The National Institutes of Health New Ethics Rules: A Swing and a Miss

The Project On Government Oversight has;

The National Institutes of Health New Ethics Rules: A Swing and a Miss

By PAUL THACKER and NED FEDER

After almost four years of horrible press over medical research tainted by conflicts of interest, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) was presented with a great opportunity to make fundamental changes to their rules, increase transparency, and strengthen public trust in taxpayer-funded research.

Instead, they stepped up to the plate...assumed a power stance...and struck out.

The NIH released its final rule today, and gone are the provisions that would’ve injected some much-needed transparency into taxpayer funded research.

Here’s how they could’ve written the rule to hit a home run:

Before disbursing federal funds to an academic researcher, the university must disclose that researcher’s outside income and a plan to manage the researcher’s conflicts of interest. Both the outside income and the management plan will be posted on the NIH RePORTER website, which details other information about the grant.

It’s just that simple and cheap. Because the NIH RePORTER website already exists.

Instead of being able to access the information easily online, taxpayers will have to write to universities and ask them about the professor’s conflicts of interest. Imagine if you had to write to your politician to ask who he takes money from, instead of viewing it on publicly available websites.

Are America’s professors scared to meet the ethical standards of elected politicians?

Furthermore, the universities’ conflict of interest management plans will remain hidden. You're not allowed to see them. Why? It doesn’t make any sense.

Finally, there are no changes to the penalties, one NIH official said in today’s phone briefing, because the previous rules had “strong enforcement.” Please.

The only reason NIH was forced to make these changes is because Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) dogged them for years about lax enforcement, with embarrassing stories in the media about Drs. Charles Nemeroff, Alan Schatzberg, andJoseph Biederman, among others.

When a United States Senator has to put on his work boots and do an agency’s job, that doesn’t meet taxpayer expectations.

We should have gotten something to be proud of. We should have expected this administration to swing for the fences—especially given its early promises of transparency.

Paul Thacker is a POGO Investigator. Ned Feder is POGO's Staff Scientist.

Image via Boston Public Library.

"Are America’s professors scared to meet the ethical standards of elected politicians?"

ROTFLMAO

"The only time a man's life, liberty, and property are safe is when the legislature's not in session."

Mark Twain

Thank You POGO and Mr. Thacker

Obamacare Waivers: Some Corporations Are More Equal Than Others

Redstate.com has;

What's The Point Of Obamacare Then?

Posted by Erick Erickson
Thursday, October 7th at 10:21AM EDT

"To stop all the fussing by major American corporations about the devastating effects of Obamacare, the Obama administration is going to give a bunch of waivers to major corporations so they don’t have to comply with the law. What’s the point of the law then?

The reality here is that this will perpetuate Obama policies in furtherance of John Edwards’ two Americas — those with the connections and power to get out from under the yoke of the law and those that cannot.

The law and the waivers will pit entrepreneurs against armies of well paid lobbyists giving a competitive advantage, yet again, to big businesses.

That’s Obama’s America."

Thank you Mr Erickson.

Dr/Congressman Ron Paul has pointed out that Anyone, with a basic understanding of "Austrian Economics", could have predicted the unintended consequences of these new healthcare policies.

Here's a Wiki on:

Austrian Economics

S. 3900: Sen. Coburn’s Medicare Fraud Buster: Part II

The Heartland Institute has More, on;

Coburn Introduces Legislation To Stop Medicare And Medicaid Fraud

“….. According to Devon Herrick, a health policy expert with the National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas, Texas, the success of Coburn’s proposal will depend on whether other members are willing to stand up on the issue.

“Senator Coburn has some great ideas, but Congress has to develop the political will to follow through with them,” Herrick said. “In the past, one of the biggest impediments to fighting waste, fraud and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid is when politicians intervene on the behalf of constituents, who are abusive service providers and equipment suppliers.”

Obamacare was So desperately needed that we had to pass the Bill so that we could find out what was in it. And despite that Desperation to save us all from a fate worse than death:

CRS Report: HHS Misses One Third Of Administrative Deadlines - by Ben Domenech

More (pdfs) on Sen. Coburn’s proposed Fraud Buster foot the main article/top link. Please read them all. Then call your own Congress Folk and tell them to support S. 3900. We can no longer afford $100 Billion a year of Rip Off as some sort of wink and a nod fringe benefit.

Here’s the pdf on Sen. Coburn’s Questions and Answers.

The “FAST” Act of 2010

Questions & Answers

Q. Why are you introducing this bill now, when you opposed the health care law?

A. While we opposed the new law when it was considered in Congress, we believe we have a duty as public servants to do all we can to protect Americans’ tax dollars. Program dollars should pay providers for caring for patients, not line the pockets of criminals who commit fraud. Waste, fraud, and abuse not only threaten the financial viability of programs, they erode the public trust. No group of stakeholders in America would be expected to tolerate high rates of waste, fraud, and abuse in any private company, and we should not expect American taxpayers to tolerate rampant waste, fraud, and abuse in publicly-funded health care programs.

