Republicans voting againt 9-11 responders health bill.

[JimboDaMan]

If we gave each of those 10k responders 5 mill a piece than that's only 500 million or even 10 million a piece that's still only 1 billion.

People spout nonsense like this directly out of their butts, and then these people vote. Oy vay.

Now, I agree that dividing 7B by 10K does yield a large number - a world less than 10 million, but still a large number. But this is a problem with involving long-term expensive monitoring, treatment, and specialized care. (Full disclosure: my brother-in-law is NYFD with serious health problems resulting not from day-of injuries but from working the site week after week in support of his fallen brethren). If there's a better way to do this, please offer up specifics, because its been many years with more happy talk than concrete support. Time to get this done.

[SnyderShrugged]

The problem with the private plans is that they are motivated by profit. Profit and health care do not mix and thus many times the benefit packages do not include procedures that do not turn a profit. Many countries with single-payer universal systems have much much better health care coverage and results than the US. Also many did not lose coverage but there are also many that did. As well many who do have coverage are being denied benefits through their workman's compensation because they are stating that there is not direct link between them having cancer and other ailments and the particles they inhaled. The point is that under the system we have many people are left out in the cold. Now under a universal system people still die people sometimes get denied more complicated and lucrative procedures which is why there is medical tourism, but in this case I am positive that the first responders would be covered.

Not to be argumentative, but why would you be "positive" that they would be covered in a universal system if not covered in the private one. I hate to keep saying the same thing, but current federally run medical programs like medicare have the highest denial rates in the industry.

[shk75]

Not to be argumentative, but why would you be "positive" that they would be covered in a universal system if not covered in the private one. I hate to keep saying the same thing, but current federally run medical programs like medicare have the highest denial rates in the industry.

Here is maybe what I should have stressed more. I am talking about a SINGLE-payer universal plan not a mixed private/public universal plan. Medicare has high rejection rates because it is underfunded and is often loaded with high risk low reward populations. To successfully run a universal plan you must enlist healthy people which is why under Obama's plan health care is a mandate since it is the only way that insurers would be able to fund the current plan. However Medicare is also one of the leanest health programs around with extremely low administrative costs estimated to be around 3-5% compared to up to 25% for private insurers. The reason I say I am positive that they would be covered is because when looking at benefits packages of other single payer universal plans like France and Sweden, the types of procedures being lobbied for by these responders would be covered.

[SnyderShrugged]

Here is maybe what I should have stressed more. I am talking about a SINGLE-payer universal plan not a mixed private/public universal plan. Medicare has high rejection rates because it is underfunded and is often loaded with high risk low reward populations. To successfully run a universal plan you must enlist healthy people which is why under Obama's plan health care is a mandate since it is the only way that insurers would be able to fund the current plan. However Medicare is also one of the leanest health programs around with extremely low administrative costs estimated to be around 3-5% compared to up to 25% for private insurers. The reason I say I am positive that they would be covered is because when looking at benefits packages of other single payer universal plans like France and Sweden, the types of procedures being lobbied for by these responders would be covered.

I need to point out that those administratibve cost figures leave out the fact that medicare doesnt count fraud prevention and regulatory compliance costs into their admin coats while the private insurers do. Its not an apples to apples comparrison, and when the fraud is added in, they are virtually identical.

I think you are very opitimistic to think coverage levels in terms of specific procedures, would be any better than what they already have for insurance. Like I said, I think there are some merits to a universal/single payer system, but I dont think at all that extended coverage like we see a need here for, is one of them.

[Koolblue13]

I'm just glad that after almost 10 years, they are finally recognizing the first responders need help.

[shk75]

I need to point out that those administratibve cost figures leave out the fact that medicare doesnt count fraud prevention and regulatory compliance costs into their admin coats while the private insurers do. Its not an apples to apples comparrison, and when the fraud is added in, they are virtually identical.

I think you are very opitimistic to think coverage levels in terms of specific procedures, would be any better than what they already have for insurance. Like I said, I think there are some merits to a universal/single payer system, but I dont think at all that extended coverage like we see a need here for, is one of them.

