Krupp is the cocoa-sipping, flannel clad, unofficial face of Obamacare who gained notoriety by appearing in two horrid online promos and one absurd video that urged people to #GetTalking about healthcare. The propaganda pieces were made to encourage Americans to visit barackobama.com/health-care. Krupp has been dissected and ripped apart in the conservative blogosphere for about a week now, and many Leftists are not too happy that Krupp is now a permanently affixed meme of socialist healthcare.
Showing posts with label obamacare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label obamacare. Show all posts
Pajama Boy Ethan Krupp Admits He's A"Liberal F-ck"
December 27, 2013 - (Language Advisory) - If you thought "Pajama Boy" Ethan Krupp was just another "liberal f-ck," you were were right. In fact, he proudly calls himself just that. It exploded on the Internet today that Krupp once described himself as "a liberal fuck" in one of his own blog posts. In the same post, he also admitted to using the tactics of Saul Alinsky. In fact, Krupp's definition of "liberal f-ck" is straight out of Alinsky's book "Rules for Radicals."
Krupp is the cocoa-sipping, flannel clad, unofficial face of Obamacare who gained notoriety by appearing in two horrid online promos and one absurd video that urged people to #GetTalking about healthcare. The propaganda pieces were made to encourage Americans to visit barackobama.com/health-care. Krupp has been dissected and ripped apart in the conservative blogosphere for about a week now, and many Leftists are not too happy that Krupp is now a permanently affixed meme of socialist healthcare.
Krupp is the cocoa-sipping, flannel clad, unofficial face of Obamacare who gained notoriety by appearing in two horrid online promos and one absurd video that urged people to #GetTalking about healthcare. The propaganda pieces were made to encourage Americans to visit barackobama.com/health-care. Krupp has been dissected and ripped apart in the conservative blogosphere for about a week now, and many Leftists are not too happy that Krupp is now a permanently affixed meme of socialist healthcare.Setting The Record Straight: The Washington Examiner Was NOT The First To Reveal Pajama Boy's Real Name
December 22, 2013 - The Internet exploded last week with laughter when it "discovered" a plaid clad flannel failure dubbed "PajamaBoy" by conservative bloggers. His real name was not known to more than a few of those bloggers.In a post on November 1, titled "Creepy: OFA encourages parents to have ‘the talk’ with their children this holiday," Twitchy.com published PajamaBoy's real name:
Now OFA is urging parents this holiday season to have “the talk” with their children — you know, the talk about buying health insurance from the Obamacare exchange....Is it just us, or does that kid (actually Ethan Krupp, OFA’s content writer) look young enough to still be covered under his parents’ plan? And will the video help families #GetTalking?
 |
| Charlie Spiering |
That headline is misleading because it makes it seem as though the Washington Examiner was the first to reveal that Pajama Boy as Ethan Krupp. Was Charlie Spiering really unaware of previously published references to Ethan Krupp?
 |
| Charlie Spiering probably likes hot cocoa, too. Click to enlarge |
As happens too often, other bloggers lazily reposted the Examiner piece without digging a little deeper. That spread the false impression that Krupp's name was not known until Dec. 19.
Could Saturday Night Live Have Saved Pajama Boy's Reputation? Maybe, But It's Too Late Now
 |
| Pajama Boy Ethan Krupp: Cocoa Puff |
"Pajama Boy"is a derogatory name that conservative pundits pinned on him. The actor's real name is Ethan Krupp, and he will forever be remembered as the dweeb in one-piece plaid pajamas, delicately clutching a cup of hot cocoa, in a piece produced by Organizing For America (OFA) for use by barackobama.com. There's a horrible video too (watch it below) in which Krupp portrays the same dweeby dude. His family is weirdly uncomfortable about having a frank discussion about getting health insurance.
The decision to let himself become the new face of Obamacare has probably destroyed his acting career. With his world seeming to crumble all around him, there might have been one thing that could have saved young Ethan's tattered reputation: An appearance on Saturday Night Live on the night of December 21. Any later date beyond that will be too late to resurrect him. Nothing else can undo what Krupp has done to himself, which is to retreat from public scrutiny, go silent and hide in the shadows.