The new federal health reform law will spend $2.6 trillion more taxpayer dollars over just a 10-year period, and we are gravely concerned that the loss and abuse of taxpayer dollars due to waste and fraud could increase under the new health law. We believe this concern is well placed, as our largest federal health care programs, Medicare and Medicaid, are already rife with waste, fraud, and abuse.

Q. All programs have flaws and all big systems have inefficiencies. Don’t politicians exaggerate the seriousness or scope of waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid for politician gain?

A. No, the waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid is real, widely-known, and very serious. Many independent, nonpartisan experts – from HHS’ Inspector General, to the Government Accountability Office, to the Department of Justice, and various media outlets – acknowledge the pervasive and persistent nature of waste, fraud, and abuse in these programs.

Q. How do these reforms impact providers?

A. We believe this bill encapsulates a host of common-sense, bipartisan reforms that would strengthen program integrity while minimizing the impact on physicians and other health care providers. One important element of reducing waste, fraud, and abuse is equipping CMS with the necessary authorizations and abilities to stop payments from going to pay crooks, not care providers. Unfortunately, too often, CMS’s current business practices send taxpayer dollars out the door without sense of whether or not a provider is paid and a patient is cared for.

A story from The Miami Herald reported the account of Ihosvany Marquez. Marquez recently plead guilty “to federal health care fraud charges alleging he made $55 million in false Medicare claims between 2005 and 2007.” He spent “his Medicare millions on a fleet of luxury cars, authorities say, including a Lamborghini….” This serious abuse of taxpayer dollars is unacceptable, but it is not highly unusual. Changes are necessary to increase the integrity of the program and ensure Medicare and Medicaid dollars pay for patient care.

Q. If this bill were to become law, would this bill eliminate fraud in Medicare and Medicaid?

A. There are many things that Congress and the Administration can to do eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid. We believe this bill is a step in the right direction. The new federal health reform law dramatically expands Medicaid, significantly changes Medicare, creates substantial new mandates and regulations, and will send hundreds of billions of dollars to insurance companies. We are concerned that this dramatic expansion of government spending will create significant vulnerabilities to waste, fraud, and abuse.

Furthermore, we are concerned that the fraud and waste provisions in the new law fail to address these vulnerabilities. In fact, the independent nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that over the next decade under the new law, only $6.7 billion dollars will be saved from fraud in Medicaid and Medicare. We are very concerned that, under the new reform law, taxpayers and patients will continue to lose out to criminals who commit fraud.

The HHS’ Inspector General’s Office for the Department of Health and Human Services said in Congressional testimony that “curbing fraud, waste, and abuse must be an essential component of any health care reform strategy.” They said “for the U.S. health care system…to remain solvent for future generations, we must pursue an effective strategy to combat fraud, waste, and abuse.” The IG’s office identified five principles as core policy recommendations, but there are many more good ideas about ways to stop fraud. Here are a few by the IG:

· Highlights of Address by HHS OIG at the Health Care Compliance Association Annual Compliance Institute

· Aging Committee testimony, 2009

· House E&C testimony, 2009

· House Approps Committee testimony, 2010

· Unimplemented recommendations, 2008

· U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management Testimony, 2009

Many experts have also authored books and research papers on this topic – some descriptive of the problem, others prescriptive with solutions. Harvard University’s Malcolm Sparrow is a respected author and anti-fraud expert who wrote the seminal License to Steal: How Fraud Bleeds America’s Health Care System. He testified to Congress that official estimates are “lacking in rigor,” are “comfortingly low and quite misleading,” even excluding many kinds of fraud and abuse. Sparrow thinks that as much as 20 percent of the federal health care budget is consumed by fraud, which would be about $90 billion a year for Medicare alone. One recent book edited by fraud expert Jim Frogue, Stop Paying the Crooks, catalogues a wide variety of anti-fraud recommendations from a host of experts that can be used to prevent taxpayer dollars from funding criminals.

When taxpayers are losing $60-100 billion dollars a year to waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid, Congress and the Administration must do more to save taxpayers’ dollars. We look forward to working with anyone interested in providing solutions to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse.

Twin Studies & PTSD: Junk Research Continues

Reuters has;

Twin Study May Quiet Doubts Over PTSD

Human Emotions are NOT a product of genetic pre dispositions. Down that road lies Eugenics. We have Already traveled it, and we're Long overdue to get Off of it. Just as there Is NO Schizophrenia gene, there is NO PTSD gene, but we have $igh-entists 'Investigating' Human Twins as Very well paid, public funded make work.

Psychiatric Genetics: Another Empty Box Of Bio-$cience.

'Mental Health': It Never runs out of specious excuses to Pay itself.

"But if we can Save just One Person!" We've Heard that one already.

We've Also heard from Senator Tom Coburn:

"American taxpayers lose $100 billion in waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid each year,” Dr. Coburn said. “Congress and the Administration must do a better job of working to staunch this flow of taxpayer dollars that goes to crooks instead of providing care.”