I disagree with your first assertion and I do not have time right now to show you the various studies that disprove this point but I will get them to you later if you are interested. Furthermore, I do not want to get into a debate with you on single payer versus our system since this would derail the topic. Also once again I say they would be covered because from what I see they have cancer and long term care issues and these are always covered by any universal system yet in the US people with cancer and no care has become normal unfortunately. If you would like to get into a deeper debate then I am OK with opening a new thread or resurrecting an old one. Also I would like to thank you for debating in a respectful manner without slinging names and labels.

[SnyderShrugged]

I disagree with your first assertion and I do not have time right now to show you the various studies that disprove this point but I will get them to you later if you are interested. Furthermore, I do not want to get into a debate with you on single payer versus our system since this would derail the topic. Also once again I say they would be covered because from what I see they have cancer and long term care issues and these are always covered by any universal system yet in the US people with cancer and no care has become normal unfortunately. If you would like to get into a deeper debate then I am OK with opening a new thread or resurrecting an old one. Also I would like to thank you for debating in a respectful manner without slinging names and labels.

Thanks and likewise in the respect area. I dont see any reason to get riled up. often its a difference in perspective and experiences that make our views for us.

I sent you something PM thats on the topic.

Have a great one!

[Mooka]

Something has to be done here.

We told these people that the air quality at the work sites were safe. (we as in the EPA and others) Because we arbitrarily established that the air quality was safe, people aren't allowed to get compensated for their respiratory problems.

That's ****ed up.

Fix this now.

The bill was for 7.6 BILLION. There were less than 10,000 first responders, all of whom have prior health coverage, and a majority of whom settled a class action lawsuit already. Exactly how much will ever be enough?

That was my point in the prior thread bout this bill. $7.6 billion for 10k responders?? That just makes no sense. If you go and read the bill & amendments it looks more like a federal jobs bill with all the "programs", committees, monitoring, research and reports mandated in it. IMO this "bill" will get done but on a much smaller in scope & scale. If it's for the first responders then limit it for the first responders.

If we gave each of those 10k responders 5 mill a piece than that's only 500 million or even 10 million a piece that's still only 1 billion. The $7.6 billion figure is just way out of line.

7.6 billion over the cost of the entire bill which is like 10+ years.

Your math is off a couple zeros. 5 million a piece would be 50 billion dollars not 500 million.

I believe a bulk of the money goes towards reopening the 9/11 victim compensation fund till 2032.

[aREDSKIN]

[/color]

Something has to be done here.

We told these people that the air quality at the work sites were safe. (we as in the EPA and others) Because we arbitrarily established that the air quality was safe, people aren't allowed to get compensated for their respiratory problems.

That's ****ed up.

Fix this now.

7.6 billion over the cost of the entire bill which is like 10+ years.

Your math is off a couple zeros. 5 million a piece would be 50 billion dollars not 500 million.

I believe a bulk of the money goes towards reopening the 9/11 victim compensation fund till 2032.

Yep, you're right. I'll refrain from doing any more math on a Sat morning with windows calculator anymore. Those zero's are just too damn small for me to read & count anymore.

[Drew_Fl]

7.6 Billion sounds like a lot, but i really don't know what it covers exactly so i won't judge. i just know these guys need to be taken care of. I also agree with the principle that if we can't pay for it, we can't pass it. But that has never stopped gov't before, so i'm not gonna expect it to start now. Since they already passed a $1 trillion health bill, we might as well add this in and bite the bullet. i'm not sure there would be any better cause.

[Veretax]

personally I don't know what's in the bill, if its the same bill that's come up and been voted down three times then I have to wonder why bring it up a 4th time this session? I'm confused. How long is the bill, is there somewhere I can go to read it?

[Baculus]

personally I don't know what's in the bill, if its the same bill that's come up and been voted down three times then I have to wonder why bring it up a 4th time this session? I'm confused. How long is the bill, is there somewhere I can go to read it?

I think I posted the bill in my OP, but if you Google the name of it you should be able to locate it. (Sorry -- I am a lazy **** right now.)

