The message behind Kevin Rennie’s column is simple, concise and unmistakeable: Sen. Dodd, it’s time to come clean because we’re not going away. It’s a message taht Sen. Dodd doesn’t want to hear but it’s a message that we won’t let him ignore.

‘I would never take ‘trust me’ for an answer, not even in the best of times. Not even from a president on Mount Rushmore.” So declared Sen. Christopher J. Dodd last week on the floor of the U.S. Senate during a debate on government surveillance.

Dodd declared he will not trust our leaders unless he gets to see certain national security documents. Dodd insists, however, that we trust him when he says he didn’t know he received special treatment when he borrowed nearly $800,000 from Countrywide Financial Corp. in 2003.

This calls for an FOIA request. If Sen. Dodd won’t voluntarily comply with our request that he produce documentation on what was or wasn’t said in his negotiations with Angelo Mozilo, then we’ll demand his compliance. Sen. Dodd would be wise to remember that summers are when many scandals are exposed. That’s because there’s a lull in the news. If he wants someone digging into his financial affairs, I’m certain someone will be more than willing to do that.

One thing that’s obvious is that Dodd will play this as long as possible. Here’s what I’m basing that opinion on: (continue reading post »)

Tuesday night, I attended our local Republican Party’s Summer Social. Predictably, one of the subjects of conversation was the high gas prices. After Rep. Dan Severson gave his presentation, out party chairman asked me to deliver an update on what were the hot topics on the blogosphere. I’m not an accomplished public speaker but this was an easy speech to make.

I said that gas prices were the dominant topic on the blogosphere by a wide margin. I said that this should excite the GOP faithful because Democrats don’t have the solution to the gas crisis. I stated first that the crisis was artificial in nature, meaning that it’s a crisis that was entirely avoidable.

The reason why Democrats don’t have an answer to this crisis is because they don’t believe in oil exploration. That isn’t just an opinion. Check out the picture from this post on Powerline. What better proof do you need that Democrats don’t have a solution than to show that House Democrats announcing on Tuesday that they’d be holding a press conference this morning, then cancelling the event?

As I pointed out here, Tim Walz is using the Democrat mantra that “we can’t drill our way out of this crisis.” Last night, I told our group about how I argued against that mantra. I said that we could use the same information whether we’re talking aboout Tim Walz, Al Franken, El Tinklenberg or whoever. (continue reading post »)

I’ve long thought that Michael Barone is one of the most intelligent political analysts in the business. RealClearPolitics links to his most recent analysis. The bad news for Democrats is that it contains alot of good news for Republicans, namely Barone’s listing of how the facts have changed the direction of this race. Here’s how Mr. Barone starts with Iraq:

In January 2007, when George W. Bush ordered the surge strategy, which John McCain had advocated since the summer of 2003, Barack Obama informed us that the surge couldn’t work. The only thing to do was to get out as soon as possible.

That stance proved to be a good move toward winning the presidential nomination but it was poor prophecy. It is beyond doubt now that the surge has been hugely successful, beyond even the hopes of its strongest advocates, like Frederick and Kimberly Kagan. Violence is down enormously, Anbar and Basra and Sadr City have been pacified, Prime Minister Maliki has led successful attempts to pacify Shiites as well as Sunnis, and the Iraqi parliament has passed almost all of the “benchmark” legislation demanded by the Democratic Congress, all of which Barack Obama seems to have barely noticed or noticed not at all. He has not visited Iraq since January 2006 and did not seek a meeting with Gen. David Petraeus when he was in Washington.

Facts matter except with Democratic activists. Once you enter the Democratic activists’ world, though, anything that highlights inaccuracies in Democratic stump speeches is ignored and frequently chastized.

The bad news for Democrats is that the presidential race won’t be won by Democrat activists. It will be decided by people that are open to hearing about improvements in Iraq.

Here’s another of Michael Barone’s observations: (continue reading post »)

In 2006, Democrats talked at length about holding congressional oversight hearings into the Bush administration, which they faithfully held. Most of these hearings were fishing expleditions trying to dig up dirt on the Bush administration. None of the witch hunts turned up anything, which was predicted. Now that a real scandal has arisen, though, Democrats have forgotten about oversight hearings. Apparently, the only time Democrats hold oversight hearings is when (a) there isn’t any evidence of wrongdoing and (b) when it involves a Republican.