“The current system was designed to be defrauded,” Coburn said. “Organized crime rings and gangs are bilking billions of taxpayer dollars from Medicare each year because it is so easy to defraud the system."

It's time to cut off the money for Junk Research into Non Diseases.

Sen. Coburn Introduces Bill To Fight Medicare & Medicaid Fraud

Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) has;

Dr Coburn Introduces Bill To Stop Medicare And Medicaid Fraud "FAST"

"(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK), a practicing physician and participant in February’s White House summit on health reform, today introduced a bill with Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL, 6th) that was inspired by President Obama’s February 22, 2010 endorsement of several Republican proposals designed to combat waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid. Dr. Coburn introduced S. 3900, the “Fighting Fraud and Abuse to Save Taxpayers’ Dollars” or “FAST” Act with Rep. Roskam, who also attended the White House health summit. The bill notionally represents the Republican solutions to combat waste in Medicare and Medicaid that the President endorsed.

“The status quo in Medicaid and Medicare is unsustainable and unacceptable. American taxpayers lose $100 billion in waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid each year,” Dr. Coburn said. “Congress and the Administration must do a better job of working to staunch this flow of taxpayer dollars that goes to crooks instead of providing care.”

“The current system was designed to be defrauded,” Coburn said. “Organized crime rings and gangs are bilking billions of taxpayer dollars from Medicare each year because it is so easy to defraud the system. The American people ought to be outraged and should not stand for this.”

“We believe our bill offers a bipartisan step forward to give HHS and the Inspector General more tools to share data, stiffen penalties, and pilot new ways of combating egregious fraud. We could save at least $400 billion over a decade, just by preventing fraud.

“Federal bureaucrats must be held accountable. Payment processes must be reformed. I hope politicians and bureaucrats can put the public interest ahead of their own and I look forward to working with any member who is serious about reducing waste, fraud, and abuse in public health care programs.”

Thank you Senator Coburn

Healthcare Reform: A Huge Misdiagnosis, Dr/Congressman Ron Paul

Congressman Ron Paul has;

Healthcare Reform: A Huge Misdiagnosis

"This week marked six months since Congress passed the healthcare reform bill in what has become all-too-typical legislative chicanery. Those in power crafted a mammoth piece of legislation and rammed it through Congress under a dire sense of emergency. Insisting on time enough to read the bill was dismissed as dangerous and crazy in a time of crisis. We were told that if we really wanted to see what was in the bill, we would have to pass it first. I cannot imagine the founding fathers intended for Congress to legislate in this manner. I would think if a Member is not absolutely certain the entire legislation meets Constitutional muster, the default vote should be “no” in accordance with our oath of office.

But now that Congress has had six months to read the new law, there is a significant amount of buyer’s remorse on Capitol Hill. The more constituents learn about the law, the more angry they become. 60% of Americans are now said to be in favor of repealing the entire thing. Unfortunately, it is much more difficult to repeal a law than to pass a bill.

I wrote a while back about the egregious provision to require businesses to issue 1099s for all transactions over $600 as a way to partially pay for it. I have cosponsored legislation to fix this issue, yet this is just the tip of the iceberg.

First of all, in spite of the administration repeating over and over that this legislation would not increase costs for Americans, they are now saying they knew all along that it would. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that American families will see their premiums rise by an average of $2100 by 2016. The Wall Street Journal has reported that the cost of compliance is forcing some insurers to increase premiums by up to 20% as soon as next year!

Also, in spite of repeated claims from the administration that we could all keep our plans and doctors if we liked them, the administration’s own officials are now predicting that won’t be true for up to 117 million Americans who will lose their current plans. Major insurers are also dropping child-only plans because of mandates and price-fixing on such policies, leaving parents with fewer choices for their children, not more.

In addition, in spite of claiming this law would contain government costs, not increase them, administration actuaries now predict it will increase healthcare spending by over $300 billion. This additional spending comes along with doctor shortages, fewer choices and more taxes. Perhaps worst of all, increases in labor costs because of health insurance mandates are discouraging employers from hiring new workers and even triggering more layoffs.

Anyone with a basic understanding of Austrian economics could have predicted the unintended consequences of these new healthcare policies. Central planning never increases choices and quality or cuts costs as promised. Price controls and government mandates always create artificial scarcity. Healthcare is not a right, nor a privilege. It is a product, like food or clothing. As with any good or service, the free market regulation of supply and demand provides the optimum quality to the maximum number of people. Once we realize the problems we are trying to solve today were created by government intervention beginning in the 1960’s, we can begin to put patients and doctors back in control of healthcare, rather than third party oligopolies and government bureaucrats. The sooner, the better."

Thank you Very much Congressman Paul

Obama Appoints Socialist To Run Medicare & Medicaid: BYPASSES SENATE HEARING!