---------- Post added December-19th-2010 at 03:22 AM ----------

[/color]

Yep, you're right. I'll refrain from doing any more math on a Sat morning with windows calculator anymore. Those zero's are just too damn small for me to read & count anymore.

Aha -- I was doing the same thing when I was earlier trying to calculate the costs. No sleep and no coffee makes for poor math skills.

[TimmySmith]

The class action lawsuit covered 10,500 by itself, and to quote from the GOP's own website: "As of March 31, 2010, a total of 52,700 individuals were enrolled in the WTC Responders programs."

52,700 are enrolled when NYC put the estimate of 10,000 back in 2002. Plus the fact fact that the entire police and fire departments in NYC (5 boroughs) total around 35,000 so even 10K seems a bit high.

[Burgold]

How do you get that from my post? I'm sure I said very specifically just now that since its paid for I'd be more in support. Aree you saying Im against because I wanted all options considered to ensure this is the best one?

Because previously you said if if was paid for you'd be in support. Now, that it's paid for you're still not supporting it, but "more' in support or looking for ways to reject it. The qualification of researching and ruling out "all other options" is wonderfully nebulous and as others have said it is one that can never be met.

[polywog999]

The GOP should address this more publicly. It is making them look bad. Of course you dig your own grave when you constantly attack your enemies with exaggerations and half-truths. They are getting a taste of their own medicine. Things are not looking good for the GOP so far and that, in turn, will be bad for the country.

[TimmySmith]

The GOP should address this more publicly. It is making them look bad.

That being the whole point of this exercise. It's a talking point for Olbermann, Stewart and the rest. It is supposed to energize the base and it happens on both sides. This basically is the flip side of the Mosque issue. Anything 9/11 gets divisive.

[SnyderShrugged]

Because previously you said if if was paid for you'd be in support. Now, that it's paid for you're still not supporting it, but "more' in support or looking for ways to reject it. The qualification of researching and ruling out "all other options" is wonderfully nebulous and as others have said it is one that can never be met.

You twist my words Burg. I said if it were paid for I would be more inclined to support it. It isnt unreasonable to desire all options to be investigated before enacting any legislation. I would say the exact same thing about any and all laws regardless of their content. You know this, and it makes no sense for you to take this line are debate with me when you already know my beliefs.

Please dont try to twist this into a silly, illogical, "he hates the first responders" argument. It's dishonest.

[polywog999]

That being the whole point of this exercise. It's a talking point for Olbermann, Stewart and the rest. It is supposed to energize the base and it happens on both sides. This basically is the flip side of the Mosque issue. Anything 9/11 gets divisive.

I agree. I can see where they might not want to have it passed. Are we just going to give lots of money away because of emotion? I don't even know at this point what's in the bill. Just because it says 9/11 doesn't mean that its good for the country. We all collectively, have to pay for this bill. I want to know more about it before I "condemn" anyone.

[Burgold]

That being the whole point of this exercise. It's a talking point for Olbermann, Stewart and the rest. It is supposed to energize the base and it happens on both sides. This basically is the flip side of the Mosque issue. Anything 9/11 gets divisive.

It gets worse when you look at how soldiers and marines have been treated after Iraq. The support was not there for ramping up VA services or dealing with the aftermath of life in service. There were tremendous gaps in the system, esp. in 2003-5 (I picked those years because I was heavily involved with a charity delivering supports to wounded soldiers and their families). It blows my mind how many went straight from the theater to hospital to homelessness. How poor the PTSD supports are/were.

That's why it always galled me when Republicans said they supported the troops. They supported the war. Not the troops. (Though in fairness, probably most didn't know or didn't give a thought to the conditions of our troops [whether it was conditions at Walter Reed, or not giving combat pay for those in combat conditions, or armoring up vehicles and personnel sufficiently])

[@DCGoldPants]

again, the Dems are idiots. They've had a week now and could have been asking loudly why the GOP doesn't support 9/11 responders. Of course there is more to it. But that method has worked for the GOP on all sorts of issues.

Ask a question that really makes a complicated issue seem simple, and then force the other side to talk details that nobody really wants to hear.

