(B) In the case of the second or any succeeding fiscal year for which this subsection applies to the State, the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the preceding fiscal year under this subsection for the State, increased by 25 percent of the number of percentage points by which the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the State for the fiscal year without regard to this subsection and subsection (y), is less than the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the State for the preceding fiscal year under this subsection.

(2) In this subsection, the term disaster-recovery FMAP adjustment State' means a State that is one of
the 50 States or the District of Columbia, for which, at any time during the preceding 7 fiscal years, the President has declared a major disaster under section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act and determined as a result of such disaster that every county or parish in the State warrant individual and public assistance or public assistance from the Federal Government under such Act and for which (A) in the case of the first fiscal year (or part of a fiscal year) for which this subsection applies to the State, the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the State for the fiscal year without regard to this subsection and subsection (y), is less than the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the State for the preceding fiscal year after the application of only subsection (a) of section 5001 of Public Law 1115 (if applicable to the preceding fiscal year) and without regard to this subsection, subsection (y), and subsections (b) and (c) of section 5001 of Public Law 1115, by at least 3 percentage points; and (B) in the case of the second or any succeeding fiscal year for which this subsection applies to the State, the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the State for the fiscal year without regard to this subsection and subsection (y), is less than the Federal medical assistance percentage determined for the State for the preceding fiscal year under this subsection by at least 3 percentage points.

(3) The Federal medical assistance percentage determined for a disaster-recovery FMAP adjustment State under paragraph (1) shall apply for purposes of this title (other than with respect to disproportionate share hospital payments described in section 1923 and payments under this title that are based on the enhanced FMAP described in 2105(b)) and shall not apply with respect to payments under title IV (other than under part E of title IV) or payments under title XXI.''.

Isn't congress just peachy king?

There is change we can believe in. What hypocrites. They rail against the Repubs and then do the same things.

I was against it before I got paid.

Anyone also notice that the new recommendation on pap smears is out... None before 20y/o, every other year until 30 and every third year over 30.

Interesting for a $5 test to risk not Dx cervical cancer for another year or two?

My wife almost got us thrown out of the restaurant we were in tonight when that little gem scrolled on the bottom of the screen...

Who's evil?

This is just the start if the gov't runs the HC of this country.

No tests for pap smears.

No mammograms.

No teaching women how to check their own breasts--too much time used.

Wait until they cancel the tests for prostrate cancer! Make men wait until they are 65 to get a test. Of course by then many men would be dead. But that is the point of govt run HC--isn't it? Maybe then people--the men will get outraged.

Oh and botax (new word for 2009), we tax you, cadillac tax, go to jail and fines!!

Rcade and I will likely be the only ones tomorrow night watching the Senate blow smoke.

Murphy got any link for your bs speculation? Or are you just making up shit as usual?

sigh . . . she got a great deal - - -
our US Rep swung the NAFTA vote for Clinton & he (WE) didn't get jack shit

Still no link from Murphy to defend her lies.

Link for what Jackass?

The first part I posted is in the news --the second part is predicting the likely future.

The people in the commission that came out with this crap are the future commissions for govt run HC.

Headed by Sebelius--she has a medical degree? Right?

From the School of Death.

This is just the start if the gov't runs the HC of this country.
No tests for pap smears.
No mammograms.
Wait until they cancel the tests for prostrate cancer! Make men wait until they are 65 to get a test.

I haven't heard these happening at all. Less frequency but not outright cancelling these. Prove these statements.

Shows you are a man and don't understand shit about women's health.

The same understanding --or lack thereof-- from these goons on the commissions.

And you can't understand sarcasm.

Because when you limit screenings for breast cancer and pap smears--more women will die as a result.

They don't even want the doctors to show a woman how to do her own breast exam!

So what is the point of having them at all!!

Get it at all there --bright guy?

Do any of you really think this is anything new or limited to this Congress?

Didn't Jindal turn down the Stimulus money? In LA they should take what they can get

Wait until they cancel the tests for prostrate cancer! Make men wait until they are 65 to get a test. Of course by then many men would be dead. But that is the point of govt run HC--isn't it?

#5 | Posted by MURPHY at 2009-11-20 09:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

When I'm in China (went to Beijing and Hong Kong this past month) I'm always struck by the government advertising that encourages people to smoke.

Of course, smokers die in their mid-60s -- about the time their productivity slows, they stop paying taxes and start collecting pension and health care benefits from the government

The Messiah with a Kool on his lips is America's new role model

Vern, that is consistent with the study in the Netherlands where they show that when you have cradel-to-grave coverage people who are over-weight or smoke cost less than people who live a healthy life style.

One of my chief complaints about Goverment HC is that many will see this as justification to control many aspects of our lives. Their rational? "We are paying for your health coverage, so we can tell you how to live in order to reduce our costs"... I am not ready to give up that control.

It starts small, but it will grow. The seatbelt laws in MI are instructive. Many years ago they made seatbelts mandatory, but said you would only recieve a ticket if they stopped you for something else and noticed that you were not wearing your seatbelt. Now they have special patrols and even road blocks to check for seatbelt usage.

