THE US REPORT

The Democratic National Convention in Denver is still weeks away, but protest groups are splintering, green schemes are coming up short and the ACLU has filed a lawsuit against the host city and the Secret Service.  There’s more—the mainstream press are miffed about their work station being set up adjacent to the protesters’ area which will be walled off by the type of chain link fence some rural types use to confine their hound dogs.  There’s so much concern about the impact of large numbers of guests one commenter at the Rocky Mountain News (Denver) gave poolroom bathroom advice to convention attendees: If it’s yellow, let it mellow. Another commenter suggested they refrain from using air conditioning. There is already a projected budget shortfall, so the a/c suggestion is a sound one. These observations are just the tip of the melting iceberg.

Click to read more ...

(Commentary)—You could say Israel was born against all odds. Prior to her creation, Jewish factions were split politically, with Arab and British hostility thrown into the mix. The US president was negative. Groups that would form the Israeli army would be seriously outnumbered and weaponry was sorely lacking. But there was support. It may surprise some that Russia figured largely in Israel’s founding, even going so far as to mandate the Czech government to sell them arms for the cause.

I learned many things I didn’t know about Israel after discovering the book Inside Israel (Marlowe & Co.), edited by John Miller and Aaron Kenedi. This collection of essays, some written by amazing writers like Paul Johnson, Saul Bellow and P. J. O’Rourke, is worth reading because it sheds a great deal of light on a country at the center of world politics.

Not long ago, I was talking politics with a friend of mine. She thinks the US needs to stop “playing favorites” with Israel. Until our talk, she was under the impression the US singlehandedly split up the territory and handed Israel her deed.

Who supported the creation of Israel?
Russia played an integral role. Paul Johnson writes in the essay, ‘A History of the Jews,’  “When Palestine first came before the United Nations in May, 1947, Andrei Gromyko, the Soviet Deputy Foreign Minister, caused surprise by announcing that his government supported the creation of a Jewish state and by voting accordingly.” In October the head of the Soviet delegation toasted the “future Jewish state” before voting for the partition plan. Of course, the Soviets weren’t fans of Jews. One of several reasons they supported Israel’s founding was because it would disadvantage the British. Johnson notes British and American oil companies didn’t want the Israeli state—backlash from Arab countries would surely follow. Meanwhile, President Franklin D. Roosevelt didn’t want the state either, a position reinforced after his meeting with King Ibn Saud at Yalta. Some might say the Jews had God on their side for sure. Roosevelt died and Harry Truman supported Israel’s founding, says Johnson, because he felt sorry for the Jewish people and he also wanted the Jewish vote in swing states.

Could the current conflict have been stopped?
People talk about the Middle East conflict and we in the US have good reason to be tired of it. Lives, resources and wealth have been sacrificed in my country on that very account, one not exclusively relevant to Israel. As this country was moving to become a reality, numerous other shifts in countries and politics were occurring.  Massive migrations of humans began and not only from Israel. Germany in no small part can be thanked for that, as can France.

But it’s worth pointing out the world had ample opportunity to stop the Arab-Israeli conflict in its tracks. In July, 1937, the Arabs were offered ¾ of Palestine. The Jews agreed. The Arabs wouldn’t even talk about it.

Jewish and Arab refugees
With Israel’s founding, had refugees been dealt with uniformly and fairly, future deaths might have been prevented. Most people know about the Arab refugees—656,000 fled. They were resettled in camps in Jordan, Transjordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Egypt and the Gaza Strip. They were viewed as guests who would, one day, return to their native land. This was the status conferred by their Arab brethren.

What most people don’t know is that between 1945-48, a massive Jewish relocation also occurred, with 567,654 Jewish refugees fleeing Arab countries. Israel received them and resettled them, Johnson says, as part of its national-home policy. They weren’t shoved into “temporary” camps. Rather, they were treated as refugees in the US are, with compassion and guidance for future citizenship.

Can you imagine the clamor if the US placed Guatemalans, Colombians, Mexicans and others in refugee camps? And left them there for years? Why is it we never hear criticism about the placement of all those Arab refugees in camps?

That question brings me to my mission. At the moment, here in the US and in Europe as well, my mission is not in sync with politics of our time except with politicians seeking votes and talking rhetoric. It is not intellectually chic at the moment to be a loyal friend to Israel. It isn’t appropriate in some quarters to say the US should never sit down and “talk” to countries intent on destroying Israel. Thus, I have two messages.

A message for Israel and one for the future US president
From the lush tropics of my native state to those who are celebrating Israel’s founding,  Happy Birthday. And may you have many more to come.

