New Rule [Secretly] Enacted by Bush Administration Impedes Cases Against Nursing Homes

George Bush has been out of office for over a month, but we are still uncovering new damage he has done to our nation. In Tuesday's Washington Post, Cindy Skrzycki reports about the latest discovery of new rule changes that the Bush administration Health and Human Services Department quietly enacted back in September that will make it much harder for consumers to sue nursing homes.

The change, which affects the $144 billion nursing-home industry, was enacted with no public notice or attention.

"This is pretty stunning," said Mark Kosieradzki, a plaintiff attorney in Plymouth, Minn. "Nobody was told. It was just done."

The rule designates state inspectors and Medicare and Medicaid contractors as federal employees, a group usually shielded from providing evidence for either side in private litigation.

The restrictions affect about 16,000 nursing facilities and 3 million residents in the United States. The practical effect is to force litigants to go to greater lengths, including seeking court orders, to get inspection reports or depositions for cases they are pursuing or defending.

"This change hurts nursing-home residents and their families by allowing bad practices to be kept in secret by nursing homes and inspectors," said Eric M. Carlson, an attorney with the National Senior Citizens Law Center in Los Angeles. "Government inspectors have the right to go into nursing homes and investigate, and they learn things that residents and families otherwise could never find out."

On Bloomberg.com, more details are given about the effect of this terrible new ruling:

More than 90 percent of U.S. nursing homes in each of the previous three years were cited for violating federal standards, according to a report in September by the inspector general of the U.S. Health and Human Services Department.

The new rule was issued in September by the department. It generally prohibits state health departments and contractors that do auditing and other services for the government from participating in private lawsuits involving facilities that are in the federal assistance program without approval by the head of HHS.

The effect of the directives has started to play out in the nation’s courtrooms. Requests for information, once fairly routine, now are stalled between state and federal officials.

“This regulation update was in the works for a very long time,” said department spokesman Bill Hall, in an e-mail.

I'm sure the enactment, at the end of the Bush administration, was just a coincidence!

The complete story is here and here

Seeing the Writing on the Wall, Lieberman Starts Talking Up "Respect" For Obama

The Washington Monthly Saturday reports that Joe Lieberman is starting to try to rewrite history as he begins to backtrack on his criticism of his party's nominee, Barack Obama. Steve Benen in his Political Animal column says:

LIEBERMAN HASN'T BEEN PAYING ATTENTION TO HIMSELF.... Joe Lieberman adopted the role of Republican attack dog early on, but as the election draws near, he's hoping the political world has a very short memory.

Lieberman, a self-proclaimed "independent Democrat" who was chosen by McCain to make the case against Obama at the Republican National Convention in early September, said his comments have been within bounds.

"When I go out, I say, 'I have a lot of respect for Sen. Obama. He's bright. He's eloquent.'"

My hunch is, Lieberman sees the direction of the political winds, and hopes to convince Democrats that while he's been a McCain sycophant, he's always been "respectful" towards Obama.

Lieberman, in other words, has to hope Democrats haven't been paying any attention at all. The party is supposed to forget, for example, when Lieberman argued that Obama doesn't put "country first."

And the time Lieberman said it was a "good question" to ask whether Obama is a "Marxist."

And the time Lieberman ironically accused the Obama campaign of "sleazy tactics."

And the time Lieberman, at the Republican National Convention, falsely accused Obama of trying to undermine the troops

"Respectful"? Nice try, Joe.

The article is here. The comments alone are worth the visit!

Sarah Palin and the AIP

We learn more and more about John McCain's running mate Sarah Palin every day. And we're learning more and more about our 50th state as well. We've learned just how under populated Alaska is. Anchorage is the largest city with a population of approximately 280,000 people. Fairbanks is second with only 31,000 people and Juneau, the capital, has just 30,000. The fourth largest city, Wasilla, the town where Sarah Palin started here political career, has just 9000 people. The entire state of Alaska, the largest state by far as measured by land mass, has a population of only 670,000. Alaska is almost two and a half times as large as the next nearest state, Texas, but it's total population is less than that of the 17th largest city in America, Fort Worth, Texas.

Despite the over $14,000 per person that Washington sends to Alaska every year (the largest per capita recipient of any state in the country), a surprising number of Alaskans aren't exactly happy to be a part of these United States. About 13,000 Alaskan's are registered with the Alaskan Independence Party - the third largest political party in Alaska. The AIP was founded in 1984 to explore whether the 1958 vote by Alaskans authorizing statehood was legal and to work to explorer alternatives to statehood including remaining a territory, becoming a commonwealth, and even complete secession.

Another surprising fact is that as governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin supports the "good work" of the AIP (aka AKIP). (Her husband, the "First Dude" Todd, was actually a member of the party in 1995 and 2000.) She even addressed the AIP 2008 Convention, welcoming their members and lauding their efforts. Here's the video:



To get a better taste of just what the AIP is about, here's an audio clip of John Vogler (AIP founder pictured above) expressing his feeling about the United States. Is someone who supports such an organization really qualified to be Vice President of the United States?? What does this say about her judgment? What does her selection say about John McCain's judgment?