[Thiebear]

I'm an idiot: Lets just get this out of the way up front! How is this not law from 2002?

They should pass any bill for the first responders that is necessary.. paid for or not.. we can work that out in January.

You type Donate and "First Responders" take up 3 pages.

But:

Didnt they get billions of dollars? (I need to go look this up).

Roy D. Simon of Hofstra University School of Law in Hempstead, N.Y., was approved to review communications to the plaintiffs about the settlement process.

The agreement applies to three related dockets for claimants who were among the first responders, claimants who worked on the rubble pile and claimants who allege injuries as first responders and for working to remove the rubble. Ninety-five percent of the eligible claimants must agree to participate in the settlement or it will not become effective.

The settlement fund will be drawn from WTC Captive, which was created in 2004 with a $1 billion grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency from an appropriation in 2003 by Congress.

The parties agree that within 90 days of the effective date of the settlement, WTC Captive will deposit $625 million in an account for the settlement fund. In addition, WTC Captive will pay $3.5 million toward allocation costs. WTC Captive may have an additional liability up to $25 million depending on the number of additional debris-removal claims filed.

http://www.lexisnexis.com/Community/LitigationResourceCenter/blogs/litigationblog/archive/2010/06/28/716-million-settlement-for-wtc-first-responders-rubble-removal-workers-approved.aspx

how the hell are we not doing the below already????

Official Summary

7/22/2010--Reported to House amended, Part II. James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010 - Title I: World Trade Center Health Program -

(Sec. 101)Amends the Public Health Service Act to establish the World Trade Center Health Program (WTC Program) within the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health to provide:

(1) medical monitoring and treatment benefits to eligible emergency responders and recovery and cleanup workers (including those who are federal employees) who responded to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; and

(2) initial health evaluation, monitoring, and treatment benefits to residents and other building occupants and area workers in New York City who were directly impacted and adversely affected by such attacks. Includes within the WTC Program:

(1) medical monitoring, including clinical examinations and long-term health monitoring and analysis for individuals who were likely to have been exposed to airborne toxins that were released, or to other hazards, as a result of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks;

(2) an initial health evaluation, including an evaluation to determine eligibility for followup monitoring and treatment;

(3) followup monitoring and treatment and payment for all medically necessary health and mental health care expenses of individuals with a WTC-related health condition, including necessary prescription drugs;

(4) establishment of an outreach program to potentially eligible individuals concerning the benefits under this Act;

(5) collection of health and mental health data on individuals receiving monitoring or treatment benefits, using a uniform system of data collection; and

(6) establishment of a research program on health conditions resulting from the terrorist attacks. Declares that monitoring and treatment benefits and initial health evaluation benefits are provided without any cost sharing to an eligible WTC responder or any other eligible WTC community member. Requires payment for such treatment to be reduced or recouped for work-related conditions to the extent that the Administrator determines the payment has been made or can reasonably be expected to be made under a workers compensation law or plan. Makes the WTC Program a secondary payor for individuals with a public or private health plan. Requires the WTC Program Administrator to:

(1) develop and implement a quality assurance program for the medical monitoring and treatment delivered by Clinical Centers of Excellence and other participating health care providers;

(2) develop and implement a program to review the Program's health care expenditures to detect fraudulent or duplicate billing payment for inappropriate services; and

(3) submit an annual report to Congress on the operations of this Act for the fiscal year and for the entire period of operation of the program. Requires the WTC Program to be administered by the Director of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health or a designee of such Director. Directs the Secretary to notify Congress when enrollments in the WTC Program reach a specified threshold. Requires the Comptroller General to report to Congress on the cost of the monitoring and treatment programs provided under this Act. Authorizes the City of New York to make recommendations to the WTC Program Administrator on ways to improve the monitoring and treatment programs under this Act for both eligible WTC responders and eligible WTC community members. Directs the WTC Program Administrator to establish:

(1) the WTC Health Program Scientific/Technical Advisory Committee to review scientific and medical evidence and to make recommendations to the Administrator on additional WTC Program eligibility criteria and on additional WTC-related health conditions; and

