Every year, more than 44,000 Americans die simply because they have no health insurance.

Only thing missing on that web site is one single name.

How many people survive without health insurance until medicare picks them up?

How many people survive without health insurance until medicare picks them up?

All of them.

OK everyone listen up. If you died because you didn't have healthcare please raise your hand. See I told ya. No hands.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

New Alan Grayson Website Violates House Ethics Rules

Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) just took to the House floor to announce his new website, "Names of the Dead". According to the website:

Every year, more than 44,000 Americans die simply because have no health insurance.

I have created this project in their memory. I hope that honoring them will help us end this senseless loss of American lives. If you have lost a loved one, please share the story of that loved one with us. Help us ensure that their legacy is a more just America, where every life that can be saved will be saved.

I'm told this may be an ethics violation because the site was created out of his House office. Developing ...

Update:

The rules in the congressional handbook House Ethics Manual (p. 131) which it seems to violate are as follows:

Member and Committee Websites: Under rules issued by the Committee on House Administration set forth in the Members Handbook and the Committees Handbook, Member and Committee websites

- May not include personal, political, or campaign information; and

- May not be directly linked or refer to websites created or operated by a campaign or any campaign-related entity, including political parties and campaign committees.

This website is clearly a violation of the above rules.

The disclaimer says "Paid for by Congressman Alan Grayson," but includes links to his campaign website, etc..

Good idea. I might start a website listing the names of Texans who committ suicide when Tony Romo blows a game.

"I have created this project in their memory. I hope that honoring them will help us end this senseless loss of American lives."

OMG! What a liar. Honoring them? It is nothing more than a political ploy. I guess for a politician that is as close as they will ever come. If he really wants to "honor them" he will give up his insurance for the crap he wants to force on the rest of us.

Is there a HIPAA violation somewhere here?

Boy do republicans throw a fit when a light will be shown on their greed.

RCADE

You often change the title of articles that we paste. It may be appropriate sometimes, but often, it is turned into something less impactful, with less literary nuance. They generally become more pedantic and unattractive, and most likely generate less traffic. Take the alternate titles to this article. The one I originally submitted was "The Names of the Dead". That certainly contains more drama, more mystery, and would generate more intrigue and questions than "Grayson launches site....". You seem to be bereft of your literary drama gene. Don't be so quick to make changes, not all of them are for the better.

S.

Is there a HIPAA violation somewhere here?

Well the dead person would have to bring suit.

When is Grayson going to announce his candidacy for Senator. I think he could give Crist a good run for his money and Crist is facing opposition from the right. Could be a good opportunity for Dems to pick up another senate seat.

726: I got news. There is no private right of action for HIPAA violations.

It's not one of those things that's easy to prove, that a person died from not having health insurance. The autopsy would say something like "kidney failure" or "cancer" or "multiple skull fractures".

But tens of millions of people all over the world are playing "Yoville", or building little farms on Facebook. Good luck with your website.

#10 | Posted by skizziks at 2009-10-22 08:05 AM

Start your own website, whiner.

Start your own website, whiner.

#15 | Posted by JOE

......that's Mr.Whiner to you.....

"It's not one of those things that's easy to prove"

I doubt it will require proof, just grieving relatives or friends who know what happened. I have a feeling that they will feel angry enough to take the time for his web site and perhaps tell their story. It will provide Rush hours and hours of comedy.

Three years ago our Johnny died. We thought there was no hope, but then we discovered the United Appeal for the Dead. They showed us that despite Johnny's handicap, he could still be a useful member of our family and the community. Our United Appeal for the Dead caseworker showed us that the absence of life from Johnny's body didn't have to mean his absence from our daily lives... Although, so far there's no known treatment for death's crippling effects, still everyone can acquaint himself with the three early warning signs of death: one, rigor mortis; two, a rotting smell; three, occasional drowsiness.
Kentucky Fried Movie

Looks like rcade has solved the "killfile" situation and is experimenting on the libs here. Skizz seems to be the only one who's posts are getting through. lol

#20....

Oops spoke to soon.... #18

I would love to see the back-up for that claim.

Is there a HIPAA violation somewhere here?

Well the dead person would have to bring suit.

#11 | Posted by 726 at 2009-10-22 08:06 AM

The Dead person will not have to bring the suit if this is a HIPAA violation and any doctor releasing medical records without permission is in big trouble.