Apparently, oversight hearings aren’t meant for real scandals with real evidence involving Democrats.

Now that there’s evidence that Chris Dodd, the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, got the V.I.P. treatment from Countrywide, the thought of holding oversight hearings is the furthest thing from the Democrats’ minds. The good news is that House Republicans, led by Jeb Hensarling and Minority Leader Boehner, are demanding that an investigation be launched into this scandal: (continue reading post »)

Yesterday afternoon, the military filed its appeal of Col. Steven Folsom’s ruling that charges be dropped against Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani. The specific charges being refiled against Col. Chessani are violation of a lawful general order and dereliction of duty. This morning, the Thomas More Law Center issued a statement critical of the military’s decision. Here’s what it says:

Late yesterday afternoon, military prosecutors filed an official notice that they are appealing the June 17th decision of Military Judge Colonel Steven Folsom, USMC, which dismissed all charges against Lt Colonel Jeffrey Chessani on the grounds of unlawful command influence. Prosecutors have 20 days in which to file their appeal brief to the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals (NMCCA), which is located in Washington, D.C.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, reacted with outrage, “This case has turned into the persecution of one of the Marine’s finest combat commanders. LtCol Chessani devoted his life to the Corps and his Nation. He served three tours of duty in Iraq, away from his wife and children in defense of us all. In their attempt ‘to get’ Chessani, prosecutors granted immunity to seventeen Marines, including one they had charged with murder. Still they failed. Sadly, in the process they have destroyed the career of an outstanding officer. Enough is enough.” (continue reading post »)

While we’re rejoicing the charges being dropped against Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani, there’s a bigger message that Col. Steven Folsom delivered with his ruling. Here’s the message that we shouldn’t overlook:

Folsom’s ruling dismissed the charges without prejudice, which means prosecutors could restart the case, but the judge said the Marine Forces Central Command could not be involved if that happens.

Col. Folsom’s ruling means that Centcom can’t be involved if this investigation is ever revived. I’m skeptical that this investigation will be revived. The military’s prosecutors have been embarrassed in each of the 7 cases that’ve been resolved thus far. Six of the cases have had the charges dropped; the other soldier was acquitted.

Just as importantly, these cases have gotten alot of scrutiny on the blogosphere. That scrutiny will only increase if the investigation is reinstated. That isn’t what the brass in NCIS and JAG want at this point. In fact, that’s the last thing they want right now.

Here’s what Col. Folsom said after dropping the charges:

“Unlawful command influence is the mortal enemy of military justice,” said Col. Steven Folsom, quoting previous case law. “In order to restore the public confidence, we need to take it back. We need to turn the clock back.”

Here’s what led to Col. Folsom’s ruling: (continue reading post »)

Just a few minutes ago, this report crossed the wires:

A military judge has dismissed charges against a Marine officer accused of failing to investigate the killings of 24 Iraqis.

Col. Steven Folsom dismissed charges Tuesday against Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani after defense attorneys raised concerns that a four-star general overseeing the prosecution was improperly influenced by an investigator probing the November 2005 shootings by a Marine squad in Haditha. The charges were dismissed without prejudice, meaning they can be refiled, but Folsom excluded Marine Forces Central Command from future involvement.

Chessani was the highest-ranking officer implicated in the case.

Here’s what WND is reporting:

A judge in the U.S. military court system today tossed out the charges against a Marine officer whose soldiers were caught in a bloody firefight with insurgents in 2005 in Haditha, Iraq.

The decision from Col. Steven Folsom came in the case against Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani after defense lawyers from the Thomas More Law Center raised the specter of unlawful command influence by confirming an “investigator” in the case also met dozens of times with commanders deciding the course of the prosecution.

Folsom’s ruling dismissed the charges without prejudice, which means prosecutors could restart the case, but the judge said the Marine Forces Central Command could not be involved if that happens, according to the Associated Press.

Later in their article, WND says this: (continue reading post »)

Based on this article, it appears that charges against Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani might get dropped on the grounds that there was undue command influence applied to his case. Here’s what WND is reporting:

Officials with the law center today said Col. Steven Folson, the military judge assigned to the case, “informed counsel that the hearing in the Chessani case, originally scheduled for three days, June 16-18, has been changed to only one hour on Tuesday, June 17, 2008, at 9 a.m. PST.