(2) the WTC Responders Steering Committee and the WTC Community Program Steering Committee. Requires the WTC Program Administrator to:

(1) institute an education and outreach program on the existence and availability of services under the WTC Program; and

(2) provide for the uniform collection and analysis of data on the utilization of monitoring and treatment benefits provided to eligible WTC responders and eligible WTC community members, the prevalence of WTC-related health conditions, and the identification of new WTC-related health conditions. Requires such data to be collected for all individuals provided monitoring or treatment benefits under this Act. Requires the Administrator to enter into contracts with Clinical Centers of Excellence to provide:

(1) monitoring and treatment benefits and initial health evaluation benefits;

(2) outreach activities to individuals eligible for such benefits and for follow-up to individuals who are enrolled in the monitoring program;

(3) benefits counseling with respect to WTC-related health conditions for eligible individuals;

(4) benefits counseling with respect to WTC-related health conditions that may be available under workers' compensation or other benefits programs for work-related injuries or illnesses, health insurance, disability insurance, or other insurance plans or through public or private social service agencies;

(5) translational and interpretive services for program participants who are not English language proficient; and

(6) data collection and reporting. Requires the Administrator to enter into contracts with Coordinating Centers of Excellence to:

(1) receive, analyze, and report to the Administrator on data collected and reported by Clinical Centers of Excellence;

(2) develop medical monitoring, initial health evaluation, and treatment protocols;

(3) coordinate outreach activities;

(4) establish criteria for the credentialing of medical providers participating in the nationwide network of providers;

(5) coordinate and administer the activities of the WTC Health Program Steering Committees; and

(6) meet periodically with the corresponding Clinical Centers of Excellence to obtain input on the analysis and reporting of data collected and on the development of protocols. Requires New York City to contribute its required matching funds for monitoring and treatment to qualify for a contract for the provision of such benefits. Limits the maximum amount of such matching requirement. Sets forth provisions defining "Clinical Center of Excellence" and "Coordinating Center of Excellence" and establishing reimbursement rules for such Centers. Declares that the provisions of this Act constitute budget authority in advance of appropriations and represent the obligations of the federal government to provide for the payment for such provisions of this Act. Defines and sets forth eligibility requirements for WTC Responders. Establishes a limitation on the number of eligible WTC responders who may be enrolled in the WTC Program. Requires the WTC Program to provide monitoring benefits for eligible WTC responders, including long-term health monitoring and analysis. Sets forth provisions governing the treatment of WTC responders for WTC-related health conditions. Defines "WTC-related health condition" and lists such health conditions for WTC-responders. Establishes standards for determining whether the terrorist attacks are responsible for a particular health condition. Establishes:

(1) a process for determinations as to whether to include additional health conditions on the list of WTC-related health conditions; and

(2) a certification process for determinations that an eligible WTC responder has a WTC-related health condition. Directs the Administrator to:

(1) reimburse costs for medically necessary treatment for WTC-related health conditions;

(2) establish a program for paying for the medically necessary outpatient prescription pharmaceuticals prescribed for such conditions; and

(3) reimburse the costs of monitoring and the costs of an initial health evaluation. Requires the Coordinating Centers of Excellence to develop medical treatment protocols for the treatment of certified-eligible WTC responders and certified-eligible WTC community members for identified WTC-related health conditions. Requires the WTC Program Administrator to approve such protocols. Defines "eligible WTC community member" and establishes eligibility criteria for such individuals. Limits the total number of individuals who may be certified as eligible WTC community members. Requires the WTC Program to provide for an initial health evaluation to determine if a certified eligible WTC community member has a WTC-related health condition and is eligible for followup monitoring and treatment benefits under the WTC Program. Lists WTC-related health conditions for WTC community members. Allows followup monitoring and treatment for individuals not otherwise qualified who have been diagnosed with a WTC-related health condition. Limits the amount of benefits that may be provided to all such individuals for any fiscal year. Requires the WTC Program Administrator to establish a nationwide network of health care providers to provide monitoring and treatment benefits and initial health evaluations to ensure reasonable access to benefits for individuals who are enrolled WTC responders, screening-eligible WTC survivors, or certified-eligible WTC survivors who reside in a state outside the New York metropolitan area. Requires the WTC Program Administrator to conduct or support:

