11 Temmuz 2012 Çarşamba
Republican Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney, the NAACP Speech and Racial Voting
[Ljava.lang.String;@c6ec9b7
10 Temmuz 2012 Salı
9 Temmuz 2012 Pazartesi
Time to Reassess Your Grill Cleaning Tools
To contact us Click HERE
While on vacation, actually on the 4th of July, we were having a traditional cookout. During dinner, my wife pulls out a 3-inch wire bristle from her cheeseburger (photo attached). Fortunately she didn't consume it. I read this morning that there are many patients now arriving at EDs across the country having ingested similar pieces of wire from a grill cleaning brush (see photo). I didn't really think about it until Pamela was holding a piece of wire in her hand as to how dangerous a grill brush can be especially one that is falling apart. For years, I simply used aluminum foil rolled into a ball with an oven mitt to clean the grill. But, when Williams Sonoma came out with their grill cleaning brush, I had to have one. It was much easier to use than tin foil. I have resorted to the tin foil alternative once again after seeing the nearly ingested wire bristle and reading about how dangerous an ingested bristle can be to one's throat, stomach, intestines or other organs. As the official "grill master," I would have felt horrible if anyone would have swallowed a wire bristle because of my lack of attention to detail. So, use this blog as a wakeup call. If you have a grill brush, especially one with a scouring pad component, toss it! There is a lot of information out there as to how to properly care for your grill; start using it. 
Hypocrisy and Falsehoods and Elizabeth Warren’s Campaign for Senate in Massachusetts
To contact us Click HERE
--Richard E. Vatz
The great French essayist and maxim-writer François de la Rochefoucauld wrote that "hypocrisy is the compliment that vice pays to virtue." Truly brilliant: it means that when a person acts in a manner diametrically opposed to his/her ostensible values while rhetorically supporting those values, it shows that the individual knows what is right and wrong despite choosing the latter among behavioral options. Lying, sometimes an unforgivable sin, has many types and subtypes, but the individual who is almost always unpardonable is he or she who attests to a factually false statement while knowing it is true. This type of lie is not common among those in public life, since an individual’s public mendacity can be exposed fairly easily.
Elizabeth Warren, Democratic Candidate in Massachusetts’ 2012 Senatorial election, sent me – as one on a list of thousands, no doubt -- an advertisement in which she wrote the following, with the paragraphs separated by several others:
“All the while, the news from Washington is about the same: sweetheart deals for the richest, most profitable companies in the world, like big oil; and lower tax rates for millionaires and billionaires, who ought to be paying their fair share. That’s what’s at stake in this election: are we going to be a nation that allows the people and businesses who have made it to say to everyone else, ‘I’ve got mine; you’re on your own...’ ”
“[A Scott Brown email] calls us ‘insiders, celebrities, elites occupiers and leftists.’ I’m tired of the name calling and ‘us against them’ politics …[I]t is wrong for corporations like GE to pay nothing—zero – in taxes while kids are left drowning in debt to get an education.”
Glad to hear she abjures “us against them politics.”
Worse than hypocrisy is the falsehood, the unambiguous "L" word. Parenthetically, less than a month ago a Towson University administrator adjudicated a dispute in which I was involved by simply advancing a “fact” that wasn’t a fact, a “fact” that everyone involved in the dispute knew was not a “fact,” a “fact” about which I e-mailed one of the disputants asking how she could suborn such a “misstatement.” She did not respond.
This was atypical of Towson administrators.
But back to Elizabeth Warren. Her conflicting claims of when she communicated and when she didn’t communicate her undocumented Cherokee lineage to Harvard Law School do not qualify as a 100% unambiguous lie. Similarly she has claimed that she has never been advantaged by being identified as a Native American, but Harvard clearly desired to list her as a minority to increase their apparently limited minority-hiring credentials. She claims she had not told Harvard Law School officially of her background, and the School has not indicated whether its listing of a Native American therein was a reference to Warren. Warren has also described herself as potentially being Massachusetts’ first Native American Senator.
On hypocrisy, we find Warren guilty. On lying, the evidence is insufficient to call her the “L” word, but she misleads. If there were one, we’d call her the “M” word.
With apologies to the late Rodney King, “Can we all be honest?”
Professor Vatz teaches Rhetoric and Persuasion at Towson University and is author of The Only Authentic Book of Persuasion (Kendall Hunt, 2012; revision coming out, 2013]
--Richard E. Vatz
The great French essayist and maxim-writer François de la Rochefoucauld wrote that "hypocrisy is the compliment that vice pays to virtue." Truly brilliant: it means that when a person acts in a manner diametrically opposed to his/her ostensible values while rhetorically supporting those values, it shows that the individual knows what is right and wrong despite choosing the latter among behavioral options. Lying, sometimes an unforgivable sin, has many types and subtypes, but the individual who is almost always unpardonable is he or she who attests to a factually false statement while knowing it is true. This type of lie is not common among those in public life, since an individual’s public mendacity can be exposed fairly easily.
Elizabeth Warren, Democratic Candidate in Massachusetts’ 2012 Senatorial election, sent me – as one on a list of thousands, no doubt -- an advertisement in which she wrote the following, with the paragraphs separated by several others:
“All the while, the news from Washington is about the same: sweetheart deals for the richest, most profitable companies in the world, like big oil; and lower tax rates for millionaires and billionaires, who ought to be paying their fair share. That’s what’s at stake in this election: are we going to be a nation that allows the people and businesses who have made it to say to everyone else, ‘I’ve got mine; you’re on your own...’ ”
“[A Scott Brown email] calls us ‘insiders, celebrities, elites occupiers and leftists.’ I’m tired of the name calling and ‘us against them’ politics …[I]t is wrong for corporations like GE to pay nothing—zero – in taxes while kids are left drowning in debt to get an education.”
Glad to hear she abjures “us against them politics.”
Worse than hypocrisy is the falsehood, the unambiguous "L" word. Parenthetically, less than a month ago a Towson University administrator adjudicated a dispute in which I was involved by simply advancing a “fact” that wasn’t a fact, a “fact” that everyone involved in the dispute knew was not a “fact,” a “fact” about which I e-mailed one of the disputants asking how she could suborn such a “misstatement.” She did not respond.
This was atypical of Towson administrators.
But back to Elizabeth Warren. Her conflicting claims of when she communicated and when she didn’t communicate her undocumented Cherokee lineage to Harvard Law School do not qualify as a 100% unambiguous lie. Similarly she has claimed that she has never been advantaged by being identified as a Native American, but Harvard clearly desired to list her as a minority to increase their apparently limited minority-hiring credentials. She claims she had not told Harvard Law School officially of her background, and the School has not indicated whether its listing of a Native American therein was a reference to Warren. Warren has also described herself as potentially being Massachusetts’ first Native American Senator.
On hypocrisy, we find Warren guilty. On lying, the evidence is insufficient to call her the “L” word, but she misleads. If there were one, we’d call her the “M” word.