I wonder if family members are volunteering this information. If so is it really ok to pimp out your loved one's death for a political purpose?

PS - Our focus should be on reducing health care costs, not the number of people covered. Reduce costs and coverage comes soon after.

Furthermore, did you know that under Bush wages actually rose significantly but employers didn't pass those increases out to employees, instead it all went to insurers? Look it up.

I'm doubting any violation of "The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act" if they didn't have health insurance :D

I'm doubting any violation of "The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act" if they didn't have health insurance :D

#26 | Posted by kwrx25 at 2009-10-22 10:48 AM

I dunno, just wondering out loud.

The HIPAA privacy rule typically only covers health plans, healthcare providers and information clearinghouses. Given that the "names of the dead" website invites anyone to "share their story," posting to the site would not be a HIPAA violation unless you are a healthcare worker or insurance company posting information about someone else.

That said, the accuracy of the website is questionable since anyone can post. I'm sure there are plenty of lefties out there who would make up a story just to inflate the count on the website.

"PS - Our focus should be on reducing health care costs, not the number of people covered."

Except that getting more people covered reduces costs. The fewer people getting health care through ER visits the better.

or autopsy.

I dunno, just wondering out loud.

#27 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE

I thought that was public information. There would not be anything in there about insurance.

What about just plain ol'

'Speaker of the Dead'

(Orson Scott Card anyone?--Kan??)

What about all the millions WITH INSURANCE WHO DIE EVERY YEAR??????

FTFY Mr. Grayson..

"What about all the millions WITH INSURANCE WHO DIE EVERY YEAR??????"

You really don't know what the difference is???

Come on, that's bull.

Danni, have you ever given money to someone who didn't have health insurance?

"Danni, have you ever given money to someone who didn't have health insurance?
#34 | Posted by JOE"

I'm sure she has. Almost everyone does. (See, e.g., the clerks at Target, McDonald's, Starbucks, almost all waiters and waitresses, etc. etc. etc.)

What about all the millions WITH INSURANCE WHO DIE EVERY YEAR??????

FTFY Mr. Grayson..

#32 | POSTED BY MURPHY

At least they were given the best possible chance of living. People will always die but it seems wrong that we let people die just because of finances. People will avoid going to the doctor as long as possible if they don't have insurance due to fear of costs. People will also skip meds if they don't have insurance because it may come down to eating or buying expensive cholesterol meds.

"Danni, have you ever given money to someone who didn't have health insurance?"

No, I only give to rich folks.

I'm sure she has. Almost everyone does. (See, e.g., the clerks at Target, McDonald's, Starbucks, almost all waiters and waitresses, etc. etc. etc.)

Except that when you patronize those establishments, you perpetuate their evil practices of employing people without giving them health insurance.

My question dealt with acts of charity, not commerce.

Just checking Danni. It seems like if you actually cared about people who don't have insurance, you might have sought one out and helped them rather than push for government to require everyone else to do so.

Sorta like the anti-choicers who never do anything to help born babies in need?

"Just checking Danni. It seems like if you actually cared about people who don't have insurance, you might have sought one out and helped them rather than push for government to require everyone else to do so."

Ooooooh Joe, you really got me with that one.....what an idiot.

Is there anywhere on that ridiculous site where you can actually read the stories? I don't even see a list of names!

"Sorta like the anti-choicers who never do anything to help born babies in need?"

Yeah, sorta like them.

This is a political ploy pure and simple.

No one knows if having insurance or not having insurance caused a person to die.

People will die with or without insurance.

He is putting out a false premise or false connection between having insurance or not having insurance was the cause of someone's death.

It could be countered by a list of all the people who died and had insurance, but it didn't help.

1. Ted Kennedy

"No one knows if having insurance or not having insurance caused a person to die."

Baloney. If the doctor says, "well, if you would have come for treatment sooner your cancer wouldn't have spread so far....." then if the person had no insurance we can say he died because he didn't have insurance.

Murphy, do you not believe some Americans die due to a lack of insurance and therefore preventive health care????

If the doctor says, "well, if you would have come for treatment sooner your cancer wouldn't have spread so far....." then if the person had no insurance we can say he died because he didn't have insurance.

Or that they didn't have regular check ups and only went to a doctor when they felt ill, which is the vast majority, both with and without insurance.

#46 | POSTED BY DANNI

Your premise is garbage. I have insurance and I wait quite a while to go to the doctor too. The doctor could just as easily be saying that to me, a fully insured person. That's not the government's fault. It's mine.