An appearance on SNL is not as far-fetched as you might think. Krupp is a student at The Second City improv theater group, which in turn is well connected to Saturday Night Live. Krupp was a student at The Second City in Chicago when the video was made. The mother in the video is portrayed by Kimmie Companik-Warner, an associate faculty member of The Second City Training Center. One wonders if anybody at The Second City tried to arrange for SNL to invite Krupp onto the show.
The result might have allowed a nearly instant rehabilitation of Ethan Krupp. He would have shed the "Pajama Boy" stink and stuck it to all those mean conservative bully bloggers. He would have turned it around.
But Ethan Krupp is one of those guys who runs for cover the moment any criticism comes his way. He was an editor of the Madison Misnomer, a "humor" rag that had no problem with ripping other people apart. Now it's Krupp being publicly ridiculed, and he can't take the heat. Rather than ride his sudden notoriety and play it for laughs and do some self-promotion, the spineless fool has the last several days scrubbing the Internet of any traces of himself that he can access. He deleted or locked his accounts at YouTube, Google Plus, LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook and more after he was outed as Pajama Boy. How could he think that would preserve his image, and that the world would not notice that all of his online presence suddenly disappeared?
Think of it another way. Suppose some actor makes a debut in a major film, and his looks and performance are widely ridiculed in the media. In reaction, that actor deletes all of his social media accounts and refuses to answer the phone. He just... disappears. What would you think of that actor? Well, that's what Krupp did.
In light of his cowardice, it is not reasonable to expect that Ethan Krupp would have accepted an invitation to mock himself on Saturday Night Live. The folks at SNL are risk takers, after all, but they know a chicken-shit loser when they see one and are not willing to take that kind of risk. The last thing they want is a sniveling amateur like Krupp to freeze up on stage or do something to mess up the show, which is broadcast live.
Sure, he might have appeared on SNL if they had asked him. Sure, someone there might have talked him back to his senses - what few senses he had. Only a self-absorbed fool with no sense would not have foreseen the reaction to the Obamacare ad and video. For an aspiring improv actor, Krupp seems oddly out of touch with who he is and how guys like him are perceived. He's learning that now, the hard way.
"Well, if Krupp can’t achieve fame," wrote Jim Treacher at Daily Caller, "infamy is the next best thing." Sure, but Krupp has achieved world-class dork infamy, and that's never good.
Post Script: Check out "SNL Script: Pajama Boy Meets Duck Dynasty," a speculative script for a Saturday Night Live skit posted at Free Republic.
Bart Stupak: Obamacare HHS Mandate Violates Executive Order, Statutory Law
The HHS mandate went into effect on August 1st. Many religious institutions now have about a year "to figure out how they’re going to violate their consciences," as NY Cardinal Timothy Dolan put it.
The video was made during a Democrats For Life panel discussion at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, North Carolina and posted to YouTube by RedState today. But Stupak's words are not really news: He came out months ago to express his disappointment in Obama's HHS mandate and the way it approaches contraception. On February 8, 2012, for example, he said the mandate was illegal when he was interviewed by Fox's Greta Van Susteren (see below).
On March 21, 2010, TheHill.com reported that Democrats "reached a deal on an executive order on abortion that could hand them a victory on healthcare," and that "Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) announced a deal at a press conference. He said the deal means Democrats will have the 216 votes they need to win a healthcare reform vote on the floor."
The title of the Order is "Executive Order: Ensuring Enforcement And Implementation Of Abortion Restrictions In The Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act." The parts of the Executive Order that Stupak (and others) now object to are Paragraphs 2 and 3 of "Section 1. Policy."
"Bart Stupak was a vital swing vote in the Obamacare debate 2 years ago," says RedState.com today. In March of 2010, Stupak said he could not support Obamacare unless he could be assured that abortion would not be covered by the mandate. As RedState notes, "Following an Executive Order signed by President Obama that supposedly ensured that abortion would not be covered, Stupak declared victory for the pro-life movement. This in spite of the fact that many had said the Executive Order was toothless and would not prevent anything."
 |
| Found at FireAndreaMitchell.com |
Fox's Greta Van Susteren interviewed Stupak for "On the Record" on February 8, 2012. Stupak said this about the the HHS contraception mandate:
".... it dealt with not only abortion, but also with the conscience clause. In fact, if you look in section one of the executive order, it's – very clearly it says – it cites the Church amendment way back in 1973, all the way to the Weldon amendment, which was in legislation that President Obama signed in 2009, in which they talked about the conscience clause and the right of individuals and institutions such as the church to not provide these services if it violates their tenets of their faith and their principles and their conscience."