With apologies to the late Rodney King, “Can we all be honest?”
Professor Vatz teaches Rhetoric and Persuasion at Towson University and is author of The Only Authentic Book of Persuasion (Kendall Hunt, 2012; revision coming out, 2013]
SCOTUS: Form Isn’t Following Function
To contact us Click HERE
June Smith
In honor of Independence Day, I chose to exercise my right of freedom of expression and pass along what the Supreme Court has to say on its website www.supremecourt.gov about the 5-4 ruling, the function of the Court, and other boowah, bushway, and blah blah blah.
Playing on the Supreme Court’s bright red, cheery “We the People” website, www.supremecourt.gov, July 03, 2012/Version 2012.0, doesn’t come close to playing something like Gearbox Software’s Xbox 360 “Brothers in Arms” but since many of “We the People” are up in arms regarding the Chief Riddler’s recent decision, it was worth a shot.
There’s no “hellacious sandbox to test your tactical mettle” www.1up.com/reviews/brothers-in-arms/reviews, just a click and voilà: Home! Underneath the images of the Chambers, sacred hallways, spiraling staircase, statues, illuminated building views and official calendar is the “What’s New” section.
Here’s what’s new, according to the folks at the SCOTUS: “The Supreme Court will launch new Website capabilities on June 1, 2012 to improve the mobile device user experience. The Court’s Website has always supported a variety of web browsers, but it will now detect the mobile device being used and will automatically adjust the display based on the screen size and orientation. This Website enhancement will make the Court’s site easier to read on a mobile device and improve user navigation on the site.”
That launch has yet to happen. They've been too busy lately messing with individual rights.
There is access to info on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act cases “available at this link.” That opens to “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Cases”, dated March 26-28, 2012, with “live links to the orders, case filings, and other information pertaining to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Cases”, but nothing about the recent decision.
It comes as no surprise that there’s a disclaimer, complete with an asterisk, at the bottom of the page—although there is no asterisk in the body of the text—leading to this nugget: “We have provided a link to this site because it has information that may be of interest to our users. The Supreme Court of the United States does not necessarily endorse the views expressed or the facts presented on this site.”
To quote Strunk & White on the use of the asterisk, “To do so is to put on airs, as though you were inviting the reader to join you in a select society of those who know better.”
But I digress…
Not finding anything useful on that page or on any of the other links or links from there, unlike “Brothers” Sergeant Matt Baker, "I didn't ask to be squad leader", and left that section, scoring no points in that round.
“Constitutional Origin” leads to this: “Article III, §1, of the Constitution provides that "[t]he judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." The Supreme Court of the United States was created in accordance with this provision and by authority of the Judiciary Act of September 24, 1789 (1 Stat. 73). It was organized on February 2, 1790.”
Hopeful of discovering the interpretation of the Court’s function, the clicking continued. Surely the information in somewhere in the bowels of the site.
There are links to dockets, oral arguments, court rules, etc., as well as press releases (nothing on the recent ACA decision there, obviously not newsworthy to them), career opportunities, and how to plan your visit, etc., but nothing on the function of the Court.
“The Supreme Court is the highest court in the Nation for all cases and controversies arising under the Constitution or laws of the United States…” popped up in the “Planning Your Visit” section; subsection “Visitor Etiquette”, hardly an explanation of function.
More digression: If a visit to the SCOTUS is on your bucket list, here are a few fun facts to know before going:
There’s a cafeteria open to the public where “…service may be interrupted briefly at noon and 1 p.m. for Supreme Court employees.” Translated, that’s when the important people eat.
The gift shop has “extensive offerings of books and other instructive materials to enhance your understanding of the Court’s history.” There are educational games, learning aids, and gift items “associated with the law and the Supreme Court” but there is no mention of the D.C. five cent bag tax.
An ATM, public phones, and vending machines are located on the ground floor.
Liberty, justice, and an ATM all in one place, all guarded by the 150 Supreme Court police offices, averaging 40-50 officers on duty daily.
Continuing the search, I swept through all the other legalese land minds, finally opting for the link to external links, leading to this fond farewell “You are now leaving the Supreme Court of the United States Website. http://www.uscourts.gov/”, thanks for the visit, hope your site visit was informative.
It wasn’t. Score: Zero. Charcoal: Ready for grilling. Search and game: Over.
The debate about the Supreme Court’s function and the recent decision are far from over. The cognitive elite continue questioning the function of the court and the impact of the decision. Many Team Reason members have expressed their thoughts.
Timothy S said, “The function of the Supreme Court is to protect individual rights from the majority. With the other two branches of government, they respond to the voters directly and hence the majority. The purpose of the Supreme Court is to protect the individuals’ rights from the political desires of the majority. So Chief Justice Roberts’ opinion to throw it all back on the voters goes against what the Supreme Court's function is and why they exist. With their decisions last Friday, it seems they did in fact protect the states’ rights, but did not protect individual rights, and why I feel it fell far short of protecting individual rights. The states are not mandated to comply, but the individual sure is, it was a sad, sad day for liberty and a great day for an ever increasing government.”
Ron would have agreed with Tim and added his own salient points and reasoning along with a rant about “big gubberment getting bigger” and this “hot fried mess.”
All the phone lines would have been lit and the truth would have been told. Callers would have expressed their First Amendment rights and then some and super show producer Ryan would have had some of Ron’s favorite guests scheduled who would have backed up their thoughts with facts.
One of those callers might have been Team Reason’s Tony M., who said: “I have heard from friends who think Roberts did the right thing by throwing it back at the voters. I assured them that they are wrong, that is exactly what the SCOTUS is there for. If not that, then what is their purpose?” Insert the memory of Ron’s cackle here, followed by a lively discussion and the opening of another can of worms.
Efrem K. S. said, “I miss Ron's insights. Man, we need him today.” How right he is.
It seems to me the Court exerted its judicial power to serve its own purpose, leaving us to deal with “the unintended consequences” as Ron often said.
So we forge ahead, seeking the truth and answers, sans Ron. In honor of his legacy, let’s keep the discussion going. Ron would have expected no less.
Your comments are welcome on this site. Let’s talk about it.
June Smith is the widow WBAL talk show host and Sun columnist, Ron Smith, who posthumously received an Emmy® for his lifetime achievement in television and radio at WBAL in Baltimore, MD. Smith was a media titan in the central Maryland area and beyond for almost forty years. Mrs. Smith’s tribute website honoring his legacy is www.FriendsofRonSmith.com. She is working diligently to raise one million dollars for the Ron Smith Pancreatic Cancer Research Fund at Johns Hopkins and is an advocate for H.R. 733, the Pancreatic Cancer Research Education Act. Her email is june@friendsofronsmith.com.
In honor of Independence Day, I chose to exercise my right of freedom of expression and pass along what the Supreme Court has to say on its website www.supremecourt.gov about the 5-4 ruling, the function of the Court, and other boowah, bushway, and blah blah blah.
