing! What are the “resources” of the DA’s office supposed to be used for, other than prosecuting cases deemed so heinous that they demand an immediate change to the Kansas penal code? If you’re suddenly struck by an image of smoky back room deal making, then you’re certainly not alone.
What does this portend?
In 2007, Phill Kline, then Kansas Attorney General, filed 107 charges against Planned Parenthood, most of them misdemeanors. He continued this case as the Johnson County District Attorney, facing numerous legal stall tactics that caused the case to creep along until Steve Howe won the DA job from him in January 2009. Throughout this battle Paul Morrison served as nothing more than one more speed bump along the way, as he tried to fight to have the evidence in Phill’s possession confiscated by the courts. Does “questioning the evidence in court hearings” sound like a familiar tactic?
In light of the cockfighting case, and the years of happy camaraderie between Paul Morrison and Steve Howe, the odds are of this cases being prosecuted aggressively are about the same as Keanu Reeves winning an Oscar. I can just see the press release now (written in chicken entrails), “Well, it would have taken a long time to prosecute this case…and a lot of money, too, what with having to fly in experts and all that other stuff. Because Planned Parenthood is a first offender, and it was “unfair” of Phill Kline to stack so many charges against them in the first place, whether or not they actually committed those crimes, I’ve decided to plea bargain this case down to a diversion. No penalties will be incurred if Planned Parenthood can find it within themselves to avoid killing any viable late-term babies for one year, and they have to promise to keep better, non-fabricated or fraudulent records for the next twelve months.”
What did my divination equipment tell me when I asked the question, “Is Steve Howe going to drop the ball in prosecuting Planned Parenthood?” The words that floated up to me through the depths were ominous. “It is decidedly so.”
I believe I’ve seen the future in chicken guts.
Senator Julia Lynn is preparing a bill in the Kansas Senate that would make cockfighting a Class 10 Non-Person felony, punishable by a loss of property for the offender. That sounds reasonable to me, but it caused me to wonder why such a bill was being proposed. What I found was a story about a cockfighting operation that was broken up right here in my neck of the woods. Disturbing, to be sure, but the image of the future contained in those chicken guts sent chills down my spine.
Not being a voodoo practitioner myself, I pulled out my own super-secret divination equipment to confirm this reading. I’ll tell you my findings in a moment, but first, let me give you a little back story.
On June 25, 1998, Murillo Fernando Tapia was arrested after a two year investigation for operating a cockfighting operation. He was charged with 172 misdemeanor counts of cockfighting, one for each fighting cock found on the premises. Each of those misdemeanors carried a penalty of up to one year in jail. That makes sense. If you were caught with one fighting cock, I’d imagine you’d be tried for one count, two for two, etc. After all, we probably shouldn’t treat a person who fights one cock the same as someone who operates a huge operation like this, should we?
Apparently, in Kansas we should. Mr. Tapia was sentenced to a one-year diversion program – no jail time if he refrains from breaking the law any more for one year. One wholly unreliable rumor reports Michael Vick as saying, “Hmm…I wonder if the Chiefs need a quarterback.”
How did Mr. Tapia receive such a light sentence, less than the maximum penalty for even one of the 172 misdemeanor charges filed against him? Well, either he had an awesome defense attorney, a lackluster prosecutor or some combination in between. The answer is that he had a defense attorney with a long buddy-buddy history with the man prosecuting the case.
Paul Morrison, the disgraced ex-Attorney General was defending Mr. Tapia (I guess business is slow for Paul these days), and Johnson County District Attorney Steve Howe was prosecuting the case. You may recall that Steve worked with Paul for something like 15 years prior to Paul running for and winning the AG position, at which time Paul’s replacement in the DA’s office, Phill Kline, terminated Steve’s employ. Paul Morrison’s defense of Mr. Tapia involved questioning the evidence in court hearings, although I have a hard time understanding exactly how the seizure of 172 fighting cocks after a two year investigation can really be questioned. It seems to me that the Sheriff’s office ought to be pretty irritated by that defense. Paul also argued that it was unfair to stack so many misdemeanor charges up against his client. Unfair? Really? Is that the defense? Is it “unfair” because your client didn’t commit these crimes, or because Phill Kline filed the charges?
Apparently it worked, because Steve Howe uttered his best Rochester impression (“Yes, Boss!” for all you young whipper-snappers) and plea bargained the diversion deal. Said Howe, “It would have involved a week of trial and pay for outside experts to fly in and testify, he said. Also, Tapia was a first-time offender and met the criteria for diversion.” With such tough prosecutorial acumen, it’s easy to see why Phill sent him packing! What are the “resources” of the DA’s office supposed to be used for, other than prosecuting cases deemed so heinous that they demand an immediate change to the Kansas penal code? If you’re suddenly struck by an image of smoky back room deal making, then you’re certainly not alone.
What does this portend?
In 2007, Phill Kline, then Kansas Attorney General, filed 107 charges against Planned Parenthood, most of them misdemeanors. He continued this case as the Johnson County District Attorney, facing numerous legal stall tactics that caused the case to creep along until Steve Howe won the DA job from him in January 2009. Throughout this battle Paul Morrison served as nothing more than one more speed bump along the way, as he tried to fight to have the evidence in Phill’s possession confiscated by the courts. Does “questioning the evidence in court hearings” sound like a familiar tactic?
In light of the cockfighting case, and the years of happy camaraderie between Paul Morrison and Steve Howe, the odds are of this cases being prosecuted aggressively are about the same as Keanu Reeves winning an Oscar. I can just see the press release now (written in chicken entrails), “Well, it would have taken a long time to prosecute this case…and a lot of money, too, what with having to fly in experts and all that other stuff. Because Planned Parenthood is a first offender, and it was “unfair” of Phill Kline to stack so many charges against them in the first place, whether or not they actually committed those crimes, I’ve decided to plea bargain this case down to a diversion. No penalties will be incurred if Planned Parenthood can find it within themselves to avoid killing any viable late-term babies for one year, and they have to promise to keep better, non-fabricated or fraudulent records for the next twelve months.”
What did my divination equipment tell me when I asked the question, “Is Steve Howe going to drop the ball in prosecuting Planned Parenthood?” The words that floated up to me through the depths were ominous. “It is decidedly so.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)