Now We Know Just How Much the McCain Campaign Stinks

We all know the StraightTalk Express has been running in the ditch for quite some time - bending the truth right and left, but now we know exactly just how bad it has gotten. Appearing today on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace, Rove declared that the McCain campaign had gone "one step too far... beyond the 100% truth test." Chris Wallace amazingly enough asks "do they need to be 100% passing the truth test." An amazing exchange to be sure:

The interview ends with Rove saying the McCain campaign needs "an adult" to help them determine how far they should go with their ads. I think we'd all agree that the McCain/Palin campaign needs a lot of adults to help them do a lot more than run their campaign.

Supreme Court Does Exxon's Bidding

Not a bad day when your team of lawyers saves your company $2 billion!

What is wrong with this picture:

June 25th, 2008: Justices Cut Damages Award in Exxon Valdez Spill:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Scotus-Exxon-Valdez.html?hp

February 2nd, 2008: Exxon Sets Profit Record: $40.6 Billion Last Year:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/02/business/02oil.html

This $500 million punitive damage award amounts to 1/80th of Exxon's profit for ONE year and they've had almost 20 years to come up with the money since this "accident" occurred in 1989! That isn't a punitive damage. It's simply an inconvenient cost of doing business - sloppy business. Even the original $5 billion damage award would have only cost Exxon 12% of this years profits and considering that the original oil spill caused oil prices to jump, Exxon really didn't lose anything in the long run. Good work if you can get it! Too bad about those thousands of local Alaskan residents who lost their entire livelihood - not to mention the wildlife and habitat that was destroyed and altered forever.

The right-wing rails against activist judges that legislate from the bench, but that only applies when they don't agree with what the court is doing. Today the court legislated new limits on punitive damages that the law does not declare. No foul though since they were doing it to the advantage of the richest corporation on the planet!

This is a prime example of what is at stake in the November election. Do we continue to tilt the court away from protecting the public and holding corporations accountable for their actions or do we halt this trend and start moving our justice system back to a more sane footing? I think the answer is clear and so is the choice in November!

Update on the Prosecution of Don Siegelman

Back in February, I posted about the political prosecution of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman. Siegelman was a respected and well liked Democratic Governor whose political career was ended by a politicized indictment, seemingly directed by the Alabama Republican machine with direction from the highest levels of the Bush Administration and Justice Department. A Republican, Bob Riley, narrowly defeated Siegelman in a highly suspicious and disputed gubernatorial race. Siegelmanwas subsequently conviction of bribery and has been serving a 7 year sentence in prison. 60 Minutes detailed the story in The Prosecution of Don Siegelman wherein Karl Rove and other Republican officials have been implicated for their involvement in this political prosecution.

Partly as a result of the 60 Minutes story and the resulting publicity, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on March 27th released Siegelman on bail pending his appeal. The House Judiciary Committee has also launched an investigation into the handling of this case (Probe Sought in Alabama Prosecution). The 60 Minutes update can be found here. More details can be found at the following links:

Ex-Ala. governor to be freed on bond

Freed Alabama Ex-Governor Sees Politics in His Case

Last week, Congressman John Conyers, the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee (aka the "Mustache of Justice" in the House) announced that he has called Karl Rove to testify before his committee regarding his involvement in the Siegelman case, the apparent political firing of federal prosecutors, and other similar issues. Rove has until Thursday to appear before the committee or face legal action. For more details, see the following:

Conyers closing in on Rove

If you think this issue goes to the very core of our judicial system and the rule of law in America, contact Congressman Conyers and you own representatives (go to Contact Congress) and let them know you want Congress to hold the Executive Branch accountable for their actions. In the United States of America, we should not be holding political prisoners!

COW Pays Chris Shays a Visit

Connecticut Opposes the War (COW) paid a visit to Congressman Christopher Shays last Saturday. A group of around 25 anti-war activists met at Ellsworth Park in the Black Rock section of Bridgeport. Cable Channel 12 interviewed COW organizer John Murphy and he explained the terrible price the country and the state has paid for the past five years of this disastrous war. The eventual cost of the war has been estimated to top $3 trillion and in addition to the terrible cost in lives, priorities at home such as education, health care and housing are facing budget cuts.

The group marched approximately a fifth of a mile down Seabright Ave. to Beacon St. where Congressman Chris Shays has a home on the Bridgeport Sound. Four members of the group along with State Representative Jack Hennessy went to the door to present Shays with a letter expressing that his support of Bush's war and John McCain who said we will stay in Iraq 100 years if we have to is not acceptable. Chris Shays' wife came to the door and spoke to the group and indicated that Chris was not at home, that he was actually in the Middle East on his 20th visit there.

Afterwards, Rep. Hennessy spoke with Cable Channel 12 saying that "It seems like he's in the Middle East more than he's at home and I don't know what he's seeing over there because he is saying that the war is having a positive effect and that is absolutely untrue."

After meeting with Mrs. Shays, members of the group went door to door passing out leaflets explaining the cost of the war and encouraging the area residents to contact Shays and Senator Joe Lieberman to tell them to end the war now.







For more information about Connecticut Opposes the War, go to www.ctcow.org. Also, for information about our national priorities, visit www.nationalpriorities.org