Playing on the Supreme Court’s bright red, cheery “We the People” website, www.supremecourt.gov, July 03, 2012/Version 2012.0, doesn’t come close to playing something like Gearbox Software’s Xbox 360 “Brothers in Arms” but since many of “We the People” are up in arms regarding the Chief Riddler’s recent decision, it was worth a shot.
There’s no “hellacious sandbox to test your tactical mettle” www.1up.com/reviews/brothers-in-arms/reviews, just a click and voilà: Home! Underneath the images of the Chambers, sacred hallways, spiraling staircase, statues, illuminated building views and official calendar is the “What’s New” section.
Here’s what’s new, according to the folks at the SCOTUS: “The Supreme Court will launch new Website capabilities on June 1, 2012 to improve the mobile device user experience. The Court’s Website has always supported a variety of web browsers, but it will now detect the mobile device being used and will automatically adjust the display based on the screen size and orientation. This Website enhancement will make the Court’s site easier to read on a mobile device and improve user navigation on the site.”
That launch has yet to happen. They've been too busy lately messing with individual rights.
There is access to info on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act cases “available at this link.” That opens to “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Cases”, dated March 26-28, 2012, with “live links to the orders, case filings, and other information pertaining to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Cases”, but nothing about the recent decision.
It comes as no surprise that there’s a disclaimer, complete with an asterisk, at the bottom of the page—although there is no asterisk in the body of the text—leading to this nugget: “We have provided a link to this site because it has information that may be of interest to our users. The Supreme Court of the United States does not necessarily endorse the views expressed or the facts presented on this site.”
To quote Strunk & White on the use of the asterisk, “To do so is to put on airs, as though you were inviting the reader to join you in a select society of those who know better.”
But I digress…
Not finding anything useful on that page or on any of the other links or links from there, unlike “Brothers” Sergeant Matt Baker, "I didn't ask to be squad leader", and left that section, scoring no points in that round.
“Constitutional Origin” leads to this: “Article III, §1, of the Constitution provides that "[t]he judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." The Supreme Court of the United States was created in accordance with this provision and by authority of the Judiciary Act of September 24, 1789 (1 Stat. 73). It was organized on February 2, 1790.”
Hopeful of discovering the interpretation of the Court’s function, the clicking continued. Surely the information in somewhere in the bowels of the site.
There are links to dockets, oral arguments, court rules, etc., as well as press releases (nothing on the recent ACA decision there, obviously not newsworthy to them), career opportunities, and how to plan your visit, etc., but nothing on the function of the Court.
“The Supreme Court is the highest court in the Nation for all cases and controversies arising under the Constitution or laws of the United States…” popped up in the “Planning Your Visit” section; subsection “Visitor Etiquette”, hardly an explanation of function.
More digression: If a visit to the SCOTUS is on your bucket list, here are a few fun facts to know before going:
There’s a cafeteria open to the public where “…service may be interrupted briefly at noon and 1 p.m. for Supreme Court employees.” Translated, that’s when the important people eat.
The gift shop has “extensive offerings of books and other instructive materials to enhance your understanding of the Court’s history.” There are educational games, learning aids, and gift items “associated with the law and the Supreme Court” but there is no mention of the D.C. five cent bag tax.
An ATM, public phones, and vending machines are located on the ground floor.
Liberty, justice, and an ATM all in one place, all guarded by the 150 Supreme Court police offices, averaging 40-50 officers on duty daily.
Continuing the search, I swept through all the other legalese land minds, finally opting for the link to external links, leading to this fond farewell “You are now leaving the Supreme Court of the United States Website. http://www.uscourts.gov/”, thanks for the visit, hope your site visit was informative.
It wasn’t. Score: Zero. Charcoal: Ready for grilling. Search and game: Over.
The debate about the Supreme Court’s function and the recent decision are far from over. The cognitive elite continue questioning the function of the court and the impact of the decision. Many Team Reason members have expressed their thoughts.
Timothy S said, “The function of the Supreme Court is to protect individual rights from the majority. With the other two branches of government, they respond to the voters directly and hence the majority. The purpose of the Supreme Court is to protect the individuals’ rights from the political desires of the majority. So Chief Justice Roberts’ opinion to throw it all back on the voters goes against what the Supreme Court's function is and why they exist. With their decisions last Friday, it seems they did in fact protect the states’ rights, but did not protect individual rights, and why I feel it fell far short of protecting individual rights. The states are not mandated to comply, but the individual sure is, it was a sad, sad day for liberty and a great day for an ever increasing government.”
Ron would have agreed with Tim and added his own salient points and reasoning along with a rant about “big gubberment getting bigger” and this “hot fried mess.”
All the phone lines would have been lit and the truth would have been told. Callers would have expressed their First Amendment rights and then some and super show producer Ryan would have had some of Ron’s favorite guests scheduled who would have backed up their thoughts with facts.
One of those callers might have been Team Reason’s Tony M., who said: “I have heard from friends who think Roberts did the right thing by throwing it back at the voters. I assured them that they are wrong, that is exactly what the SCOTUS is there for. If not that, then what is their purpose?” Insert the memory of Ron’s cackle here, followed by a lively discussion and the opening of another can of worms.
Efrem K. S. said, “I miss Ron's insights. Man, we need him today.” How right he is.
It seems to me the Court exerted its judicial power to serve its own purpose, leaving us to deal with “the unintended consequences” as Ron often said.
So we forge ahead, seeking the truth and answers, sans Ron. In honor of his legacy, let’s keep the discussion going. Ron would have expected no less.
Your comments are welcome on this site. Let’s talk about it.
June Smith is the widow WBAL talk show host and Sun columnist, Ron Smith, who posthumously received an Emmy® for his lifetime achievement in television and radio at WBAL in Baltimore, MD. Smith was a media titan in the central Maryland area and beyond for almost forty years. Mrs. Smith’s tribute website honoring his legacy is www.FriendsofRonSmith.com. She is working diligently to raise one million dollars for the Ron Smith Pancreatic Cancer Research Fund at Johns Hopkins and is an advocate for H.R. 733, the Pancreatic Cancer Research Education Act. Her email is june@friendsofronsmith.com.
Red Maryland Radio: 7/5/2012
To contact us Click HERE
Another great episode of Red Maryland Radio came at you this week:
Listen to internet radio with redmaryland on Blog Talk Radio
On tonight's show
Listen to internet radio with redmaryland on Blog Talk Radio
On tonight's show
- The power went out last week. Greg's power specifically. We'll talk about the politics of electricity and Gregg Easterbrook's article about how it relates to Martin O'Malley's Presidential Campaign'
- Maryland Business for Responsive Government has come out with their ratings. What do they say?
- And did you know there are "conservative" Marylanders who think Dan Bongino isn't conservative enough. Really. Greg took umbrage and wants to discuss tonight.