“Col. Folsom indicated that the only business he will address is his ruling on the defense motion to dismiss Lt. Col. Jeffery Chessani’s case because of unlawful command influence,” the law center said.

Officially, Lt. Col. Chessani has been charged with dereliction of duty. The accusation made against him was that he didn’t properly investigate the firefight at Haditha on Nov. 19, 2005. The fact that the hearing was changed from 3 days to 1 hour says everything. The defense has made lots of motions, which is why they initially scheduled 3 days to get through the hearing. Here’s the part that is most telling:

Folsom only recently ruled that there was evidence in the Chessani case of unlawful command influence, which is considered the “mortal enemy” of justice within the military judicial structure.

The judge’s conclusion was based on evidence two generals who controlled Chessani’s case were influenced by Marine lawyer Col. John Ewers, one of the investigators assigned to the case. Ewers was allowed to attend at least 25 closed-session meetings in which Chessani’s case was discussed.

If there is proof that Col. Ewers sat in “on 25 closed-session meetings”, then the prosecution has a big problem.

The Thomas More Law Center said the officers involved in the firefight handled its aftermath according to military protocol.

“Even though Lt. Col. Chessani promptly reported the events of that day to his superiors, including the deaths of 15 noncombatant civilians caught in the battle, nobody in Lt. Col. Chessani’s chain of command believed there was any wrongdoing on behalf of the Marines,” the law firm said.

The notion that Lt. Col. Chessani didn’t do his duty is absurd. Here’s what Newsmax reported in June, 2007: (continue reading post »)

On the Massachusetts border that joins with Connecticut and Rhode Island, the green woods and blue waters of Lake Chaubunagungamaug shimmer in the summer breeze. Turning northeast along Sutton Road, it’s easy to see why America’s first colonists settled in these gently rolling hills and tilled its fields. In the fall, the thick green forests turn into a kaleidoscope of rusty yellows, reds, and browns before the first snow falls. At Nipmuck Pond, you won’t notice that Sutton Road has become Cliff Road until it changes again to Joe Jenny Road.

Five generations of the Whittier Family have farmed in this part of America. Their prized Holsteins have grown to a herd of 350, and their milk is driven daily a few miles north to their processing plant in Shrewsbury, where it is bottled and sold fresh at their milk store. From cow to cup, the process takes two days, which means “farm fresh milk” to their loyal customers. The fruits, berries, and vegetables from the farm are used to make jams, jellies, and relishes that they sell during the summer months. Todd, Wayne, and Janice Whittier have good reason to be proud. What could be more American?

Last September, Boston doctors found listeria in a woman who arrived to deliver her baby. They notified the state health department, which added her name to a list of four area residents who had also been sickened. Of those listed, two died in June and October and a third died in November. Another pregnant woman miscarried but survived, as did the mother and her new baby.

Once investigators identified Whittier Farms as the source, the health department closed their Shrewsbury operation until investigators could find and remove the source of contamination.

If not for the independence of government funded health departments, it’s not hard to imagine the dangers we would face without them. One can also imagine the risks posed if businesses like these (and their lawyers) policed themselves.

In the case of hospitals, there is no such independent oversight. And unlike Whittier Farms, hospitals actually profit when they injure or kill patients.

In 2005, Harvard Professor Lucian L. Leape, M.D reported:

“In most industries, defects cost money and generate warrantee claims. In healthcare, perversely… physicians and hospitals can bill for the additional services that are needed when patients are injured by their mistakes.”

Harming patients isn’t the only way hospitals profit. The National Center for Policy Analysis estimates that Medicare and Medicaid fraud costs taxpayers $33 billion annually. In 2005, the Florida Attorney General filed civil racketeering charges against Tenet Healthcare to recover $1 billion. Although some individuals have been convicted, legislators are primarily responsible for forcing hospitals to treat indigent, uninsured, and illegal alien patients for votes. And when those hospitals compensate with alternative revenue streams, politicians feign disdain (if they show any interest at all).

In this video, the corporate director of this Florida hospital explains why hospitals must rely on creative ways to keep their hospitals open:

In 2001, we had an illegal alien as a patient in our hospital. He was there from 2001 through 2003. He had over $1.5 million in healthcare services. We forcibly returned him to his home country of Guatemala at our own cost of $30,000… That case is not over. We have spent…$250,000 in legal fees because his family here in the United States is suing us because they think it was inappropriate for us to return this illegal patient to his home country.