(1) research on physical and mental health conditions that may be related to the terrorist attacks;

(2) research on diagnosing WTC-related health conditions in the case of conditions for which there has been diagnostic uncertainty; and

(3) research on treating such conditions of such individuals in the case of conditions for which there has been treatment uncertainty. Requires the Administrator to extend and expand the World Trade Center Health Registry. Authorizes the WTC Program Administrator to make grants to the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene to provide mental health services to address mental health needs related to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. Title II : September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001 -

(Sec. 201)Amends the Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act to:

(1) make individuals eligible for compensation under the September 11 Victim Compensation Fund of 2001 for harm as a result of debris removal;

(2) extend the deadline for making a claim for compensation for physical harm not discovered before the deadline;

(3) cap liability for claims related to debris removal based on the level of insurance available;

(4) limit the total payment for compensation for claims filed on or after the regulations are updated pursuant to this Act; and

(5) cap the amount that an individual may charge in connection with a claim under such Act, with exceptions.

[Drew_Fl]

i read today the Dems are trying to pass a cheaper version of this bill hoping for some Repub support. They are trying to get it done this week. Not sure of progress.

[Burgold]

i read today the Dems are trying to pass a cheaper version of this bill hoping for some Repub support. They are trying to get it done this week. Not sure of progress.

That's the thing about the Dems. They seem more interested in getting the things done. I think that's why Republicans win all the PR battles. If the roles were reversed the GOP would spend weeks or months railing on how the Dems were anti-first responder without doing anything in terms of trying to get them relief. The Dems, quietly and silently (and perhaps stupidly) don't do this, but just write another bill trying to get these people the aid they need.

---------- Post added December-20th-2010 at 04:32 PM ----------

and SS, I'm not trying to twist your words. That's how I'm hearing them. It's not that you are anti-first responder. You are anti-spending and that takes priority over EVERYTHING and EVERYONE. I think that's what you believe having read your economic thoughts over the past couple of years on everything from the Tarp to the stim to the auto bailout to health reform to this. It's entirely consistant.

[JimboDaMan]

That's the thing about the Dems. They seem more interested in getting the things done. I think that's why Republicans win all the PR battles. If the roles were reversed the GOP would spend weeks or months railing on how the Dems were anti-first responder without doing anything in terms of trying to get them relief. The Dems, quietly and silently (and perhaps stupidly) don't do this, but just write another bill trying to get these people the aid they need.

---------- Post added December-20th-2010 at 04:32 PM ----------

and SS, I'm not trying to twist your words. That's how I'm hearing them. It's not that you are anti-first responder. You are anti-spending and that takes priority over EVERYTHING and EVERYONE. I think that's what you believe having read your economic thoughts over the past couple of years on everything from the Tarp to the stim to the auto bailout to health reform to this. It's entirely consistant.

Here's how stupid the Dems are. Because they actually want this, they will horse trade and give in to the Republicans on some other issue just to get their votes. Republicans will then claim credit for getting BOTH things done.

[SnyderShrugged]

That's the thing about the Dems. They seem more interested in getting the things done. I think that's why Republicans win all the PR battles. If the roles were reversed the GOP would spend weeks or months railing on how the Dems were anti-first responder without doing anything in terms of trying to get them relief. The Dems, quietly and silently (and perhaps stupidly) don't do this, but just write another bill trying to get these people the aid they need.

---------- Post added December-20th-2010 at 04:32 PM ----------

and SS, I'm not trying to twist your words. That's how I'm hearing them. It's not that you are anti-first responder. You are anti-spending and that takes priority over EVERYTHING and EVERYONE. I think that's what you believe having read your economic thoughts over the past couple of years on everything from the Tarp to the stim to the auto bailout to health reform to this. It's entirely consistant.

I suggest hearing what I say rather than interpreting things I didnt Burg