And to whoever wins the office of US president, I hope you’ll read some history and maybe a few blogs. They will serve you well in deciding who you should sit down and talk to when it comes to the Middle East, especially if terms like "annihilate" are being tossed around.

(-filed by Kay B. Day)

The latest alleged US healthcare dollars ripoff occurred in Puerto Rico, to the tune of $922,882.00. On May 1st, a grand jury returned a 27-count indictment charging four doctors and two other individuals with conspiracy, health care fraud, soliciting and receiving kickbacks in relation to the Medicare Program, false statements and forfeiture allegations.  This is a drop in the mega bucket of wasted dollars.

Healthcare dollars wasted in virtual barbecue
I’ve often pointed out that if the federal government was a more responsible steward of our tax dollars, the money saved could fill many needs, such as health insurance for the working poor. The alleged Puerto Rican healthcare grifters worked in a similar manner to some Medicaid thieves in South Florida. Government officials say recent reports show as much as $2 billion a year may be lost in Florida’s $16 billion Medicaid program to fraud and abuse. So we’re talking one US government territory and one US state and more than $2 billion in fraud. Take a look at any other state and you’ll find your tax dollars are being burned with pleasure. In New York in 2006, indictments were issued for a Medicaid fraud ring involving a doctor, pharmacists, several city pharmacies, millions in fraudulent Medicaid billings and large monetary transfers to individuals in Pakistan. Sixteen individuals and five corporations have been indicted in the ongoing investigation and a civil action has been filed against twenty individuals and entities freezing assets and seeking the recovery of more than $22 million.

Consider this—these are the fraudulent bucks we know about largely thanks to cooperative investigations among top-notch law enforcement agencies and basically every level, from local cops to the US Justice Dept. Wanna have some fun? Enter the name of any state or US territory in your search bar and add the words, ‘Medicare fraud.’ Have fun and have lunch, dinner and breakfast the following morning while you’re at it. It’ll take you that long to read all the results for Medicare fraud in a single state.

Puerto Rican company sold durable medical equipment
In the Puerto Rico case, Doctor's Medical Supplies was a durable medical equipment (DME) company authorized to do business in Puerto Rico with its business office located in Luquillo, Puerto Rico, and registered as an authorized Medicare Part B DME supplier. Doctor's Medical Supplies submitted claims to Medicare, seeking reimbursements for DME, including oxygen services, motorized wheelchairs, and hospital beds, that were allegedly provided and medically necessary. During the time period listed in the indictment, Doctor's Medical Supplies submitted false claims for DME and received approximately $922,882.00 in Medicare reimbursements.

The main defendant, Rabindranaut Amrud-Ríos, also known as Rabin, submitted and caused the submission of false and fraudulent claims to Medicare. He is the owner and president of Doctor's Medical Supplies. Amrud-Rios oversaw the business and financial operations of Doctor's Medical Supplies. The "Physician Signers," as used in the Indictment, would sign prescriptions and certificates of medical necessity (CMNs) and were paid kickbacks by Amrud-Rios to sign the false CMNs. Amrud-Rios along with the other defendants listed in the indictment falsely and fraudulently represented that the medical conditions of the Medicare beneficiaries were such that DME, which included oxygen services, power wheelchairs, and hospital beds, were medically necessary when in fact the Medicare beneficiaries were either dead or did not suffer from such medical conditions and did not qualify to receive the DME under the Medicare regulations.

The names of the four doctors involved in the conspiracy are: Jaime Belardo, Narciso Reyes-Carrillo, José Figueroa-Pacheco, and Rafael Esteva-Heal. Also charged is Gladys Avilés, an employee of Doctor's Medical Supplies. The licensed doctors are charged with signing blank or previously completed false prescriptions and CMNs for Doctor's Medical Supplies. Each of the doctors was paid kickbacks by co-defendant Amrud-Ríos in exchange for signing blank or previously completed false CMNs for Doctor's Medical Supplies. Defendant Gladys Avilés was the employee of Doctor's Medical Supplies who completed blank and false CMNs for Doctor's Medical Supplies and submitted claims to Medicare based on those false CMNs.

Why aren’t the presidential candidates talking about this issue?
Health insurance is a hot topic as our presidential election draws near. Until the feds can manage the money we taxpayers already ante up, I really hope members of congress steer clear of raising income taxes. It’s like the same hope I have to win the lottery—ain’t gonna happen. But I’m already paying for mistakes that can actually be corrected at a basic level. That’s why we have federal government workers. It’s obvious Medicare needs better oversight. Why aren’t the candidates doing something about the fraud that could help those who need healthcare and can’t afford it? Sen. John McCain is a Republican. Here's a wakeup call, GOP—this is an issue handed to you on a silver platter. Especially since we read Sen. Barack Obama’s lips and he guarantees us he’ll raise our taxes. We anticipate he'll have lots of  help from the tax loving members of congress.