Martin O'Malley and PEPCO Connected by More than Just Incompetence
To contact us Click HERE
In case you missed the MOAB The Atlantic’s Gregg Easterbrook dropped on Governor O’Malley last week on his week, please check it out. Easterbrook—a victim of many PEPCO outages—reminded O’Malley that his energy policy failures may very well come back to haunt him on the way to the White House in 2016. Easterbrook’s piece is a thoroughly enjoyable fisking of a governor who seems to care more about Sunday morning talk shows than governing. However, please allow me to Tuesday morning quarterback Mr. Easterbrook, as there is more to the story.
I’m sure Easterbrook and many other angry customers will be thrilled to know that—thanks to O’Malley’s own energy policy—PEPCO along with BG&E and Delmarva Power can charge them for power they never used.
But I’m getting ahead of myself. Let’s begin back during the 2006 gubernatorial campaign. It was then mayor O’Malley who demagogued a 72% BG&E rate increase, and lambasted Public Service Commission chairman, Ken Schisler, as an energy industry stooge. In fact, the increase was a result of the removal of rate caps, part of larger deregulation plan enacted by the legislature in 1999, and approved by previous PSC commissioners—including O’Malley’s own brother-in law. O’Malley promised to roll back the rate increase.
During a televised debate with Ehrlich, O’Malley said
Fast forward to July 2012, and we have those “competent, qualified, professional regulators” admitting they dropped the ball on holding PEPCO after several years of declining reliability performance.
Bob Ehrlich isn’t governor but we’re still paying a lot more for energy. Retail electricity rates spiked 54% during O'Malley's first three years office. Rates decreased over the last two years because of
Then there are the rank political shakedowns. In July 2010, similar thunderstorms raked the state causing outages to hundreds of thousands of PEPCO customers. O’Malley targeted his bluster at the utility, and suddenly PEPCO executives and board members donated $20,000 to his reelection campaign. One month later O’Malley, as member of the Board of Public Works approved a $20 million energy efficiency project for PEPCO at BWI Airport. Last year, O’Malley perpetrated another shakedown of Constellation Energy during its merger with Exelon Corp, getting billions from the companies to burnish his green credentials. Of course, Exelon’s $250,000 donation to the Democratic Governor’s Association, which O’Malley leads, helped to sweeten the deal as well.
O’Malley’s record may look good as talking points in a Democratic presidential primary, but it’s a dog’s breakfast of expired campaign promises and bad policy.
I’m sure Easterbrook and many other angry customers will be thrilled to know that—thanks to O’Malley’s own energy policy—PEPCO along with BG&E and Delmarva Power can charge them for power they never used.
But I’m getting ahead of myself. Let’s begin back during the 2006 gubernatorial campaign. It was then mayor O’Malley who demagogued a 72% BG&E rate increase, and lambasted Public Service Commission chairman, Ken Schisler, as an energy industry stooge. In fact, the increase was a result of the removal of rate caps, part of larger deregulation plan enacted by the legislature in 1999, and approved by previous PSC commissioners—including O’Malley’s own brother-in law. O’Malley promised to roll back the rate increase.
During a televised debate with Ehrlich, O’Malley said
As Governor I am going to appoint competent, qualified, professional regulators to the job so that we actually have a hearing to determine what is the fair and reasonable rate that BGE can charge us for this commodity they buy. That did not happen in this case. There is no clearer issue that separates my governing philosophy from the governor’s than this one I will stand with the, rate payers, consumers, and working people of our state, he will always side with the powerful wealthy energy interests and utility lobbyists… The only guarantee we have is that if you [Ehrlich] get reelected we’re all going to be paying a lot more for energy.
Fast forward to July 2012, and we have those “competent, qualified, professional regulators” admitting they dropped the ball on holding PEPCO after several years of declining reliability performance.
Bob Ehrlich isn’t governor but we’re still paying a lot more for energy. Retail electricity rates spiked 54% during O'Malley's first three years office. Rates decreased over the last two years because of
Then there are the rank political shakedowns. In July 2010, similar thunderstorms raked the state causing outages to hundreds of thousands of PEPCO customers. O’Malley targeted his bluster at the utility, and suddenly PEPCO executives and board members donated $20,000 to his reelection campaign. One month later O’Malley, as member of the Board of Public Works approved a $20 million energy efficiency project for PEPCO at BWI Airport. Last year, O’Malley perpetrated another shakedown of Constellation Energy during its merger with Exelon Corp, getting billions from the companies to burnish his green credentials. Of course, Exelon’s $250,000 donation to the Democratic Governor’s Association, which O’Malley leads, helped to sweeten the deal as well.
O’Malley’s record may look good as talking points in a Democratic presidential primary, but it’s a dog’s breakfast of expired campaign promises and bad policy.
8 Temmuz 2012 Pazar
Father's Day
To contact us Click HERE
I really don't want to sound judgmental, but yesterday's front page article in the Cumberland Times News on Father's Day was based on an interview with Martin Sheen. Advice on being a father from Martin Sheen, really? Advice on acting, great, but Martin Sheen as a role model for Father's Day, you couldn't aim even a little higher? Oh wait a minute, he and other son Emilio Estevez have written a father / son memoir entitled, "Along the Way" which would assume now classifies them as experts; weren't they estranged for many years? It wasn't that long ago that Martin Sheen was on the cover of the Sunday Parade magazine for Father's Day under the same mantra: "I may not have been the best father due to my career and never being there or my years of alcoholism, but it doesn't matter who you are, you are never going to get the ideal relationship. Whatever your kids choose to do is not a reflection of you."
Although they seem to be less and less, including Martin Sheen, there are other Father's Day role models to choose from starting with President Obama. Like him or not, he is a devoted father to his daughters. In this day and age, devoted fathers seem to be less and less the rule and more and more the exception. All the more that we should be promoting great Dads and wonderful role models on Father's Day rather poor or even marginal ones. Happy belated Father's Day to the many devoted, wonderful fathers out there.
Although they seem to be less and less, including Martin Sheen, there are other Father's Day role models to choose from starting with President Obama. Like him or not, he is a devoted father to his daughters. In this day and age, devoted fathers seem to be less and less the rule and more and more the exception. All the more that we should be promoting great Dads and wonderful role models on Father's Day rather poor or even marginal ones. Happy belated Father's Day to the many devoted, wonderful fathers out there.
The Waiting Continues
To contact us Click HERE
This is the week for the Supreme Court's ruling on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare). Everyone is weighing in on what the ruling will be. So I figured why not weigh in, as well. Actually, I have about as much to offer in the area of expertise as everyone else so why not. My guess --because it is simply that, a guess--is that the individual mandate will be struck down, but other aspects of the law will be upheld. The Court will focus on the constitutionality of the law as they did with Arizona's Immigration Reform, which they ruled on today. What such a ruling means, however, is that it presents a number of challenges for Marylanders. It puts pressure on Medicaid with increased enrollment; access to care may be threatened; those with pre-existing conditions may be denied coverage; varied premiums for healthier employees would be put in jeopardy and the increase in uninsured will increase the amount of uncompensated care.