2. Michael Jackson

3. Patrick Swayze

4. Elvis

"That's not the government's fault. It's mine."

Yes, if you're too dumb to be seen periodically by your doctor that's your fault, but there are many people, like my son, who lost his job and his insurance and can't afford to go for a check up. Fortunately, he's young and healthy and we hope to have some insurance for him pretty soon but many others aren't lucky enough to have a family that can take care of them. Pretending that lack of health insurance doesn't cause some folks to die unnecessaryily is bull shit and you know it. I simply hate arguing with people who post arguments they don't even believe themselves.

What most of you are really arguing is that since we can't know exact numbers about people dying because of lack of health cre insurance then we shouldn't say it happens. It does happen though and we all know it so, like it or not, supporters of health care reform are going to keep repeating it bcause it's true.

Pretending that lack of health insurance doesn't cause some folks to die unnecessaryily is bull shit and you know it.

Some, not all. This means it was you who was full of shit when you said "If the doctor says, "well, if you would have come for treatment sooner your cancer wouldn't have spread so far....." then if the person had no insurance we can say he died because he didn't have insurance."

You have a point of view that you are seeking evidence to prove rather than looking at the evidence to reveal the truth.

"Some, not all. This means it was you who was full of shit when you said "If the doctor says, "well, if you would have come for treatment sooner your cancer wouldn't have spread so far....."

Gee, I didn't think anyone would be stupid enough to think I meant "all". Excuse me, I overestimated the IQs of other posters.

"You have a point of view that you are seeking evidence to prove rather than looking at the evidence to reveal the truth."

No, I'm not trying to prove anything, it is self-evident. It doesn't need to be proven. If you want to prove it isn't true then do so, but I fear that it may be impossible.

Well, if that's self evident and doesn't need to be proven, how about this:

If Obamacare care passes, the quality of life for Americans as a whole will be diminished, beyond any gains a small minority will receive. Quad erat demonstrandum.

"Some, not all. This means it was you who was full of shit when you said "If the doctor says, "well, if you would have come for treatment sooner your cancer wouldn't have spread so far....."

Gee, I didn't think anyone would be stupid enough to think I meant "all". Excuse me, I overestimated the IQs of other posters.

#55 | Posted by danni at 2009-10-22 01:03 PM

Wow, someone calls you out on your statement and you try to insult the IQ's of people who don't agree with you? Sounds like the current administration.

Someone said
"No one knows if having insurance or not having insurance caused a person to die."

And you replied what I typed above. Then you try to insult people for calling you on it.

Basically, that poster was correct in saying that. You can't account for the people who have insurance and procrastinate going to see a doctor before it's to late. There are no hospitals in the US that will deny medical attention to someone without insurance.

"If Obamacare care passes, the quality of life for Americans as a whole will be diminished, beyond any gains a small minority will receive."

Too many other countries with national health care to point to and refute such a nonsensical statement.

"Basically, that poster was correct in saying that."

No he wanted to play semantic games instead of actually discuss the topic. You have a real point or just want to play silly games too???

Or that they didn't have regular check ups and only went to a doctor when they felt ill, which is the vast majority, both with and without insurance.

#47 | Posted by kanrei at 2009-10-22 12:14 PM

Yeah, silly games. I call this game "you are full of shit."

Nope. The quality of life in Cuba or England or Belgium doesn't come to ours, IMO. But we don't have to prove anything, do we? The idea that 40,000 people die every year from insufficient insurance sounds like a big deal, except when you put that up against the 30 million Americans who are uninsured, and another 50 million they say are underinsured. Suddenly, less than one twentieth of one percent mortality seems kinda trivial.

" There are no hospitals in the US that will deny medical attention to someone without insurance."

Of course not, but by the time someone goes to teh ER it may be too late. That is the people we are talking about. But then, you know that, do you have a real point??? Do you deny that preventive health care saves lives??? Do you deny that those without access to it risk letting a treatable illness progress to the point it is too late????
Do you???

"Suddenly, less than one twentieth of one percent mortality seems kinda trivial."

Not to them and their families.

Gee, just think, we've only lost 4-5000 troops in Iraq, by RisR's logic that is less than trivial.

We lose around 40,000 people a year in car crashes too. We'd better get rid of cars.