Red State.com has;

Donald Berwick Exemplifies The Obama Agenda

Mr Domenech's analysis of this yet further revolting development from the party of "Yes You Will!" is far more than simply apt.

Because This time, even the New York Times isn't buying it.

Thank you Mr Domenech.

Healthcare Deform: State AGs V The Nebraska Compromise

Legalnewsline has:

Senate Healthcare Deal Draws Republican AGs Ire

And the Star Telegram has:

Greg Abbott, Other State AGs Take Aim At The 'Nebraska Compromise' Health Bill


Now that we've seen how Nebraska is more equal than the other 49 States: to pass a Takeover Bill which the Citizenry overwhelmingly Does Not Want, let's yet again look at how some Professions, ...... are More Equal than others.

Newsweek (2008) has:

When Doctors Kill Themselves.

"So why aren't depressed docs seeking treatment for a common illness that millions of Americans have learned to manage with therapy and readily available medications? Because they worry—not without reason—that if they admit to a mental-health problem they could lose respect, referrals, income and even their licenses." .....

"One way to address physician suicide, says Reynolds, is to focus on medical students and residents, since depression often starts in young adulthood. Medical schools across the country have launched programs that, among other things, guarantee students who seek help that it will not appear on their records. , .....

....., "If we teach doctors to recognize depression in themselves," says Dr. Paula Clayton, the foundation's medical director, "they will recognize it in their patients." And then everybody will feel better."

That's right, Everybody will Feel Better, ..... after the vested interests funding this protectionist pill peddling racket make certain that the people Selling their Antidepressants, Antipsychotics, Anticonvulsants etc, ..... are safe and secure from being deemed Officially, Incurably, ' Mentally Ill' under the Same BILLING codes Psychiatry peddles all day every day, ....... .

COBRA

Families USA has:

Squeezed! Caught Between Unemployment Benefits And Health Care Costs

Findings:

"Average Unemployment Checks Are Not Sufficient To Pay COBRA Premiums"


And which road going Where, is it that's paved with Good Intentions?

Heathcare Reform Is A Lump Of Coal

Congressman Ron Paul has:

Healthcare Reform is a Lump of Coal

Last week on Christmas Eve, after many back room deals were made, the Senate passed the healthcare reform bill with a strictly partisan vote. I was pleased that my colleagues in the GOP are on the right side of this bill. Although this vote was a major step in healthcare reform becoming reality, they still have to reconcile the Senate bill with the House-passed version in conference committee. This could prove even more difficult and costly than the Senate vote.

There was a little bit of controversy surrounding one particular Senator who was initially against the bill, but then, coincidentally, a large amount of Medicare funding specifically for his state was tucked inside and he ended up voting for it. One wonders how much more of that will have to go on to achieve final passage.

But this is how politicians in Washington deal with problems: they throw your money at them. Healthcare reform is no different. The Senate version of the bill, at last count, will cost $871 billion. The House version tops $1 trillion. But they tell us this is for the health of Americans, and how dare we count the cost?

Such is the arrogance of politicians. There seems to be no end to the problems they feel capable and duty-bound to solve through legislative proclamation and plenty of your money. To hear them talk, one might think that a few words spoken on Capitol Hill would make problems just disappear. All it takes it good intentions.

But no good can come from 2400 pages of Washington’s good intentions.

I have observed quite the opposite throughout my political career in the House of Representatives, and fear that with this immense legislation, our healthcare problems are only just beginning. Over the last few decades, I have seen healthcare subjected to more and more creeping red tape that only creates bottlenecks and increases costs as new bureaucratic hurdles are put in place.

Politicians cannot solve the problems created by ever-increasing intervention by exponentially increasing their intervention. Similarly, they cannot improve the quality of healthcare and expand access to it for all Americans simply by legislative decree. If only it were that simple! The reality is the free market, when allowed to function, naturally increases access and drives prices down through competition. The free market keeps service providers accountable by allowing people to take their business elsewhere.

This government intervention will eventually create a near monopoly of providers in health insurance as smaller companies are squeezed out and innovation comes to a grinding halt due to formidable barriers to entry. The government will determine prices and levels of service that will apply to everyone, regardless of want or individual circumstances. The true insurance model of healthcare cost management, meaning major medical coverage only, will basically become illegal. Opting out of the system will incur heavy tax penalties.

Expanding government reach so deeply into this very sensitive area of our personal lives and such a major part of our economy means more opportunities for waste, fraud and abuse of the system. One need only remember the recent bailouts for an example of how government handles systemic waste, fraud and abuse.

So while the Senate patted itself on the back last week for delivering a Christmas gift to Americans, time will prove it was instead a great big lump of coal.

Thank You, Congressman Paul

Professor Walter Williams offers the analogy of a man scooping water out of the deep end of a swimming pool, to pour it back into the shallow end in the hope of making the pools depth uniform.

Govt, cannot Provide/Give/Grant you Anything, much less a Commodity as expensive as Healthcare: ..... which wouldn't Be as expensive as it is, if Govt hadn't already spent Decades, redistributing all the water in the pool.