(We) have a patient from Mexico who has been in my hospital for 760 days. He has severe brain damage. He has no family, no friends… His charges to date for almost two years is $1.5 million… we have contacted the Mexican Consulate four times, we have contacted immigration and nobody will help us return this patient to Mexico. We’re even willing to spend our own $30,000 to return this patient…

In 2007, the Florida Hospital Association estimates that there was $100 million in costs for illegal patient care… right now I have six patients, illegal, undocumented patients, that we are seeing every three days for renal dialysis, for all of this… we have received no reimbursement… our healthcare costs are severely affected by this… A large percentage of the babies born at our facility are from illegal parents… we have tried repeatedly (to report illegal aliens to the authorities) and have been told they are only interested if a crime has been committed.

While fraud leaves a paper trail, it’s much more difficult to prove that physicians deliberately or recklessly harmed patients.

For example, if Dr. Smith successfully treats you for a small cut, he might legitimately charge your insurance company $500. But if Dr. Smith uses improperly sterilized equipment (like those routinely used at this Tenant hospital), the subsequent infections, IV antibiotics, intensive care, and related costs permit hospitals to charge much more whether the patient survives or not. Essentially, the sicker a well-insured patient gets, the more hospitals can charge.

Tenet Healthcare’s Garden Grove Hospital knowingly used defective sterilizers for many months. “Flash” sterilizers are used to clean surgical instruments soiled during operations. These had repeatedly failed to kill resilient spores during repeated routine test runs. When hospital administrators instructed surgeon Charles Rosen how to explain the situation to federal inspectors, Rosen resigned and went straight to federal authorities.

“This information was being withheld from the very surgeons entrusted with care of the surgical patients,” Rosen complained in a 2000 resignation letter to then-hospital-CEO Mark Meyers. “Such behavior is beyond belief. I feel it is a deliberate attempt at cover-up for financial reasons.”

When LA’s Cedar Sinai Medical Center almost killed Dennis Quaid’s children last year, the hospital’s chief medical officer admitted the “preventable error.” The unprecedented admission had more to do with Quaid’s celebrity than the spokesman’s candor. Had Dennis Smith’s children been injured, the medical records would have likely disappeared into a lawyer’s briefcase until a settlement (with a solid non-disclosure statement attached) had been signed.

Although he has sued the drug company, Quaid has not yet sued Cedars. Whether he sues or not, malpractice lawsuits in California are capped too low to worry most California hospitals. The California Department of Public Health fined Cedars $25,000 which is, coincidentally, what the hospital typically charges insurance companies for two babies who spend one day in intensive care – a pittance designed to make Californians believe the agency performs any oversight.

Quaid has since created The Quaid Foundation to give patients a place to report medical errors. Unfortunately, non-disclosure statements prevent many disclosures. If Quaid partnered with physicians of Semmelweis Society International or the Alliance for Patient Safety, he would team with physicians who aren’t afraid of protecting patient rights.

After reviewing 37 million Medicare patients’ medical records, (e.g. patients over 65), Healthgrades reported that medical errors in hospitals kill 200,000 patients each year. They did not report what happened to patients younger than 65.

HCQIA

When restaurants poison diners, the local or state health department closes the business until the problems are fixed. But when hospitals harm patients, administrators close ranks, investigate themselves, and destroy physicians and nurses who talk.

This isn’t a new problem. When patients sued for unnecessary errors and complications before 1986, many assumed that former patients and their lawyers were maliciously shaking down hospitals for millions of dollars.

To protect healthcare managers, their own lawyers drafted legislation called the Health Care Quality Improvement Act (HCQIA) in 1986. HCQIA’s flaw (pronounced Hick-Wa) stems from the fundamental conflict of interest between the bill’s co-authors, corporate hospital attorneys Horty & Springer, and the patients they ostensibly protect. Predictably, the same lawyers rendered HCQIA unenforceable by inserting this subsection:

42 U.S.C. §11112 (b) (3): A professional review body’s failure to meet the conditions described in this subsection shall not, in itself, constitute failure to meet the standards of subsection (a) (3) of this section. (See page 20)

This section indemnifies hospitals and their own peer review boards from being liable for their own rules. So, for example, when Dr. Gil Mileikowsky agreed to assist a patient whose healthy fallopian tubes were removed by another physician without her consent, the hospital staged what many physicians call a “sham peer review.” By characterizing Dr. Mileikowsky as disruptive, the hospital suspended his clinical privileges and reported their decision to the National Practitioners Data Bank (NPDB), which effectively prevents physicians whose licenses have been suspended in one state from practicing in others.

