Re: Disturbing update on HR3200 (or whatever it will be numbered)

[Guest guest]

There were 2 different articles, 2 different links.  Sorry if not clear.   

God Bless !!

dragonflymcs

Mayleen

________________________________

From: ur_shtnme <ur_shtnme@...>

Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2009 5:24:43 PM

Subject: [] Disturbing update on HR3200 (or whatever it will be

numbered)

 

Ok… I was wrong on some of this…

The Senate's Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee did indeed pass a

bill… they just did it backward. As far as I can find, there still is not even

a bill number, which means it's never been officially introduced. Normally, a

bill is introduced, given a bill number, and then referred to a specific

committee. Sometimes the bill is introduced by the committee chair himself

without a bill number and reviewed/considered (maybe passed) in committee. The

House of Representatives rules are such that if it is done this way, the bill

must be officially introduced by the end of that day so I know the House rule on

that method). I'm guessing the Senate doesn't have the same rule, because it was

passed by the Senate HELP committee on July 15th or so, but I still can't find

the bill anywhere but the Committee's website, still without a bill number.

Can't find it in the official registry at http://thomas. loc.gov.

The short paragraph below isn't really referring to the University of Alabama

article for which the link is provided… the paragraph was found in that

article and actually refers to another CNS article… http://www.cnsnews.

com/public/ content/article. aspx?RsrcID= 51115

[Guest guest]

http://www.arizonaadvancedmedicine.com/articles/flu_season.html

 

 

God Bless !!

dragonflymcs

Mayleen

________________________________

From: ur_shtnme <ur_shtnme@...>

Sent: Saturday, August 8, 2009 5:24:43 PM

Subject: [] Disturbing update on HR3200 (or whatever it will be

numbered)

 

Ok… I was wrong on some of this…

The Senate's Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee did indeed pass a

bill… they just did it backward. As far as I can find, there still is not even

a bill number, which means it's never been officially introduced. Normally, a

bill is introduced, given a bill number, and then referred to a specific

committee. Sometimes the bill is introduced by the committee chair himself

without a bill number and reviewed/considered (maybe passed) in committee. The

House of Representatives rules are such that if it is done this way, the bill

must be officially introduced by the end of that day so I know the House rule on

that method). I'm guessing the Senate doesn't have the same rule, because it was

passed by the Senate HELP committee on July 15th or so, but I still can't find

the bill anywhere but the Committee's website, still without a bill number.

Can't find it in the official registry at http://thomas. loc.gov.

The short paragraph below isn't really referring to the University of Alabama

article for which the link is provided… the paragraph was found in that

article and actually refers to another CNS article… http://www.cnsnews.

com/public/ content/article. aspx?RsrcID= 51115

This article brings into question the provision in both the Senate bill

(attached) and the House bill (HR 3200, also attached) that speaks of " home

visits " as an intervention tool. Nothing in the bill says that these home visits

result in anything mandatory. Supposedly they're trying everything they can to

get the word out, educate, and encourage folks to get their shots or other

health related actions. Again, the bill does not say that they will enter your

home and force your family to get shots. Nothing requires you to even speak to

anyone if they do knock on your door. Feel free to shut the door in their face.

The idea that the government wants to allow or require teams of health folks to

make home visits for these purposes is troubling anyway. Right now it's couched

as a grant to states to do a demonstration/ pilot project that includes these

types of efforts at education and outreach. But seriously… do you want the

Public Health Service (which, yes, do indeed wear uniforms just like military

uniforms… they look like Navy) knocking on your door prepared to give

immunizations, etc? Even if you can turn them down, it just seems intrusive. I

mean… you have to be living in the backwoods with no TV or telephone to not

know about pandemics when they happen… you already know you can go somewhere

to get a shot…

Not clear who the " home visits " would target… door to door? Just those that

are bedridden and unable to go to the doc for themselves? I could see the latter

happening upon request possibly being a good thing… upon request… but that

doesn't appear to be the intent… it's just very unclear as it's written in

such broad language as it could include anything…

Another note about the Public Health Service… it's very small… odds are it

wouldn't be a uniformed PHS person that comes to your house, but rather these

local intervention Community Preventive Services Task Force teams set up to

" assist " local doctors… I'd be watching and asking about the Community

Preventive Services Task Force… that seems to be the foot in the door, so to

speak, for government to slowly assert more control in the local health arena…

I mean… where are the people going to come from to help the local doctors? If

they were so plentiful then why aren't they already working for local doctors?

At which point we wouldn't need the Task Force people… so whether or not the

teams are widespread or not, it's a legislative way of asserting more influence

and control in the local health community, even if they never actually form a

team. And once you make something allowable, it's harder to turn it off…