The Real Reasons Behind Fed Secrecy

Congressman Ron Paul has:

The Real Reasons Behind Fed Secrecy

Last week I was very pleased that the Financial Services Committee held a hearing on the Federal Reserve Transparency Act, HR 1207. The bill has 295 cosponsors and there is also strong support for the companion bill in the Senate. This hearing was a major step forward in getting the bill passed.

I was pleased that the hearing was well-attended, especially considering that it was held on a Friday at nine o’clock in the morning! I have been talking about the immense, unchecked power of the Federal Reserve for many years, while the attention of Congress was always on other things. It was gratifying to see my colleagues asking probing questions and demonstrating genuine concern about this important issue as well.

The witness testifying in favor of HR 1207 made some very strong points, which was no surprise considering the bill is simply common sense. It was also no surprise that the witness testifying against the bill had no good arguments as to why a full audit should not be conducted promptly. He attempted to make the case that the fed is already sufficiently accountable to Congress and that the current auditing policy is adequate. The fact is that the Fed comes to Congress and talks about only what it wants to talk about, and the GAO audits only what the current laws allow to be audited. The really important things however, are off limits. There are no convincing arguments that it is in the best interests of the American people for anything the Fed does to be off limits.

It has been argued that full disclosure of details of funding facilities like TALF and PDCF that enabled massive bailouts of Wall Street would damage the financial position of those firms and destabilize the economy. In other words, if the American people knew how rotten the books were at those banks and how terribly they messed up, they would never willingly invest in them, and they would fail. Failure is not an option for friends of the Fed. Therefore, the funds must be stolen from the people in the dark of night. This is not how a free country works. This is not how free markets work. That is crony corporatism and instead of being a force for economic stabilization, it totally undermines it.

If the Fed gave its actual arguments against a full audit, they would not have mentioned anything about political independence or economic stability. Instead they would admit they don’t want to be audited because they enjoy their current situation too much. Under the guise of currency control, they are able to help out powerful allies on Wall Street, in exchange for lucrative jobs or who-knows-what favors later on. An audit would expose the Fed as a massive fraud perpetrated on this country, enriching a privileged few bankers at the top of our economic food chain, and leaving the rest of us with massively devalued dollars which we are forced to use by law. An audit would make people realize that, while Bernie Madoff defrauded a lot of investors for a lot of money, the Fed has defrauded every one of us by destroying the value of our money. An honest and full accounting of how the money system really works in this country would mean there is not much of a chance the American people would stand for it anymore.

Thank You Congressman/Dr. Paul

Healthcare Reform Is More Corporate Welfare

Congressman Ron Paul has:

Healthcare Reform is More Corporate Welfare

Last Wednesday the nation was riveted to the President’s speech on healthcare reform before Congress. While the President’s concern for the uninsured is no doubt sincere, his plan amounts to a magnanimous gift to the health insurance industry, despite any implications to the contrary.

For decades the insurance industry has been lobbying for mandated coverage for everyone. Imagine if the cell phone industry or the cable TV industry received such a gift from government? If government were to fine individuals simply for not buying a corporation’s product, it would be an incredible and completely unfair boon to that industry, at the expense of freedom and the free market. Yet this is what the current healthcare reform plans intend to do for the very powerful health insurance industry.

The stipulation that pre-existing conditions would have to be covered seems a small price to pay for increasing their client pool to 100% of the American people. A big red flag, however, is that they would also have immunity from lawsuits, should they fail to actually cover what they are supposedly required to cover, so these requirements on them are probably meaningless. Mandates on all citizens to be customers of theirs, however, are enforceable with fines and taxes.

Insurance providers seem to have successfully equated health insurance with health care but this is a relatively new concept. There were doctors and medicine long before there was health insurance. Health insurance is not a bad thing, but it is not the only conceivable way to get health care. Instead, we seem to still rely on the creativity and competence of politicians to solve problems, which always somehow seem to be tied in with which lobby is the strongest in Washington.

It is sad to think of the many creative, free market solutions that government prohibits with all its interference. What if instead of joining a health insurance plan, you could buy a membership directly from a hospital or doctor? What if a doctor wanted to have a cash-only practice, or make house calls, or determine his or her own patient load, or otherwise practice medicine outside the constraints of the current bureaucratic system? Alternative healthcare delivery models will be at an even stronger competitive disadvantage if families are forced to buy into the insurance model. And yet, the reforms are sold to us as increasing competition.

What if just once Washington got out of the way and allowed the ingenuity of the American people to come up with a whole spectrum of alternatives to our broken system? Then the free market, not lobbyists and politicians, would decide which models work and which did not.

Unfortunately, the most broken aspect of our system is that Washington sees the need to act on every problem in society, rather than staying out of the way, or getting out of the way. The only tools the government has are force and favors. These are tools that many unscrupulous and lazy corporations would like to wield to their own advantage, rather than simply providing a better product that people will willingly buy. It seems the health insurance industry will get more of those advantages very soon.