The mystery in all of this is why it took so long for Stupak and others to realize that they were fooled. The Executive Order was, after all, posted to the White House website on March 21, 2010 – the same day that Stupak had his victorious press conference. Stupak was suckered, lied to by Obama and his White House operatives.
Or - maybe not. Many accuse Stupak of selling his vote to support Obama's mandate in exchange for a lot of pork to his district in Michigan.
Related:
- Someone call the president! Stupak says executive order bars contraceptive mandate Jill Stanek
- Stupak Says ‘No Regrets’ About Decisive Obamacare Vote CNS News
- Rep. Bart Stupak interviewed on Fox News by Megyn Kelly, 3/22/10 YouTube
- Flashback Video: Congressman Bart Stupak from March 2010 - GretaWire.Foxinsider
- Bart Stupak paid off! Announces $726,409 for airports... Fire Andrea Mitchell
- Cardinal Dolan “White House strangling Catholic church” Catholic Advocate
More Surprises from Obama Healthcare Law-Michael A. Minton
Written by Michael A. Minton
Remember this famous quote from then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi? "[W]e have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy." Well, we're finding out.
If this wasn't the Obama administration, this would seem an unbelievable story. While we were promised that Congress would have plenty of time to read every bill that went through when the Democrats controlled both chambers, this, along with other bills, was shoved down the American peoples' throats before there was ever time to absorb it. Now come the consequences.
It is now being reported that "Obamacare" will allow millions of middle-class Americans to get healthcare coverage for practically nothing. In fact, up to three million Americans who retire early, at the age of 62, will qualify for the federal-state sponsored insurance program Medicaid.
Believe it or not, couples who can earn up to $64,000.00 per year will, in the year 2014, qualify for the program which is intended for low income and disabled Americans. This is because, as the AP reports, "in a major change from today, most of their Social Security benefits would no longer be counted as income for determining eligibility."
The Associated Press says the "Medicare chief actuary Robert Foster says ‘The situation keeps me up at night. I don't generally comment on the pros or cons of policy, but that just doesn't make sense,' Foster said during a question-and-answer session at a recent professional society meeting. It's almost like allowing middle-class people to qualify for food stamps, he suggested.
‘This is a situation that got no attention at all,' added Foster. ‘And even now, as I raise the issue with various policymakers, people are not rushing to say ... we need to do something about this.'"
Of course, all of this is happening at a time when both the federal and state governments are drowning in debt. With Medicaid, the federal government pays 60% of Medicaid costs, while states must pay 40% of the costs. Obviously, neither can afford the added expense of the problem posed in the bill that "we had to pass to know what was in it."
The depth of ineptness in the Democrat party is just unfathomable. BOTH houses of Congress were controlled by Democrats when this bill was passed, and obviously a Democrat president signed it into law. This is an important point. As 2012 approaches, we must remember that we not only have an inept president who needs to be replaced, but we also have inept members of Congress who need replacing as well!
Of course, for many of these Congressional seats, and even the highest office in the land, I would suggest that you keep in mind that many of those making a lot of the noise, and prompting most of the change on Capitol Hill, are Tea party members who are motivated, invigorated and most importantly, true to their word.
Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/more-surprises-from-obama-healthcare-law-michael-a-minton-4939336.html
About the Author:
Michael A. Minton got his start in politics at the ripe old age of six, when his father, G. Terry Minton, ran for alderman in Louisville, Kentucky. "Mike" has worked in campaigns to elect (well, naturally his dad), former Rep. Anne Northup, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and most recently in the failed Romney for president campaign.
Mike got his start in his writing career as a freelance reporter for Talon News Service, and has since gone on to create his own blog, Mr. Right Opinion, and now operates a new blog called What's Right is Right.
He has been published in a number of online and print publications to include: Jefferson Review, Heritage Institute, Men's News Daily, RightNation.us, VDare.com, Hawaii Reporter, Lincoln Heritage Institute, fixmyhealthcare.com, CivilHomelandDefense.com, The Pioneer News and others.
Mike is a member of Providence Baptist Church in Brooks, KY, a single father of two daughters, an amateur genealogist, and has been involved in acting, including a role in Camelot at the Kentucky Center for the Arts in Louisville.