I read about an interesting poll today whereby the majority of Americans like the provisions in the Act but don't like how it was enacted by Congress and the President. Tomorrow, I will blog about what it would mean for Marylanders if the entire Act is overturned. In fact, I will blog all week about the Affordable Care Act leading up to the Supreme Court's announcement of their ruling on Thursday.
I read about an interesting poll today whereby the majority of Americans like the provisions in the Act but don't like how it was enacted by Congress and the President. Tomorrow, I will blog about what it would mean for Marylanders if the entire Act is overturned. In fact, I will blog all week about the Affordable Care Act leading up to the Supreme Court's announcement of their ruling on Thursday.
If ACA is Overturned
To contact us Click HERE
Needless to say, no matter what happens, a firestorm will result from either side of the aisle--Democrat or Republican--if the Affordable Care Act is overturned. Everyone from politicians to insurers to providers are preparing for the "what happens if" scenario. For Congress and the President, it is back to the drawing board. For others, like insurers and providers, many of the provisions created under the Affordable Care Act will continue. Hospitals and physicians will continue to work with insurers, policymakers, regulators and each other to do what's right for patients and to build upon many of those reforms already in place.
A focus on the inability to financially sustain the cost of health care will continue with greater emphasis on the value of the care over the volume of tests, procedures and admissions. Providers and regulators will continue to focus on quality and patient safety initiatives as well as linking quality with payment reform. The triple aim of health care reform (better quality, reduced cost and enhanced population health) will also continue to be the focus of all of those groups previously mentioned in today's blog. States would also individually enact stand-alone legislation on some of aspects of the Act. Fortunately, Maryland will continue to make changes and build upon those components of reform already in place.
So far, I am shocked that the Supreme Court's ruling hasn't been leaked to the media, especially in DC where un-named sources run rampant. Actually, that gives me a good feeling about the integrity of the Court.
A focus on the inability to financially sustain the cost of health care will continue with greater emphasis on the value of the care over the volume of tests, procedures and admissions. Providers and regulators will continue to focus on quality and patient safety initiatives as well as linking quality with payment reform. The triple aim of health care reform (better quality, reduced cost and enhanced population health) will also continue to be the focus of all of those groups previously mentioned in today's blog. States would also individually enact stand-alone legislation on some of aspects of the Act. Fortunately, Maryland will continue to make changes and build upon those components of reform already in place.
So far, I am shocked that the Supreme Court's ruling hasn't been leaked to the media, especially in DC where un-named sources run rampant. Actually, that gives me a good feeling about the integrity of the Court.
Drug Shortages - Who is to Blame?
To contact us Click HERE
OK, I know that I said that I would blog all week about tomorrow's Supreme Court decision, but so is everybody else. Blogs, newspapers, radio and TV, the story is everywhere. Can't wait for tomorrow so we can all get on with our lives. Outside of the hospital, I have never had so many people ask me about an issue as they have with the upcoming Supreme Court's decision. So, today I am taking a break from the Affordable Care Act and blogging about a recent poll on the drug shortage issue. Recently, a Congressional Committee stated that the FDA is responsible for the shortages because of their over-regulation and not allowing new drugs to the market fast enough. The results are as follows: Drug Companies - 42.2%; FDA - 11.3%; Both - 42.7% and Neither - 3.8%. I am in the both category. I think that the FDA shares in the blame but to a much lesser degree than Big Pharma. Of course, Congress is going to blame the FDA in an attempt to embarrass the Obama administration. Congress is not going to bite the hand that feeds them, the drug companies! We need to stop pointing fingers and work on viable solutions to the drug shortage issue, especially when it is avoidable, as is the case here.
Today's the Day, but First.
To contact us Click HERE
The Supreme Court is to announce their ruling today on the Affordable Care Act at around 10 AM. I routinely write my blog first thing in the morning based on reflections from about 4 AM on. So, once again, I will write about another "burning" issue and blog about the decision tomorrow. I think that I have written before that I am a Yankee fan. I have been one since I was a young child when I would watch the Yankees with my grandmother sitting in her rocking chair with her rosary beads in her hands praying for her boys, Maris and Mantle throughout the game. This week most would say that it is a great time to be a Yankee fan as they are 5 games ahead in first place heading into the All -Star break in a week or so. Actually, I am embarrassed to be a Yankee fan at least for this week and it's about integrity or a lack there of. On Tuesday, leftfielder Dewayne Wise didn't make a catch in the outfield as he fell into the stands, but the umpire called it a catch and the inning was over. All of the follow up articles and press coverage was about the umpire not making the correct call and that Dewayne did what any player would have done. Really? I'll take you back to my father in law's memorial service when his best friend and high school football teammate got up and told the story of my father in law and the extent of his integrity. During a football game, he caught a pass and ran it down the sidelines for a touchdown. Everyone was cheering on the field and in the stands except my father in law who walked back along the sidelines and pointed to the referee where he stepped out of bounds as he was running down the field. Needless to say, everyone was angry with my father in law that he came clean. His friend told him that he was crazy to have told the referee since no one would have known. My father in law said that he knew and that was enough for him. Ask yourself, would you rather be known as the guy with his integrity well in check or the one who sheepishly ran off the field after not catching a foul ball and then getting to see yourself all over national TV in what should be an extremely embarrassing moment? Some might chalk it up to a different era or winning is everything. From perspective, about one's personal integrity and it's a core value of this health system for a very good reason.
7 Temmuz 2012 Cumartesi
Today's the Day, but First.
To contact us Click HERE
The Supreme Court is to announce their ruling today on the Affordable Care Act at around 10 AM. I routinely write my blog first thing in the morning based on reflections from about 4 AM on. So, once again, I will write about another "burning" issue and blog about the decision tomorrow. I think that I have written before that I am a Yankee fan. I have been one since I was a young child when I would watch the Yankees with my grandmother sitting in her rocking chair with her rosary beads in her hands praying for her boys, Maris and Mantle throughout the game. This week most would say that it is a great time to be a Yankee fan as they are 5 games ahead in first place heading into the All -Star break in a week or so. Actually, I am embarrassed to be a Yankee fan at least for this week and it's about integrity or a lack there of. On Tuesday, leftfielder Dewayne Wise didn't make a catch in the outfield as he fell into the stands, but the umpire called it a catch and the inning was over. All of the follow up articles and press coverage was about the umpire not making the correct call and that Dewayne did what any player would have done. Really? I'll take you back to my father in law's memorial service when his best friend and high school football teammate got up and told the story of my father in law and the extent of his integrity. During a football game, he caught a pass and ran it down the sidelines for a touchdown. Everyone was cheering on the field and in the stands except my father in law who walked back along the sidelines and pointed to the referee where he stepped out of bounds as he was running down the field. Needless to say, everyone was angry with my father in law that he came clean. His friend told him that he was crazy to have told the referee since no one would have known. My father in law said that he knew and that was enough for him. Ask yourself, would you rather be known as the guy with his integrity well in check or the one who sheepishly ran off the field after not catching a foul ball and then getting to see yourself all over national TV in what should be an extremely embarrassing moment? Some might chalk it up to a different era or winning is everything. From perspective, about one's personal integrity and it's a core value of this health system for a very good reason.