Thank You Dr. Paul

What's A Trillion Dollars Look Like? If We're Going To Waste It, We Ought To Know.

So What's a Trillion to ya?

Well, here's what One page tells us a $Trillion Dollars Looks Like.

A packet of one hundred $100 bills is less than 1/2 thick and contains $10,000. Fits in your pocket easily and is more than enough for week or two of shamefully decadent fun.

Believe it or not, this next little pile is $1 million dollars (100 packets of $10,000). You could stuff that into a grocery bag and walk around with it.

While a measly $1 million looked a little unimpressive, $100 million is a little more respectable. It fits neatly on a standard pallet…

And $1 BILLION dollars… now we’re really getting somewhere…

Next we’ll look at ONE TRILLION dollars. This is that number we’ve been hearing so much about. What is a trillion dollars? Well, it’s a million million. It’s a thousand billion. It’s a one followed by 12 zeros.

You ready for this?

It’s pretty surprising.

(And notice those pallets are double stacked.)

So the next time you hear someone toss around the phrase “trillion dollars”… that’s what they’re talking about.

Congress is yammering about throwing $1 Trillion More into an already Malfunctioning Healthcare System as "Reform", ...... to "Hold Down The Costs", through buying More, of the Same Malfunction we have now.

And the Real cost may well greatly exceed $1 Trillion, over the next 10 years, as we Further degrade our Healthcare through emulating Systems like the French have.

Health Care Bill Would Actually Cost 4 Trillion

Phillip Klein on American Spectator clears up some numbers for us by reporting this:


Health Systems Innovations Network, a consulting group, went ahead and estimated the full cost of a bill that included the subsidies and Medicaid expansion, and reduced the number of uninsured by 99 percent. With these assumptions, they estimated the cost at a staggering $4 trillion over 10 years, resulting in the shift of 79 million Americans to government-run health care. The report does not include possible tax increases or spending offsets, but notes that, "this would be a challenging proposal to finance with budget neutrality.

See full article here.

To help put this in perspective, let's consider what 1 trillion looks like.

A stack of one trillion one-dollar bills would reach 68,000 miles into space. If you spent $1 million dollars a day from the day Jesus was born until now, you would only have spent about three quarters of a trillion. If you laid one trillion one-dollar bills end to end, it would make a chain from the earth to the moon 200 times. One trillion dollars would stretch nearly from the earth to the sun. It would take a jet flying at the speed of sound, reeling out a roll of dollar bills behind it, four years before it reeled out one trillion dollar bills. A million seconds is 11.5 days. A billion seconds is 32 years. A trillion seconds is 32,000 years.

Now multiply this by 4. Kill this bill.

FRPAA Seeks To Protect Public Access To Govt Funded Research

And it matters, Why?

Because:

HR 801 Would END FREE ACCESS To GOVT FUNDED RESEARCH

Considering the ghost writing and skewed writing underwriting the purported safety and efficacy of Psych Drugs the Public Must retain the Right to Read and Critique what they already got written up for, ...... or we'll never get the rewrite: the one with the Truth in it.


Here's A Press Release from Senator John Cornyn:

http://cornyn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=
ForPress.NewsReleases&ContentRecord_id=1959bcce-
802a-23ad-4dbe-e2aece171fb3

Sens. Cornyn & Lieberman Team Up To Increase Public Access To Taxpayer Funded Research
Thursday, June 25, 2009

U.S. Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Joe Lieberman, I-CT, introduced legislation today to expand the public’s access to the research they help fund by shedding additional light on federal research projects. Their legislation, the Federal Research Public Access Act (FRPAA), would require every federal department and agency with an annual extramural research budget of $100 million or more to make their research available to the public within six months of publication.

“Our legislation would give the American people greater access to the important scientific research they help fund, which will accelerate scientific discovery and innovation, while also making sure that funding is being spent appropriately to ensure taxpayers are receiving a return on their research investments and they are not having to pay twice for the same research - once to conduct it, and a second time to read it. I will continue to advocate for greater transparency measures across all of our governmental departments and agencies, and I urge our Senate colleagues to support this legislation,” said Sen. Cornyn.

“The United States has some of the best and brightest researchers,” said Lieberman. “I continue to be impressed by their ideas and feel strongly that the American public should have access to what they discover. The internet makes it possible to provide public access to federally funded research and I am pleased to lead the effort to make this information more accessible.”

Background:

Sens. Cornyn and Lieberman first introduced this legislation in the 109th Congress. In 2008, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) implemented their public access policy. It is estimated that approximately 80,000 papers are published each year from NIH funds.

Specifically, the FRPAA would:
* Require every researcher with an annual extramural research budget of $100 million or more, whether funded totally or partially by a government department or agency, to submit an electronic copy of the final manuscript that has been accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
* Ensure that the manuscript is preserved in a stable digital repository maintained by that agency or in another suitable repository that permits free public access, interoperability, and long-term preservation.
* Require that each taxpayer-funded manuscript be made available to the public online and without cost, no later than six months after the article has been published in a peer-reviewed journal.

