Archive for March, 2009

Fun with Health Insurance

March 28, 2009

I thought it would be interesting to cut and paste some posts from a kidney disease forum.  Entries having to do with health insurance are listed in random order.  Some of the formatting is a bit off because of the nature of the board.

Enjoy.  

***

My son is a mutation so there was no early warning. Point in fact is just this year his employeer decided to drop the insurance for drug coverage.  Privately I think my son was the biggest reason that it was dropped. Im sure to be an employer paying insurance premiums for him is skyhigh. So now after 5 years of a successful transplant, he will have no insurance for his drugs. He falls between the cracks. Hes not dirtpoor, yet his income is above poverty level.

***

I dont think you realize that you are in a very fortunate position. I know people who dont even know how they are going to buy groceries this month let alone come up with the kind of money we are both talking a bout. Many many people dont even have transplants done because they dont know how they would pay for the drugs after Medicare leaves off. Several people on this forum and another one that I am on were refused transplant because of their inability to prove that they could pay for their drugs after the operation. Many people dont have jobs with good benefits or friends with a lot of money.

***

She needs to contact the different companies.  And yes, some transplant centers won’t do a transplant if you can’t prove that you will be able to afford the meds after the Medicare runs out in 3 yrs.

***

These medications are so expensive that we fall into the “donut hole” very soon.  Then we have to pay our own way through the donut hole, at least thousands of dollars before catastropic coverage kicks in.

***

I’m trying to make what pills I have left last–and this makes me

angry], I think I will go to my nephrologist and ask him if he will

just agree to prescribe pain meds for, say, six months until I can get

some other issues out of the way. The only other thing I know to do is

to go “doctor shopping” [oh no! they say that's a crime on the

news-grrr] [which I cannot afford] and just tell them straight up, “Yep,

I’m drug seeking. I’m in pain, it’s real, will you help me or not?”

[Which probably won't be very effective.]

***

Sorry so long but I really wanted to explain the whole thought process.

I know I sound like a druggie or something but, the fact is, I know

something about “druggies” and that is not my problem. I just want to

be able to function for as long as my kidney function will allow me to.

***

If there is any way possible he should try to keep his coverage. As he has a pre existing condition and it will be next to impossible to get coverage and the programs that are set up to help have very Little funds and the process of just getting signed up can be months. I wish I had better things to tell you. But this is why my brother could not get his transplant because he had no way of paying for his rejection medications after medicare stopped paying . This is a area that we need to really try and get new laws passed.

***

i was a nurse for years so i understand the medical side of it, but it was too expensive to keep up with the labs and dr. visits.

***

If she is on Medicare then when she receives a transplant the meds will automatically be covered through Medicare for three (3) years not 18 months.  Then she will need to find another way to pay for her antirejection drugs which can be quite costly…some say between $2,000 and $4,000 per month.  If she is not on Medicare and has no way to pay for the medications then the transplant center may not approve her for listing as a transplant will likely not be able to survive without the necessary meds.  Each center has their own protocol regarding requirements for insurance, weight, medical issues etc.  so tell her to “shop around” for a center that will be willing to take a chance on her.

***

I got my Medicare ahead of my PKD diagnosis, so since it is not transplant-related I get to keep it as long as my ‘underlying condition’ exists.  Irony is, of course, that it’s likely that PKD is the cause of the heart valve stuff that has given me a lot of trouble and got me covered.  The transplant question -kicking folks off based on an arbitrary time limit- makes no sense.

***

I’m 3 and 1/2 years post Kidney transplant and my
  Medicare coverage stopped at the end of the month in
  which I passed the 3 year mark. It was amazing how
  hard I tried to find out in advance if this would
  happen –I thought the transplant social workers
  would know about this but they told me I wouldn’t be
  dropped –and yes I was dropped. I have no other
  reason to be on Medicare at this time so now my
  transplant drugs are being covered by my regular
  insurance. I also was dropped from the other
  Medicaare covrerage and will have wait until I’m 65
  to have it again (or of course I could go back on
  dialysis or become disabled in some other covered
  way) My expenses have really gone up since Medicare
  dropped their coverage.

***

I heard something else in the CSpan interview of Dr.  Satel and her  donor. Is it true, as they said, that Medicare stops paying out the benefits for transplant drugs after the 3rd year??
  Now that sounds positively cruel and counter-intuitive. From what was said, Medicare will pay for the transplant expenses, but only
allows 3 years for the anti-rejection drugs. They will pay for a return to
dialysis. 
 Anyone familiar w the ins and outs of Medicare on
kidney transplant?

***

So then I can assume when they said I don’t have prescription coverage, that means I don’t.  This is what I had when I was working, and since my creatinine had spiked, I was afraid to try to buy another kind and find out down the road that they don’t cover pre-existing conditions.  I am scared about the meds after Medicare runs out.