Why shouldn’t we focus on saving these dollars? Why don't politicians ever talk about it? Because it’s easier to just tax us? What do you think should be done to stop the burning of US tax dollars in healthcare fraud?

--filed by Kay B.Day

(Washington, DC)-A Wall Street Journal article by Scott Gottlieb caught my eye because it’s the first article I’ve seen that explores a specific policy area, healthcare, of the Dem presidential frontrunner Sen. Barack Obama. The article, ‘Obama’s Health Care Record,’ analyzes the impact of mandates on health insurers and the higher costs passed on to consumers. Gottlieb notes, “By my count, during Mr. Obama's tenure in the state Senate, 18 different laws came up for a vote and passed that imposed new mandates on private health insurance. Mr. Obama voted for all of them.”

I’ve had personal experience with mandates, though I don’t know if the mandate was facility-driven or government-enacted. When my younger daughter was 13, we took her to the emergency room. She had symptoms of appendicitis. The very first test my daughter had: a pregnancy test. We told them our daughter wasn’t sexually active. Didn’t matter. “We give them to all girls who are old enough to menstruate,” the nurse told us.

I was glad to see the WSJ article because for months now, I’ve been asking repeatedly why no one is willing to look not only at Obama’s specific record of deeds and actions, but also at every candidate’s history. Not the one you read on official bios, or the one you hear in campaign speeches, but at what the candidate actually did.
I keep reading about the senator’s work on behalf of the poor in Chicago. Specifics, please?

I did an archive search. By way of an article in the University of Chicago Chronicle, I did learn Obama participated in a panel on juvenile justice in 1997. One of Obama’s fellow panelists was William Ayers who at the time had a new book out. Ayers is known for his intense activism during the 1970s, a kind way to describe those who advocate setting off bombs to deliver a political message. Obama and Ayers were two of four speakers talking about the juvenile criminal justice system. Obama was described as “working to combat legislation that would put more juvenile offenders into the adult system.”

As an aside, I’d like to note I harbor some anger towards Ayers. The actions he and his fellows set in motion when I was in college had an impact even at our university in a small Southern state. In the early 70s our campus was conflicted by riots over the Vietnam War, out-of-state activists and rumors the Weather Underground Organization was coming to set off bombs. I remember someone setting off fireworks. Several students fainted. For weeks we were under a curfew mandated by the governor. Add in the fact we were having midterms. On every corner there was a soldier, actually a member of the National Guard, standing at attention with weapon ready. Going to class, work, the library or anywhere was a royal pain for weeks. Ayers was never convicted, but the Washington Post mentions a quote from September, 2001, from a story in the New York Times, “Although never convicted of any crime, he [Ayers] told the New York Times in September 2001, ‘I don't regret setting bombs...I feel we didn't do enough.’ That’s a great perspective to deliver to juvenile justice, right?

As a voter, I want to know more about a candidate who may well be our next president. When Obama worked for a law firm, what did he work on? Who’d he help sue? The Chicago Sun-Times did a think piece on Obama’s work there and elsewhere, in April, 2007. Were questions posed in the article ever answered?

As a voter, I want to believe we can have a candidate who will put aside racial prejudice, who will govern for the benefit of all (even those of us who work hard) and who will work to rise above partisan politics. But what I’m seeing is mostly campaign rhetoric.

The WSJ article notes, “The burden of paying for state mandates is usually borne by individuals who buy their own insurance, small employers and others not covered by ERISA. In total, about half of the people who have insurance bear the brunt of the cost of state mandates.” So I’d like to know why I am bearing the cost of those mandates, whether they’re testing 13 year old girls for pregnancy or extending coverage to unmarried dependents under the age of 30. I’d like to know the specifics, the nitty gritty and the down and dirty for every single presidential candidate. Isn’t that why we have a free press?

In 1990, as he was being interviewed after becoming the first black to head Harvard’s Law Review, Obama told the New York Times, “''I personally am interested in pushing a strong minority perspective. I'm fairly opinionated about this. But as president of the law review, I have a limited role as only first among equals.''

Tell us more about every candidate. And if we’re smart, we voters will ask for more.

(--filed by Kay B. Day; photo of White House grounds from White House website)