------------
Health care graphic from www.jeffhead.com
AMA Re-Endorses Obamacare Mandate, Loses 12,000 Members
June 21, 2011 - Chicago - The American Medical Association (AMA) has suffered a significant loss of membership since 2010. The AMA is being ripped apart from within by its controversial support of the fascist "individual mandate" element of Obamacare, which requires individuals to by health care or face stiff penalties.
The AMA met last weekend to discuss Obamacare and other issues. The AMA has just re-endorsed the individual mandate.
"The American Medical Association’s delegates held their annual meeting over the weekend, at which the most contested issue under discussion was the individual mandate to purchase health insurance or pay a fee," reports the American Independent, "and whether the AMA should continue, as it has since 2006, to officially support such a mandate. The mandate is a crucial component of the Affordable Care Act passed by the Democratic Congress last year."
"AMA delegates voted on yesterday in favor of maintaining support for the mandate by a vote of 326-165," the AI report said. "An alternative proposal, in favor of the government encouraging the purchase of insurance through tax credits but not requiring it, was supported by delegations from several more conservative states."
Many of the AMA's member physicians do not support the unconstitutional mandate, and a lot of those doctors have dropped their AMA memberships over the past two years.
According to America's Medical Society (AMS), "the AMA’s membership is down 5.3% since last year, and AMA rolls have dropped almost 10.4% since 2007…considering that the bulk of AMA members are medical students (who get a free ‘member’ card) and retirees, this loss of real, active, productive physician members is astounding and devastating to the AMA." The AMS published its article on its website on June 20, 2011. Read the AMS article "AMA Loses 12,000 Members … More Obamacare Lies from the White House" here.
The AMA calls itself "the nation's largest physician group," but this is intentionally misleading. AMA membership is not nearly as large as the average American might think. Fewer than one in five U.S. physicians are members of the AMA, which is based in Chicago. That number is dwindling, primarily because of the way in which the AMA embroiled itself in the health care debate by siding with Barack Obama's fascist policy of requiring individuals to purchase health care insurance.
"Despit the hoopla and false celebration of physician 'unity,'" says the AMS, "the American Medical Association reluctantly acknowledged this past weekend that the organization has lost 12,000 members in the aftermath of their support for Obamacare. Based on the growth of more moderate/conservative doctor groups in America, the AMA is losing even more members as each day goes by..."
Many of the AMA's member physicians do not support the unconstitutional mandate, and a lot of those doctors have dropped their AMA memberships over the past two years.
According to America's Medical Society (AMS), "the AMA’s membership is down 5.3% since last year, and AMA rolls have dropped almost 10.4% since 2007…considering that the bulk of AMA members are medical students (who get a free ‘member’ card) and retirees, this loss of real, active, productive physician members is astounding and devastating to the AMA." The AMS published its article on its website on June 20, 2011. Read the AMS article "AMA Loses 12,000 Members … More Obamacare Lies from the White House" here.
The AMA calls itself "the nation's largest physician group," but this is intentionally misleading. AMA membership is not nearly as large as the average American might think. Fewer than one in five U.S. physicians are members of the AMA, which is based in Chicago. That number is dwindling, primarily because of the way in which the AMA embroiled itself in the health care debate by siding with Barack Obama's fascist policy of requiring individuals to purchase health care insurance.
"Despit the hoopla and false celebration of physician 'unity,'" says the AMS, "the American Medical Association reluctantly acknowledged this past weekend that the organization has lost 12,000 members in the aftermath of their support for Obamacare. Based on the growth of more moderate/conservative doctor groups in America, the AMA is losing even more members as each day goes by..."
Video: Schakowsky Wants to Destroy Private Health Insurers
Listen to Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL, 9th District) admit that goal in a speech she made at a Health Care For America rally on April 18, 2009 at St. Augustine College in Chicago. The hottest part comes at 3:29 in the video. There, Schakowsky talks about a conversation she had with a man who worked for an insurance company, who said that the planned "reforms" would put the private insurance industry out of business. "He was right," Schakowsky told the roomful of over 500 cheering socialists. Obamacare is intended to destroy the private health insurance industry.
a bloated, incompetent socialist that will be forced on people against their will.