And LibraryJournal.com Also has FRPAA:

http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6668699.
html?nid=2673&source=title&rid=1999395792

Economics & Eugenics

Loose Fiscal Policy has brought America to its Knees. Much of that Policy stems from the Theories of:

John Maynard Keynes

John Maynard Keynes, 1st Baron Keynes, CB (pronounced /ˈkeɪnz/) (5 June 1883 – 21 April 1946) was a British economist whose ideas have been a central influence on modern macroeconomics, both in theory and practice. He advocated interventionist government policy, by which governments would use fiscal and monetary measures to mitigate the adverse effects of business cycles, economic recessions, and depressions. His ideas are the basis for the school of thought known as Keynesian economics, and its various offshoots.

In the 1930s, Keynes spearheaded a revolution in economic thinking, overturning the older ideas of neoclassical economics that held that free markets would automatically provide full employment as long as workers were flexible in their wage demands. Following the outbreak of World War II Keynes's ideas concerning economic policy were adopted by leading Western economies. During the 1950s and 1960s, the success of Keynesian economics was so resounding that almost all capitalist governments adopted its policy recommendations.

Keynes's influence waned in the 1970s, due to critiques from Milton Friedman and other economists who were less optimistic about the ability of interventionist government policy to positively regulate the business cycle. However, the advent of the global financial crisis in 2007 has caused a resurgence in Keynesian thought. Keynesian economics has provided the theoretical underpinning for the plans of President Barack Obama, Prime Minister Gordon Brown and other global leaders to rescue the world economy.

In 1999, Time Magazine named Keynes one of the 100 most influential people of the 20th century and reported that, "His radical idea that governments should spend money they don't have may have saved capitalism". He is widely considered the father of modern macroeconomics, and by commentators such as John Sloman, the most influential economist of the 20th century. In addition to being an economist, Keynes was also a civil servant, a patron of the arts, a director of the Bank of England, an advisor to several charitable trusts, a writer, a private investor, an art collector and a farmer.

The Instrument Enacting Keynes Interventionist Macroeconomics is America's:

Federal Reserve System

(also known as the Federal Reserve, and informally as The Fed) is the central banking system of the United States. It was created as a result of the Panic of 1907, which was a particularly severe panic after a series of other panics (from previous decades), in which people raced to their banks to withdraw their deposits, which caused banks to fail, which in turn wreaked havoc throughout the U.S. economy. With the passage of the Federal Reserve Act on December 23, 1913, the Federal Reserve System was created "to address these banking panics" and "that would help prevent and contain financial disruptions" like the Panic of 1907. Over time, the roles and responsiblities of the Federal Reserve System have expanded and its structure has evolved, with events such as the Great Depression leading to major changes in the system. Its duties today, according to official Federal Reserve documentation, fall into four general areas:

1. conducting the nation's monetary policy by influencing the monetary and credit conditions in the economy in pursuit of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates;
2. supervising and regulating banking institutions to ensure the safety and soundness of the nation's banking and financial system and to protect the credit rights of consumers;
3. maintaining the stability of the financial system and containing systemic risk that may arise in financial markets;
4. providing financial services to depository institutions, the U.S. government, and foreign official institutions, including playing a major role in operating the nation's payments system.

Ask a representative selection of British Citizens what They think of the Reign of Gordon Brown, with His embrasure of Keynes Interventionism in Their Personal, Household Economies. We don't have to travel That road farther than to note that we've just Traveled it, AGAIN.

So what Else has Keynes contributed to the Improvement of the Sovereign, Individual, Citizen?

Wiki has:

The Galton Institute/British Eugenics Society

Check Their List of Prominent Members.

John Maynard Keynes, Director 1937-1944 V.P. 1937

What conclusion might You Draw from summing up these snippets?

Returning to Keynes Wiki expose:

"Keynes was always confident he could find a solution to whatever problem he turned his attention to, and retained a lasting faith in the ability of government officials to do good."


As in Weeding out the Bad Genetic Stock infesting the under classes, through Eugenics?

If you need a Refresher in just how Nothing, Psychiatric Genetics has actually Proven to date:

Psychiatric Genetics: Another Empty Box Of Bio-$cience.

Macroeconomic Interventionism IS, what it IS: the Brain Fart of a Eugenicist.

Psychiatric Intervention IS, what it IS:

Medical Publishing Co. Calls Bull Shit

Psychiatry lacks the fundamental elements of ANY field claiming to be a science.

Psychiatric Drugs ARE, what they ARE:

FDA Reported Adverse Reactions

America's Outrage over surrendering Their Health Care to Govt, IS, what it IS:

Town Hall Meeting Says NO To Govt Health Care;

The CITIZEN outrage over this Interventionist Fiasco is NOT simple political partisanship. These CITIZENS, are UNITED in their Opposition.