Permitting Fees at Last Year's Rates to Encourage Business Friendly Climate
To contact us Click HERE
FREDERICK, MD – Frederick County permitting fees were due to automatically increase as of July 1 by 3.2 percent to keep pace with inflation this year. But, with business-friendly goals of utmost concern to the Frederick Board of County Commissioners, the board recently chose to keep rates the same as last year.
The board also agreed to clarify fee schedule policies in the Community Development Division to provide clarity and consistency with other regulatory issues in the Department of Permits and Inspections. It establishes, eliminates and/or clarifies other fees for certain approvals that are a result of new or modified planning and development review approval processes and also incorporates comprehensive planning and zoning fees into the fee schedule to coincide with the division’s reorganization last year.
Key changes in the fee schedule include the clarification to the “agricultural buildings” definition to be consistent with the building code; establishing of a “minimum permit” fee instead of a “per square foot” charge, and elimination of the fire code revision fee charged for additional plan reviews. In addition, the board will exempt the county’s capital improvement program from payment of the fees in accordance with its strategic goal to “consider eliminating review fees for county capital projects.”
Board President Blaine Young commented, “We believe that holding the permitting fees at the same rate is good for business, and what is good for business is good for Frederick County. The decisions the board has made are part of our strategic goals to consider proposals to reduce, alter or eliminate rules and regulations to help improve county processes.
“We commend our employees for working diligently to help businesses more easily and efficiently navigate their way through the process. We welcome continued feedback from our citizens -- from the homeowner to the large business to the small business.”
At the beginning of their term in office, the Frederick Board of County Commissioners initiated a review of over 200 recommended changes to rules and regulations as part of their goal to improve the “business friendly” atmosphere in Frederick County, and have made good progress toward completion.
The items on the “business friendly action items” list were proposed after meetings with officials from the former Permitting and Development Review and Economic Development Divisions and members of the Frederick Chamber of Commerce, Frederick County Builders Association, commercial business representatives and many other stakeholders.
The changes coincide with the Board of County Commissioners’ proposed Strategic Plan goal of providing improved predictability for businesses. The goal states that “Frederick County needs to implement predictability in the business community in order to reduce inefficiencies, allow cost control, provide an effective process and increase understanding in daily business processes within Frederick County Government.”
For further information, visit www.FrederickCountyMD.gov/permits or contact Director Gary Hessong, Permits and Inspections Department, at 301-600-1172 or via e-mail at ghessong@FrederickCountyMD.gov.
The board also agreed to clarify fee schedule policies in the Community Development Division to provide clarity and consistency with other regulatory issues in the Department of Permits and Inspections. It establishes, eliminates and/or clarifies other fees for certain approvals that are a result of new or modified planning and development review approval processes and also incorporates comprehensive planning and zoning fees into the fee schedule to coincide with the division’s reorganization last year.
Key changes in the fee schedule include the clarification to the “agricultural buildings” definition to be consistent with the building code; establishing of a “minimum permit” fee instead of a “per square foot” charge, and elimination of the fire code revision fee charged for additional plan reviews. In addition, the board will exempt the county’s capital improvement program from payment of the fees in accordance with its strategic goal to “consider eliminating review fees for county capital projects.”
Board President Blaine Young commented, “We believe that holding the permitting fees at the same rate is good for business, and what is good for business is good for Frederick County. The decisions the board has made are part of our strategic goals to consider proposals to reduce, alter or eliminate rules and regulations to help improve county processes.
“We commend our employees for working diligently to help businesses more easily and efficiently navigate their way through the process. We welcome continued feedback from our citizens -- from the homeowner to the large business to the small business.”
At the beginning of their term in office, the Frederick Board of County Commissioners initiated a review of over 200 recommended changes to rules and regulations as part of their goal to improve the “business friendly” atmosphere in Frederick County, and have made good progress toward completion.
The items on the “business friendly action items” list were proposed after meetings with officials from the former Permitting and Development Review and Economic Development Divisions and members of the Frederick Chamber of Commerce, Frederick County Builders Association, commercial business representatives and many other stakeholders.
The changes coincide with the Board of County Commissioners’ proposed Strategic Plan goal of providing improved predictability for businesses. The goal states that “Frederick County needs to implement predictability in the business community in order to reduce inefficiencies, allow cost control, provide an effective process and increase understanding in daily business processes within Frederick County Government.”
For further information, visit www.FrederickCountyMD.gov/permits or contact Director Gary Hessong, Permits and Inspections Department, at 301-600-1172 or via e-mail at ghessong@FrederickCountyMD.gov.
Specialized Engineering Opens Doors for Business Visit
To contact us Click HERE
Frederick County Commissioners and The Business Development and Retention division met with Mr. Charles R. Mitchell, Vice-President of Specialized Engineering for a business visit. Specialized Engineering is an employee-owned firm which was founded in 1992 in Ijamsville, Maryland. The company has since grown and is recognized as one of the premier engineering firms in the Mid-Atlantic region. Specialized Engineering moved to its present Frederick location 2 1/2 years ago at 4845 International Blvd. Suite 104, occupying 8, 000 square feet and employ 93 people. They operate on two shifts and according to Mr. Mitchell their location is very strategic to the Washington Metropolitan area. Specialized Engineering services include Construction Materials Testing and Inspection, Laboratory Testing and Analysis, Geotechnical Engineering and Environmental Consulting. Some of the projects that Specialized Engineering has been involved with include, The City of Frederick Parking Garage, The Frederick County Public Schools Board of Education Building, Georgetown Waterfront Park, District of Columbia Employment Services and the John F. Kennedy Center for Performing Arts.For more information about Specialized Engineering, visit their website at www.specializedengineering.com
Frederick County Recognizes #1 RV Dealer in Maryland
To contact us Click HERE
Frederick County Commissioners and The Business Development and Retention Division met with Kelly Shanholter, President of Beckley’s Camping Center.
Established in 1980 by Mr. Robert Beckley, the Camping Center was originally located on RT 85 in Frederick. In the spring of 1985 the dealership moved to its present location o RT 15, 12 miles north of Frederick, Maryland in Thurmont. In their 32 years of serving the RV community as a RV Dealer, they have sold approximately 24,000 RV units. The dealership carries brands that have longevity in the RV industry such as Winnebago, Keystone, KZ, Newmar and Evergreen. The showroom is 6,000 square feet and they have over 270 units in stock. The service department is an 11,375 square foot facility with a 12 bay service shop. They also have a 5,400 square foot parts department. Beckley’s Camping Center employs 72 people of which 59 are Frederick County residents. The company generated over 38 million dollars in revenue in 2011 and Beckley’s has been ranked the number one RV dealer in the State of Maryland for the past 12 years. According to President Kelly Shanholter,“We sell lifestyles to families”. They also have recently broken ground on 3.5 acres of property that will adjoin the service department to help minimize the congestion of the 250 plus RV’s they have for sale.