Also, no one has pointed me toward the place on that website where you can actually read the stories (or even the names). If you're going to call a website "Names of the Dead" shouldn't you provide a few names?

"If you're going to call a website "Names of the Dead" shouldn't you provide a few names?"

I haven't even been to the web site yet. We lose 40,000 people in cars, I'll take your word for it, that ain't trivial to me though. We now have seat belts, air bags, etc. so I guess it isn't trivial to lots of people.

Of course not, but by the time someone goes to teh ER it may be too late. That is the people we are talking about. But then, you know that, do you have a real point??? Do you deny that preventive health care saves lives??? Do you deny that those without access to it risk letting a treatable illness progress to the point it is too late????
Do you???

#63 | Posted by danni at 2009-10-22 01:43 PM

I have 2 cousins that have died within the past year from cancer and both have health insurance. I guess that they should have went in and tested for cancer before they got sick but then how would they have known?

Please link me some of the instances where people without insurance have died and list out what they died from.

What is your point about them not going to the ER before it's to late. It's much quicker to go to the ER than to make an appointment for a doctor. So you are telling me that people who pay nothing to go to the ER don't because it's to much trouble for them?

Doesn't Canada have a single payer system and they have to wait months to see a doctor. How would that help your arguement? So we give these 40 million, uninsured, people access to health care at the end of this year or even next year. Will the number go down or will the lines of people waiting to see a doctor go up and instead of waiting a week, you wait a month, 2 months, 3 months and by then, you're dead. Oh wait, those same people are just going to go to the ER.. haha

Right, and we have emergency rooms for people without health insurance. It's not the ideal situation, but neither is a car accident. It's just something we deal with. Not something we overhaul public policy over.

"Doesn't Canada have a single payer system and they have to wait months to see a doctor."

No they don't, that is just a talking point.

"It's just something we deal with. Not something we overhaul public policy over."

Don't look now but Congress is overhauling public policy over it right now.

Right, and we have emergency rooms for people without health insurance. It's not the ideal situation, but neither is a car accident. It's just something we deal with. Not something we overhaul public policy over.

www.unitedjustice.com

#69 | Posted by the_nether at 2009-10-22 02:00 PM | Reply |

LOL really?

Car accidents are interesting because we have legislated any number of safety devices and requirements into them that have saved lives.

Why should we just "deal with it" when it comes to healthcare? When there are better options that again will save lives!. Living or dying, most find those issues kind of important. Do you not care about living?

Does it really seem wise that the same policy you apply to a used care ought to be our national healthcare policy? I mean really? lol.

I have 2 cousins that have died within the past year from cancer and both have health insurance. I guess that they should have went in and tested for cancer before they got sick but then how would they have known?

#68 | Posted by T_Man at 2009-10-22 01:58 PM | Reply |

That is the whole point of getting tested!!!. HELOOOOOO?!?!

Read just about every thing about diagnosing cancer and most of them are of the opinion by the time you have symptoms its too late. Ergo, you get tested. If you have pre-disposed risk factors then you test for them first.

Knighthawk.. That was my point. I was in response to Danni who likes to pick her battle carefully and likes to request links with data but doesn't like to provide them when other's ask for specifics.

I've been involved in the healthcare system for years and don't know a person that has died because of lack of health insurance-- this has got to be up there with "global warming" as far as factual info to support this absurdity. Another congressional body taken over by aliens.

#70--- Danni. the gal who recently took over the Canadian health care system related that they have over 1,000,000 people waiting for elective surgeries and that costs are out of control.

I hope this goddamn democrat asshole is enjoying his few moments here.
the other day he said that I Was an enemy to the nation

ME...yes thats right.
me and people like nanc and murph and jest and all of the other patriots who are against what he and the other GD DEMS are trying to do.

ah but his rantings only endear him to many here and THATS a clear picture of so many..

NOVEMBER, 2010!!!!!

I hope this goddamn democrat asshole is enjoying his few moments here.
the other day he said that I Was an enemy to the nation
#77 | Posted by afkabl2

.....you ARE an enemy of America......

......you are the American Taliban......

.....same backwardness, same willingness to do infinite evil, in the name of a higher good........

.......there are no amount of people you are unwilling to kill, or allow to die, to achieve your "ethical" state......

Boy do republicans throw a fit when a light will be shown on their greed.

#9 | Posted by jackass the asshole

This is stupid there is not a single health carrier out there that would not insure a dead guy.