Rep. Jan Schakowsky To Insurance Companies: Drop Dead
 |
| Schakowsky: Fighting Dirty |
"This is not a principled fight. This is a fight about strategy for getting there and I believe we will." - Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), speech on healthcare reform, April 18, 2009In other words, Schakowsky and her Democrat pals will fight dirty and without principles, because for them the end justifies the means. Principles be damned, Schakowsky admits, we'll cheat and kick below the belt to win. That's what she meant in the quote above. Hear her say it in the video below.
Full Text of HR 3200, Section 1233 Advance Care Planning Consultation
H.R. 3200 America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (Introduced in House)
SEC. 1233.
ADVANCE CARE PLANNING CONSULTATION
ADVANCE CARE PLANNING CONSULTATION
(a) Medicare-
(1) IN
GENERAL- Section 1861 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x) is amended--
(A) in
subsection (s)(2)--
(i) by
striking ‘and’ at the end of subparagraph (DD);
(ii)
by adding ‘and’ at the end of subparagraph (EE); and
(iii)
by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
‘(FF)
advance care planning consultation (as defined in subsection (hhh)(1));’; and
(B) by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
‘Advance Care
Planning Consultation
‘(hhh)(1)
Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the term ‘advance care planning
consultation’ means a consultation between the individual and a practitioner
described in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning, if, subject to
paragraph (3), the individual involved has not had such a consultation within
the last 5 years. Such consultation shall include the following:
‘(A) An
explanation by the practitioner of advance care planning, including key
questions and considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to.
‘(B) An
explanation by the practitioner of advance directives, including living wills
and durable powers of attorney, and their uses.
‘(C) An
explanation by the practitioner of the role and responsibilities of a health
care proxy.
‘(D) The
provision by the practitioner of a list of national and State-specific
resources to assist consumers and their families with advance care planning,
including the national toll-free hotline, the advance care planning
clearinghouses, and State legal service organizations (including those funded
through the Older Americans Act of 1965).
‘(E) An
explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and
supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for
such services and supports that are available under this title.
‘(F)(i)
Subject to clause (ii), an explanation of orders regarding life sustaining
treatment or similar orders, which shall include--
‘(I)
the reasons why the development of such an order is beneficial to the
individual and the individual’s family and the reasons why such an order should
be updated periodically as the health of the individual changes;
‘(II)
the information needed for an individual or legal surrogate to make informed
decisions regarding the completion of such an order; and
‘(III)
the identification of resources that an individual may use to determine the
requirements of the State in which such individual resides so that the
treatment wishes of that individual will be carried out if the individual is
unable to communicate those wishes, including requirements regarding the designation
of a surrogate decisionmaker (also known as a health care proxy).
‘(ii) The
Secretary shall limit the requirement for explanations under clause (i) to
consultations furnished in a State--
‘(I)
in which all legal barriers have been addressed for enabling orders for life
sustaining treatment to constitute a set of medical orders respected across all
care settings; and
‘(II)
that has in effect a program for orders for life sustaining treatment described
in clause (iii).
‘(iii) A
program for orders for life sustaining treatment for a States described in this
clause is a program that--
‘(I) ensures such orders are
standardized and uniquely identifiable throughout the State;
‘(II)
distributes or makes accessible such orders to physicians and other health
professionals that (acting within the scope of the professional’s authority
under State law) may sign orders for life sustaining treatment;
‘(III)
provides training for health care professionals across the continuum of care
about the goals and use of orders for life sustaining treatment; and
‘(IV) is guided by a coalition of
stakeholders includes representatives from emergency medical services,
emergency department physicians or nurses, state long-term care association,
state medical association, state surveyors, agency responsible for senior
services, state department of health, state hospital association, home health
association, state bar association, and state hospice association.
‘(2) A
practitioner described in this paragraph is--
‘(A) a
physician (as defined in subsection (r)(1)); and
‘(B) a
nurse practitioner or physician’s assistant who has the authority under State
law to sign orders for life sustaining treatments.
‘(3)(A) An
initial preventive physical examination under subsection (WW), including any
related discussion during such examination, shall not be considered an advance
care planning consultation for purposes of applying the 5-year limitation under
paragraph (1).
‘(B) An
advance care planning consultation with respect to an individual may be
conducted more frequently than provided under paragraph (1) if there is a
significant change in the health condition of the individual, including
diagnosis of a chronic, progressive, life-limiting disease, a life-threatening or
terminal diagnosis or life-threatening injury, or upon admission to a skilled
nursing facility, a long-term care facility (as defined by the Secretary), or a
hospice program.