For more information about Beckley’s Camping Center, visit their website at www.beckleysrvs.com
Summer Begins With Trans-Tech Business Visit
To contact us Click HERE
Frederick County Commissioners and The Business Development and Retention Division began the summer season with a business visit to Trans-Tech, a subsidiary of Skyworks Solutions. The business visit was hosted by Mr. Gary Moore, Controller for the company, Daniel Tipsord, Sabrina Winpigler, and Ron Hiltner. The company was founded in 1955 and has been located in Frederick County for 46 years. Trans-tech has three shifts and operates on a 24/7 schedule with over 200 employees.Trans-Tech has two locations in Frederick County. Their Corporate headquarters is a 140,000 square foot facility located at 5520 Adamstown Road. Their 16,000 square foot manufacturing facility is located at 4510 Metropolitan Court. Trans-tech is an industry leader in ceramic products. Trans-Tech designs and manufactures a complete line of RF and microwave components for commercial markets including wireless communications infrastructure, military, cable television, broadband access, circuit miniaturization, technical powder and ingots. Trans-Tech’s in house manufacturing capability allows the company to deliver materials that range from custom particle size distributions for thermal barrier coatings and fuel cells to machined precision components. In addition their product portfolio includes dielectric resonators and coaxial transmission line elements for DRO and VCO applications, ceramic bandpass filters, ferrite and garnet materials for circulators/isolators. Visit their website at www.trans-techinc.com
5 Temmuz 2012 Perşembe
The Ruling
To contact us Click HERE
Well, I didn't see that coming. Both Chief Justice Roberts siding with the liberal side of the Supreme Court and upholding the individual mandate by it's treatment as a tax were unexpected. First, it was kind of refreshing to see the Chief Justice take political ideology out of the decision and rule on the reform law based on it's constitutionality. As for the ruling as a whole at least from the hospital side, we can now continue on our path toward reform with more certainty. My prediction was that there was going to be little impact in Maryland if the law was overturned being in a State with a Democratic governor who has embraced the Affordable Care Act from the onset. As the Governor said in his press conference, it's full steam ahead. After yesterday's ruling, I was asked to serve as part of a webinar panel for the Huffington Post. They needed a hospital CEO who had a dissenting opinion of the Supreme Court ruling. I don't know if I fully fit the bill since there are aspects of the ACA that I am not crazy about starting with its treatment of the individual mandate as a tax, that is quite a reach for me, especially since it was clearly stated by the Obama administration and Congress that it wasn't a tax but, argued before the Supreme Court that it was tax. You can't have it both ways. I like the idea of more people being covered with access to health care coverage, but I don't like that we are now destined for a single payer system for health care. I also don't think that the Act goes far enough in a number of areas especially with medical malpractice. As an industry, we still practice defensive medicine and over utilize ancillary testing as well as physician consultants in the care of a hospitalized patient. On the positive side, I have seen firsthand what can be done when hospitals and providers focus on value based care which translates to improved quality, reduced cost and a healthier community. Congressman Roscoe Bartlett said at the groundbreaking for our new medical center in 2006, that the US needs to become truly a "health" care system and not continue as a sick care system. He said that we are focusing on treating the illness, but not enough was being done to prevent the illness. He was right and at the Western Maryland Health System our focus has become just that: we are there if you are sick, but our goal is to get you better and keep you out of the hospital. And it is working. We are seeing dramatic difference by more efficiently and more effectively caring for patients while they are in the hospital, but making sure that once they are discharged they have appropriate follow up care, that they are able to see their physician within a week of discharge, if need be, that high risk patients have their medications upon discharge, that patients and families are educated on the patient's illness while in the hospital and that there is a clear plan to keep them as healthy as can be to avoid readmission. All in all, the Affordable Care Act and the Supreme Court's affirmation of the law have removed barriers for full implementation of the reform law and allow for the continued transition to value based care as a nation. As I have blogged before, US health care is financially unsustainable in its current form. We now have a clearer path for better, more cost effective care, covering more people when they are sick and focusing on their overall health and wellness in an effort to prevent hospitalization going forward. I find it amazing that I was not a fan of the Affordable Care Act in its entirety in 2010, but as I have worked under the value based care delivery model for the last year and a half, there are aspects of the reform law that make sense and should be built upon. We need to take the politics out of health care and focus on improving what has already been started. However, some additional areas of focus would be tort reform, ensuring that health care remains affordable for businesses and individuals, aligning incentives of providers since many physicians are still reimbursed on a volume of service basis, more is done to support and grow the practice of medicine across the US, especially in rural areas, less onerous regulation and immediate attention to what has become the absurdity of the CMS RAC audit process, just to name a few. I will be on vacation next week and not blogging. Please have a safe and happy 4th of July. 
Staff Attorney Job in Venable LLP - Baltimore, MD
To contact us Click HERE
| Job Title | Staff Attorney |
| Location | Baltimore |
| State | MD |
| Practice Area | Real Estate |
| Level | Mid Level |
| Description | Venable’s Baltimore Office seeks staff attorney for real estate group. Experience in commercial real estate finance preferred, but not required. Must have strong academic credentials and be a member of the Maryland Bar. Full time, excellent benefits. EOE-M/F/D/V Send resume to Maria Krupinsky, Recruiting Manager, mtkrupinsky@Venable.com, 750 E. Pratt Street, Suite 900, Baltimore, Maryland 21202. |
| Source | Firm Web Site |
| Firm Name | Venable LLP |
| Contact Details | |
| Name | Maria Krupinsky |
| Title | Recruiting Manager |
| mtkrupinsky@Venable.com | |
| Address 1 | 750 E. Pratt Street |
| Address 2 | Suite 900 |
| City | Baltimore |
| State | MD |
| Country | USA |
| Zipcode | 21202 |
Real Estate Associate Job in Venable LLP - Baltimore, MD
To contact us Click HERE
| Job Title | Real Estate Associate |
| Location | Baltimore |
| State | MD |
| Practice Area | Real Estate |
| Level | Mid Level |
| Description | Venable's Baltimore office seeks a real estate associate with 4-6 years commercial real estate experience. Experience in real estate finance, especially the restructuring and workout of commercial mortgage loans, is preferred but not required. Must have strong academic credentials and be a member of the Maryland Bar. "Big Firm" experience strongly preferred. Send resume and transcript to Maria Krupinsky, Recruiting Manager, mtkrupinsky@Venable.com, 750 E. Pratt Street, Suite 900, Baltimore, Maryland 21202. |
| Source | Firm Web Site |
| Firm Name | Venable LLP |
| Contact Details | |
| Name | Maria Krupinsky |
| Title | Recruiting Manager |
| mtkrupinsky@Venable.com | |
| Address 1 | 750 E. Pratt Street |
| Address 2 | Suite 900 |
| City | Baltimore |
| State | MD |
| Country | USA |
| Zipcode | 21202 |
Environmental Associate Job in Venable LLP - Baltimore, MD
To contact us Click HERE
| Job Title | Environmental Associate |
| Location | Baltimore |
| State | MD |
| Practice Area | Environmental |
| Level | Junior Level |
| Description | Venable's Baltimore office is looking for an associate for their environmental group. One to three years’ experience preferred. Maryland Bar, good academics and undergraduate achievement. Good research and writing skills required. Please send resume, cover letter and transcript to Maria Krupinsky at mtkrupinsky@Venable.com. |
| Source | Firm Web Site |
| Firm Name | Venable LLP |
| Contact Details | |
| Name | Maria Krupinsky |
| Title | Recruiting Manager |
| mtkrupinsky@Venable.com | |
Government Contracts Lawyer Job in Miles and Stockbridge P.C. - Baltimore, MD
To contact us Click HERE
| Job Title | Government Contracts Lawyer |
| Location | Baltimore |
| State | MD |
| Practice Area | Government Contracts |
| Level | Senior Level |
| Description | Miles & Stockbridge is seeking a Government Contracts Lawyer with 7-15 years of experience and substantial portable business to help expand our thriving government contracts practice in our Maryland and Northern Virginia offices. Practice in protests, claims, fraud investigations and related litigation, and regulatory counseling in cybersecurity, manufacturing and distribution industries is preferred. Please send cover letters and resumes via email to Dina Billian, Esq., dbillian@milesstockbridge.com, Recruitment Manager & Pro Bono Coordinator, Miles & Stockbridge P.C. EOE. |
| Source | Firm Web Site |
| Firm Name | Miles and Stockbridge P.C. |
| Contact Details | |
| Name | Dina Billian |
| Title | Recruitment Manager & Pro Bono Coordinator |
| dbillian@milesstockbridge.com | |
4 Temmuz 2012 Çarşamba
Today's the Day, but First.