Join them and Make Your Voice Heard.

Unless of course you Want your kids Drugged, for some Non-Disease which exists only through being Voted into existence by a Show of Drug Money Conflicted hands.

ADHD, 100% FRAUD: Dr. Fred Baughman

Hospital Stupidity Costs 85,000 Lives & $35 Billion Per Year

Public Citizen has:

Aug. 6, 2009

Basic Patient Safety Reforms Would Save 85,000 Lives and $35 Billion a Year, Public Citizen Report Says

Consumer Group Urges Congress to Use Medicare Funding as Leverage to Implement Changes

WASHINGTON, D.C. - A report issued today by Public Citizen proposes 10 cost-cutting, patient safety measures that would save an estimated 85,000 lives and $35 billion a year. The report, "Back to Basics," analyzed the results of scientific studies of treatment protocols for chronically recurring, avoidable medical errors.

In contrast to the high-tech tests and procedures that many experts blame for staggering increases in the nation’s health care costs, most of the reforms in Public Citizen’s report involve fundamentals as simple as practitioners consistently washing their hands, sufficiently tending to patients to prevent bed sores, and following simple safety checklists to prevent infections and complications stemming from operations.

Aside from the tragedy of needless deaths and injuries, the financial toll of failing to follow accepted safety procedures is astounding. Severe pressure ulcers cost an average of $70,000 apiece to treat. A catheter infection costs $45,000. Each instance of ventilator-associated pneumonia costs $5,800. Collectively, avoidable surgical errors cost an estimated $20 billion a year, bed sores $11 billion and preventable adverse drug reactions $3.5 billion.

"There are many incentives to order expensive tests and procedures and too few rewards for providing basic, sensible care," said David Arkush, director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division. "As the largest investor in the nation’s health care system, the federal government should ensure that fulfilling basic patient safety standards is a condition of receiving federal reimbursements. And the government should pay providers for doing the right thing. It will save money in the long run."

Public Citizen proposes that health care providers:

• Use a checklist to reduce avoidable deaths and injuries resulting from surgical procedures (saves $20 billion a year);

• Use best practices to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia (saves 32,000 lives and $900 million a year);

• Use best practices to prevent pressure ulcers (saves 14,071 lives and $5.5 billion a year);

• Implement safeguards and quality control measures to reduce medication errors (saves 4,620 lives and $2.3 billion a year);

• Use best practices to prevent patient falls in health care facilities (saves $1.5 billion a year);

• Use a checklist to prevent catheter infections (saves 15,680 lives and $1.3 billion a year);

• Modestly improve nurse staffing ratios (saves 5,000 lives and $242 million a year);

• Permit standing orders to increase flu and pneumococcal vaccinations in the elderly (saves 9,250 lives and $545 million a year);

• Use beta-blockers after heart attacks (saves 3,600 lives and $900,000 a year); and

• Increase use of advanced care planning (saves $3.2 billion a year).

Public Citizen proposes five steps to ensure near-universal adoption of these reforms:

• The federal government should use its enormous leverage from its $750 billion annual investment in health care to compel providers to use proven patient safety practices. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has the authority to enact many of reforms proposed in Public Citizen’s report through the regulatory process. Congress could ensure rapid adoption by including instructions to HHS in legislation;

• Congress should require HHS to take responsibility for accrediting providers to receive Medicare reimbursements. At present, the federal government delegates most accrediting authority to the Joint Commission, a private entity that derives its income from the very hospitals it oversees and denies accreditation to less than 1 percent of these hospitals;

• Congress should make significant financial investments to increase the country’s supply of nurses and set federal minimums of acceptable nurse-to-patient ratios. Nurse shortages are often implicated in patient safety errors. Modest increases would yield significant improvements. A significant increase in the number of nurses could produce dramatic results. One study estimated that increasing the number of nurses by a little more than one-third would save an astounding 72,000 lives annually;

• Congress should require mandatory reporting of adverse events, including requiring hospitals to institute strong internal reporting systems, and creating whistle-blower protections for health care workers. National reporting of the most serious medical errors is largely left to the Joint Commission. However, that organization estimates that it learns of only about one-tenth of 1 percent of serious medical errors despite its stated requirement that doctors disclose all errors to patients. In 1996, the Joint Commission contemplated requiring mandatory reporting but succumbed to industry pressure and settled for voluntary reporting; and

• Congress should ensure that the requirements for hospitals to report doctor discipline and maintain viable peer review processes are followed. Hospitals have been required since 1990 to report to the federal government cases in which doctors are suspended for more than 30 days. But nearly 50 percent of hospitals have never reported a single disciplinary action. This may be due to hospitals flouting the law, evading the spirit of the law by customizing penalties to sail below the reporting threshold, or failing to carry out warranted doctor discipline altogether because of inadequate peer review processes.

READ the report.

###

Thank You Public Citizen.