Regrettably, the Act is ineffective because it relies on corporate hospital executives to report errors and complications that they profit from.

For example, two physicians in one small Tenet facility generated $40 million/year in revenues from patients they subjected to unnecessary cardiac procedures. As in all cases, the protections that patients relied on depended upon; 1) the hospital executives who profit financially from unnecessary procedures, errors and complications, and 2) the physicians who were responsible for such misconduct.

Examples of failures to fulfill HCQIA’s intent by corporate hospital executives have been reported by CBS News, The Street, the Pittsburg Post Gazette and AMA Voice.

Examples of failures to fulfill the HCQIA’s intent by physicians are found in Medical Economics, the Pittsburg Post Gazette, Time, and the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

Although small businesses and entrepreneurs have been the driving force behind the growth of the US economy, the US healthcare system has regressed into one that does not permit competition.

Because competition tends to reduce consumer costs, Dr. Mileikowsky reports that hospital law firms consider staff physicians who compete as “problem physicians.” Horty Springer’s hostility toward independent private physicians is demonstrated throughout their seminars, courses, and audiotapes that can be purchased on their website.

Hospital lawyers have developed a methodology and vernacular for controlling physicians, patients, and other advocates who report incidents to outside agencies or agree to testify on behalf of patients/victims of medical negligence. Their preferred strategy is to destroy the physician by discrediting him or her as disruptive, crazy, impaired, incompetent, or an imminent danger. Horty Springer also trains hospital administrators how to protect themselves from physicians who report dangerous conditions or patients who are killed or injured by recklessness or incompetence (whistleblowers).

Harvard economist Kip Viscusi estimates that the value of one human life is somewhere between four- and nine million dollars. If multiplied by Healthgrade’s “200,000 patients who die each year”, the loss to the US economy can be estimated somewhere between $800 billion and $1.8 trillion, annually.

Based on 152 published peer review articles, the Nutrition Institute of America, concludes that medical mistakes kill 784,000 people annually.

In 2006, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons unanimously passed resolutions to correct these issues. The time for US legislators to correct these mistakes is long overdue.

If you do not want your hospital to harm you or your loved ones for profit, call your local representatives and demand their support of the Whistleblower Protection Act.

(More info here, here, and here)

Sen. Obama has crafted an image that he isn’t a partisan and that he’s squeaky clean ethically. This Newsweek article will quickly dispel that myth. It also might force Sen. Obama to fired his chief strategist, David Axelrod. At minimum, it’ll cause some serious embarrassment for him after he attacked John McCain on the issue of lobbyists running McCain’s campaign. Here’s what Newsweek is reporting:

When Illinois utility Commonwealth Edison wanted state lawmakers to back a hefty rate hike two years ago, it took a creative lobbying approach, concocting a new outfit that seemed devoted to the public interest: Consumers Organized for Reliable Electricity, or CORE. CORE ran TV ads warning of a “California-style energy crisis” if the rate increase wasn’t approved—but without disclosing the commercials were funded by Commonwealth Edison. The ad campaign provoked a brief uproar when its ties to the utility, which is owned by Exelon Corp., became known. “It’s corporate money trying to hoodwink the public,” the state’s Democratic Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn said. What got scant notice then—but may soon get more scrutiny—is that CORE was the brainchild of ASK Public Strategies, a consulting firm whose senior partner is David Axelrod, now chief strategist for Barack Obama.

Last week, Obama hit John McCain for hiring “some of the biggest lobbyists in Washington” to run his campaign; Obama’s aides say their candidate, as a foe of “special interests,” has refused to take money from lobbyists or employ them. Neither Axelrod nor his partners at ASK ever registered as lobbyists for Commonwealth Edison—and under Illinois’s loose disclosure laws, they were not required to. “I’ve never lobbied anybody in my life,” Axelrod tells NEWSWEEK. “I’ve never talked to any public official on behalf of a corporate client.” (He also says “no one ever denied” that Edison was the “principal funder” of his firm’s ad campaign.) (continue reading post »)