It will start small. A gov commission saying that women do not need breast exams until they are 50. Or men do not need prostate exams. Then they tell you that you cannot smoke or weigh too much (what is too much, how do you measure?). Then they start telling you that you cannot eat fatty foods or spend too much time out in the sun. It will not end... And this is the begining...

Get it at all there --bright guy?

#11 | POSTED BY MURPHY AT 2009-11-20 10:35 PM | REPLY

You still didn't prove your statements were ever said by anyone in govt dimwit.

one can only assume that the money will be put towards helping katrina victims...but remember we are talking about the land of huey long.

the problems there were from all levels and since she was senator when it happened, why is there never any comments about her incompentence at the time...

never mind I know why

The people in the commission that came out with this crap are the future commissions for govt run HC.
......#9 | Posted by MURPHY

......wrong......they were appointed by Bush, been around for years......

.....they are an advisory group, have nothing to do with 'running HC'.........

.....it's bullshitters like you that keep fearmongering, getting the bible-thumping retards all excited and voting against their own best interest.......

Skizz--

This is rationing and will be the heart of the HC reform.

They do it for all the other socialized countries with govt run HC.

Why would the US be any different?

And jackass still doesn't get it...

The vote by the Senate today --to get cloture --has holdouts of Landrieu and Lincoln of AR.

With this 100 million dollar bribe--watch Mary's speech today --here real soon I think--to see which way she will blow in the wind.

Because when you limit screenings for breast cancer and pap smears--more women will die as a result.

I am shocked and appalled that the Govt run health care system limited those tests.

Wait.... it hasn't passed?

Clearly Obama was behind this!

Or maybe it was the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Maybe your sky is falling hysteria needs to be revamped.

When I'm in China

Of course that translates perfectly to the USA.

More irrational hysteria.

"Shows you are a man and don't understand shit about women's health. The same understanding --or lack thereof-- from these goons on the commissions."

The doctor & panel member who announced the recommendations is a woman.

Are they doctors Dan--or just someone who can talk from a prepared script??

What the heck does a female announcing the rationing of tests for women have to do with the tea in China?

"Because when you limit screenings for breast cancer and pap smears--more women will die as a result."

The two things are seperate issues and the American Cancer Society has two different opinions in regards to both.
On breast exams they are still in favor of mastectomy exams for all women starting at 40 and for women at risk much earlier. It should be noted that this board has made this same recommendation before and it has nothing whatever to do with the current health care bill though people like Murphy are led to believe it does by Fox News and the like.

Mammograms and politics: Task force stirs up a tempest
Research, recommendations for breast cancer screening have long been debated

More irrational hysteria.

Aw, come on, give me a break. I've only posted a couple of times today.

This is rationing and will be the heart of the HC reform.
They do it for all the other socialized countries with govt run HC.
Why would the US be any different?
And jackass still doesn't get it...
.......#19 | Posted by MURPHY

....you are the one who does not get it.......
....this advisory group was appointed by Bush and has nothing to do with running Healthcare in US....
....you don't see any "socialized" country having riots asking for US style healthcare where 40 thousand people a year die BEACAUSE THEY ARE RATIONED OUT OF HEALTHCARE, and ONE MILLION FAMILIES A YEAR GO BANKRUPT BECAUSE OF RATIONED BENEFITS........
.....I have lived in Europe and Canada, and NO ONE IS TURNED DOWN, NO ONE GOES BANKRUPT, NO ONE HAS TO STAY IN A JOB THEY DON'T LIKE JUST FOR HEALTHCARE.....the stories about how things go in other countries are LIES TOLD BY THE HEALTHCARE INDUSTRY so they can keep RIPPING US OFF OF ZILLIONS.......

Hey, this is the best the legislative branch can do.

The amazing stupidity of some people.

Danni--

I am talking from personal experience you dunce!

My Mom died from breast cancer at the age of 42.

There are women I know who have died in their 30's from breast cancer.

There are hundreds of thousands of woman WHO HAVE BEEN SAVED because their mammograms caught cancer early.

Oh--but wait--these eggheads--who are NOT doctors--say it only saves 1 in 1900 who are tested.

WTF!!

It's a $100.00 test!!!!!

Does it not bother anyone that these jerks proclaim it is not worth it to even SHOW A WOMAN HOW TO DO THEIR OWN BREAST EXAM!!!

Not even the lousy 15 minutes to show a woman how to do their own breast exam. That's too much time!!

And I dont give a hoot who appointed them Skizz!!

And the bribe to Landrieu turns out to be 300,000,000--not 100M.

Sounds like a death panel to me.

Facts are that this is a health amendment to a health care Bill, one which was a priority of...... LA Repub Gov Bobby Jindal.

So. Why does congress give a shit about what Bobby Jindal wants.

So it wasn't strictly a bribe to a Dem congressperson.

you are trying to make the partiship of the governor's office relevant because you are dying to deflect this ugly but obvious reality.

maybe the janitor at the capital in LA is republican. pin this on him if you want.

but it doesn't matter. what governor wouldn't benefit from it.

again, congress doesn't give a shit about Jindal. they care about the vote.