To contact us Click HERE
The Supreme Court is to announce their ruling today on the Affordable Care Act at around 10 AM. I routinely write my blog first thing in the morning based on reflections from about 4 AM on. So, once again, I will write about another "burning" issue and blog about the decision tomorrow. I think that I have written before that I am a Yankee fan. I have been one since I was a young child when I would watch the Yankees with my grandmother sitting in her rocking chair with her rosary beads in her hands praying for her boys, Maris and Mantle throughout the game. This week most would say that it is a great time to be a Yankee fan as they are 5 games ahead in first place heading into the All -Star break in a week or so. Actually, I am embarrassed to be a Yankee fan at least for this week and it's about integrity or a lack there of. On Tuesday, leftfielder Dewayne Wise didn't make a catch in the outfield as he fell into the stands, but the umpire called it a catch and the inning was over. All of the follow up articles and press coverage was about the umpire not making the correct call and that Dewayne did what any player would have done. Really? I'll take you back to my father in law's memorial service when his best friend and high school football teammate got up and told the story of my father in law and the extent of his integrity. During a football game, he caught a pass and ran it down the sidelines for a touchdown. Everyone was cheering on the field and in the stands except my father in law who walked back along the sidelines and pointed to the referee where he stepped out of bounds as he was running down the field. Needless to say, everyone was angry with my father in law that he came clean. His friend told him that he was crazy to have told the referee since no one would have known. My father in law said that he knew and that was enough for him. Ask yourself, would you rather be known as the guy with his integrity well in check or the one who sheepishly ran off the field after not catching a foul ball and then getting to see yourself all over national TV in what should be an extremely embarrassing moment? Some might chalk it up to a different era or winning is everything. From perspective, about one's personal integrity and it's a core value of this health system for a very good reason.
The Ruling
To contact us Click HERE
Well, I didn't see that coming. Both Chief Justice Roberts siding with the liberal side of the Supreme Court and upholding the individual mandate by it's treatment as a tax were unexpected. First, it was kind of refreshing to see the Chief Justice take political ideology out of the decision and rule on the reform law based on it's constitutionality. As for the ruling as a whole at least from the hospital side, we can now continue on our path toward reform with more certainty. My prediction was that there was going to be little impact in Maryland if the law was overturned being in a State with a Democratic governor who has embraced the Affordable Care Act from the onset. As the Governor said in his press conference, it's full steam ahead. After yesterday's ruling, I was asked to serve as part of a webinar panel for the Huffington Post. They needed a hospital CEO who had a dissenting opinion of the Supreme Court ruling. I don't know if I fully fit the bill since there are aspects of the ACA that I am not crazy about starting with its treatment of the individual mandate as a tax, that is quite a reach for me, especially since it was clearly stated by the Obama administration and Congress that it wasn't a tax but, argued before the Supreme Court that it was tax. You can't have it both ways. I like the idea of more people being covered with access to health care coverage, but I don't like that we are now destined for a single payer system for health care. I also don't think that the Act goes far enough in a number of areas especially with medical malpractice. As an industry, we still practice defensive medicine and over utilize ancillary testing as well as physician consultants in the care of a hospitalized patient. On the positive side, I have seen firsthand what can be done when hospitals and providers focus on value based care which translates to improved quality, reduced cost and a healthier community. Congressman Roscoe Bartlett said at the groundbreaking for our new medical center in 2006, that the US needs to become truly a "health" care system and not continue as a sick care system. He said that we are focusing on treating the illness, but not enough was being done to prevent the illness. He was right and at the Western Maryland Health System our focus has become just that: we are there if you are sick, but our goal is to get you better and keep you out of the hospital. And it is working. We are seeing dramatic difference by more efficiently and more effectively caring for patients while they are in the hospital, but making sure that once they are discharged they have appropriate follow up care, that they are able to see their physician within a week of discharge, if need be, that high risk patients have their medications upon discharge, that patients and families are educated on the patient's illness while in the hospital and that there is a clear plan to keep them as healthy as can be to avoid readmission. All in all, the Affordable Care Act and the Supreme Court's affirmation of the law have removed barriers for full implementation of the reform law and allow for the continued transition to value based care as a nation. As I have blogged before, US health care is financially unsustainable in its current form. We now have a clearer path for better, more cost effective care, covering more people when they are sick and focusing on their overall health and wellness in an effort to prevent hospitalization going forward. I find it amazing that I was not a fan of the Affordable Care Act in its entirety in 2010, but as I have worked under the value based care delivery model for the last year and a half, there are aspects of the reform law that make sense and should be built upon. We need to take the politics out of health care and focus on improving what has already been started. However, some additional areas of focus would be tort reform, ensuring that health care remains affordable for businesses and individuals, aligning incentives of providers since many physicians are still reimbursed on a volume of service basis, more is done to support and grow the practice of medicine across the US, especially in rural areas, less onerous regulation and immediate attention to what has become the absurdity of the CMS RAC audit process, just to name a few. I will be on vacation next week and not blogging. Please have a safe and happy 4th of July.
Kaydol:
Yorumlar (Atom)