***

I am going to a free clinic because when I left my job I couldn’t

afford the insurance. now, since my doc is sure I need the fistula, I

am beginning to worry if the clinic will pay for that surgery and/or

dialysis. I think when they schedule dialysis, they help you get on

medicare, don’t they?

***

I guess I need to talk to the director at the clinic about all of

this. I sure don’t want the dialysis, but, I guess I will have too if

I want to survive!!!!

 

Anyone with any info, I would greatly appreciate it. I guess I’m

a “dummy” when it comes to knowing about all of this!!

***

Now I wish I waited because I will soon lose my Medicare health coverage and will

have to apply for group health insurance. My question: I’m currently

a medical assistant student and I will be moving to another state and

looking for a job in a few months. Does anyone know if an insurance

co. be able to access my PKD ultrasound and diagnosis? (I’m

considering lying) I haven’t had any treatment since the diagnosis.

***

It’s a tough choice to have a teen age daughter tested by ultrasound

(OR NOT) for PKD. There’s decisions to make about family planning,

blood pressure monitoring, and UTI prevention. However, you don’t want

your child labeled as a “pre-existing condition” on insurance, etc.

***

Meanwhile, I’ve been hospitalized twice times this year with kidney

infections. The problem is that I don’t have insurance, can’t get

insurance, don’t qualify for anything tht I can think of and never

have enough money to go to the doctor.

 

Anyway, my point in case I haven’t made it, is that I NEED medical

care. Not just for the surgery but I need to be able to see a doctor

before it becomes a life threatening situation. My nephrologist would

LOVE for me to be able to have regular creatinine tests, 24-hour,

etc. but I just can’t swing it.

 

SOOOOO, does ANYBODY know ANYTHING about applying for straight up

Medicaid in the state of Georgia? I have been online all evening and

I can’t figure it out. [And, I'm not stupid. How is it that so many

people manage to get this stuff?]My family is stretched to the limits

of their ability to help but they keep saying, “There is no way, in

this country, you would be left to die in the streets without being

able to get help.” Oh yea!! Somebody show me. Please. [she adds

meekly]

 

I’m going to try again tomorrow but for now I thought I’d check with

some “experts”. Sure hope someone has some ideas.

***

You can’t get on MEDICARE until you qualify for SSI or SSD, but MEDICAID is different.  Medicaid is the state run health care for low income people.  You can probably qualify based on the bills you have from hospital visits.  I am surprised that the hospital never offered to help you with that. 

***

What a fool I was.  I first received Medicare due to dialysis back in 1982.  I refused my work’s insurance… thinking Medicare would take care of everything.  Well, of course, who knew there was a 20% co=pay.  But, in NY, was able to get a Medigap insurance, which was still cheaper than what the insurance at work would have cost me….still dumb, cause once I left on disability, I could of still had the work’s insurance… ..especially, once I moved down here to FL.  Seems Fl, doesn’t recognize anyone under the age of 65 for a Medigap insurance policy…so I am stuck paying all my 20% and deductible for every time I go into the hospital.

***

If they just throw him out on the street I don’t

know what our family will do for health/life insurance. As most of

you know this disease makes him and our children uninsurable.

***

I hate to bear more bad news, but my father is fighting the Medicare battle. He basically has been told he will not get a kidney since he can not show proof of being able to pay for the anti-rejection mediciation after the transplant. He has private insurance, but he was told by Blue Cross that it does not cover prescriptions. He has only Medicare to rely on and they are not willing to pick up the cost for the anti-rejection meds. They will pay the difference for the transplant, but not the meds.

***

I did not have the money, strength, time, or energy to play

medication roulette again.

***

No, medicare part B does not pay for the drugs, unless you take Part D with the

additional premiums.   You can, however, get assistance, for the Part D premiums 

if you are income eligible.

***

I just had my transplant in July and I was under the same impression, until I read

the “fine print” and have talked, in depth, with my social worker, and others who

have had transplants before me.

***

Does this sound right?

The hospital financial coordinator told me that you can’t apply for Medicare until the day of the transplant surgery. The surgery costs 
about $130,000, of which $26,000 is not covered by Medicare? 

The prescriptions cost $4,000 a month of which $1,000 per month (25%) 
is not covered by Medicare?

***

Had breakfast with a Canadian friend whose American wife was turning 65 and thus becoming eligible for Medicare. So he asked me about the Medicare program. I began to explain Part A and Part B and Part D (he wanted to know what happened to part C? Is there /was there a part C?? Couldn’t answer that). Talked about Medicare supplemental (versions A through K) and Medicare advantage programs and redoing part D each year.

 

I wished I could have taken a picture of the shocked and speechless expression he had!

***

Yes, it can be very complicated and there are many people confused about it all. (I’m often confused about it!)Unfortunately some of those people are those providing guidance..pharmacies, social workers, elder counselors, and sometimes even the Social Security workers filling out the forms. It’s important you understand what you’re entitled to, to the point you can push back when someone tells you different.