‘(4) A
consultation under this subsection may include the formulation of an order
regarding life sustaining treatment or a similar order.
‘(5)(A) For
purposes of this section, the term ‘order regarding life sustaining treatment’
means, with respect to an individual, an actionable medical order relating to the
treatment of that individual that--
‘(i) is
signed and dated by a physician (as defined in subsection (r)(1)) or another
health care professional (as specified by the Secretary and who is acting
within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law in signing
such an order, including a nurse practitioner or physician assistant) and is in
a form that permits it to stay with the individual and be followed by health
care professionals and providers across the continuum of care;
‘(ii)
effectively communicates the individual’s preferences regarding life sustaining
treatment, including an indication of the treatment and care desired by the
individual;
‘(iii) is
uniquely identifiable and standardized within a given locality, region, or State
(as identified by the Secretary); and
‘(iv) may
incorporate any advance directive (as defined in section 1866(f)(3)) if
executed by the individual.
‘(B) The level
of treatment indicated under subparagraph (A)(ii) may range from an indication
for full treatment to an indication to limit some or all or specified
interventions. Such indicated levels of treatment may include indications
respecting, among other items--
‘(i) the
intensity of medical intervention if the patient is pulse less, apneic, or has
serious cardiac or pulmonary problems;
‘(ii) the
individual’s desire regarding transfer to a hospital or remaining at the
current care setting;
‘(iii) the
use of antibiotics; and
‘(iv) the use of artificially
administered nutrition and hydration.’.
(2)
PAYMENT- Section 1848(j)(3) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-4(j)(3)) is amended by
inserting ‘(2)(FF),’ after ‘(2)(EE),’.
(3)
FREQUENCY LIMITATION- Section 1862(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395y(a)) is
amended--
(A) in
paragraph (1)--
(i) in subparagraph (N), by striking ‘and’ at the end;
(ii) in subparagraph (O) by striking the semicolon at the end and
inserting ‘, and’; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
‘(P)
in the case of advance care planning consultations (as defined in section
1861(hhh)(1)), which are performed more frequently than is covered under such
section;’; and
(B) in
paragraph (7), by striking ‘or (K)’ and inserting ‘(K), or (P)’.
(4)
EFFECTIVE DATE- The amendments made by this subsection shall apply to
consultations furnished on or after January 1, 2011.
(b) Expansion
of Physician Quality Reporting Initiative for End of Life Care-
(1) Physician’S QUALITY REPORTING
INITIATIVE- Section 1848(k)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1395w-4(k)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
‘(3)
Physician’S QUALITY REPORTING INITIATIVE-
‘(A)
IN GENERAL- For purposes of reporting data on quality measures for covered
professional services furnished during 2011 and any subsequent year, to the
extent that measures are available, the Secretary shall include quality measures
on end of life care and advanced care planning that have been adopted or
endorsed by a consensus-based organization, if appropriate. Such measures shall
measure both the creation of and adherence to orders for life-sustaining
treatment.
‘(B)
PROPOSED SET OF MEASURES- The Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register
proposed quality measures on end of life care and advanced care planning that
the Secretary determines are described in subparagraph (A) and would be appropriate
for eligible professionals to use to submit data to the Secretary. The
Secretary shall provide for a period of public comment on such set of measures
before finalizing such proposed measures.’.
(c) Inclusion
of Information in Medicare & You Handbook-
(1)
MEDICARE & YOU HANDBOOK-
(A) IN
GENERAL- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Health and Human Services shall update the online version of the
Medicare & You Handbook to include the following:
(i) An explanation of advance care planning and advance directives,
including--
(I) living wills;
(II) durable power of attorney;
(III) orders of life-sustaining treatment; and
(IV) health care proxies.
(ii) A description of Federal and State resources available to assist
individuals and their families with advance care planning and advance
directives, including--
(I) available State legal service organizations to assist individuals
with advance care planning, including those organizations that receive funding
pursuant to the Older Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 93001 et seq.);
(II) website links or addresses for State-specific advance directive
forms; and
(III) any additional information, as determined by the Secretary.
(B)
UPDATE OF PAPER AND SUBSEQUENT VERSIONS- The Secretary shall include the
information described in subparagraph (A) in all paper and electronic versions
of the Medicare & You Handbook that are published on or after the date that
is 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act.
See the full text of H.R. 3200 at OpenCongress.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)