***

Hi All, My son had a transplant five years ago and has been doing

very well. He has a good job with good insurance. Tonight he dropped

the bomb at his sister and I that he was losing his drug insurance.

His coverage remains the same, minus his drug ins. Im convinced that

he is one of the reasons for the loss since his drugs are so

expensive. I don’t mean to sound mercenary but to all of you out there

who are contemplating a transplant please be aware that its expensive

and after the transplant the drugs for the rest of your life are very

expensive also. Now what do we do? I’m very scared and more then a

little angry. So this has turned into venting along with asking for

advice. He contemplated updating his resume’ but it really wouldn’t

help since the drugs are so expensive and he couldn’t make enough more

to make up the difference plus he loves his job. I’m going to make

some phone calls tomorrow am but does anyone else have any good ideas.

Right now I’m too agitated to think clearly. Thanks,A PKD Mother

***

After reading everyone’s posts, I just wanted to point out … 

THIS is why so many American citizens get lost in our bureaucratic health system.   I am a (relatively) healthy thirtysomething who works in the IT field and is pretty savvy when it comes to small print … and this STILL sounds like a spaghetti bowl of red tape.  

Medicare or Medicaid … Part A, Part B, Part D … primary or secondary … but only if you meet work qualifications … for a limited time … unless you qualify for disability … and you apply on a Tuesday when the moon is full and you stand on one foot singing, “Rocket Man” … come on!

If it’s confusing for us … can you IMAGINE what it’s like for our parents and grandparents?  By the time I need dialysis … which I hope is 20 years from now … I’m going to have to give a DNA sample just to apply.   This is ridiculous!

***

I don’t mean to sound unsympathetic as I say

this, so laugh with me, please… you’ve only

been turned down once on each applicaiton? LOL!

Man – you’re just getting started. Many, many

people get turned down two or three times before

they get in the program. Seems both very

inefficient and CRUEL, but the system isn’t as

efficient as it should be. The worker-bees buzz

around, and very often it’s a game of endurance.

Hate to say it, but it’s true.

***

From some of the things I hear other Americans say regarding their

medical coverage and problems I just say thank God I live here. I was

told by some people that most of your insurance companies will cut off

your transplant drug coverage after a few years.

***

Welcome to the group. I wanted to suggest that your son should not be tested until there is a need to do so i.e. symptoms. If he is diagnosed with PKD it will follow him the rest of his life, causing significant impact on his ability to get life insurance and health insurance. There have probably been some past discussions on this (though I get confused what’s been said where, since I am on another list also). I had no trouble getting life insurance until I was diagnosed with PKD. Since then, I have been turned down so many times, I have given up.

www.mikeneedsakidney.com

March 24, 2009

One of my websites is www.mikeneedsakidney.com.  It’s pretty much self-explanatory.  I have kidney disease, I’ll need a transplant within the year, and I need a donor.   All the information is on the site.  

Anyway, a couple of points about the website:  It may seem unusual to create a site like this.  In fact, I’m only aware right now of a couple of other similar sites. Here they are – an 11-year old girl needs a kidney: http://nadianeedsakidney.weebly.com/, and a man is looking for a kidney:  http://www.ineedakidneynow.com/.   I’m sure there are a bunch of other sites I haven’t come across.

I think in the future, though, people will use the web a lot more to ask for kidneys and other organs.   They’re already using You Tube (see some examples below).  Anyway, the alternative if you need a donor and don’t have one is not getting one, or waiting to get one from a deceased donor from the waiting list, and that could take more than five years.  During that time, some people survive on dialysis, while others don’t make it. 

While I try to use a bit of humor on the site, it’s not intended to make light of the subject.  I just think it can be funny to have the contrast of something really serious and then something unexpected.  Same deal with the video I’m going to put up on www.mikeneedsakidney.com soon. 

Besides trying to get a donor, hopefully another result of the site will be to increase awareness of organ donation.  The site will have been worth it if even one person who sees it decides to donate to someone who otherwise wouldn’t have received an organ. 

The need for organs is much greater than the number available for transplantation.  More than 100,000 people are currently waiting for organs, including 76,000 waiting for kidneys.  About 7,000 people die each year waiting for some kind of transplant.  Another 2,000 are cut off from the list because they are too sick.  

See Death’s Waiting List, an editorial written by Sally Satel in the New York Times from May 15, 2006.  She says that people should be allowed to have incentives to donate, such as health insurance or funding for education.  I agree.

One site that donors can search to find people who need organs is www.matchingdonors.com.   You can also check out the National Kidney Foundation’s site at www.kidney.org for information on donating.  The site for the PKD Foundation is http://www.pkdcure.org.

As for me, I will need a transplant relatively soon but there are a lot of people worse off who are already on dialysis (which leads to death in about 20% of people per year).  This is what I wrote to someone on matchingdonors.com who had been considering donating. 

“Your decision to possibly donate is obviously really amazing.  Of course, as I say in my profile, I’ll need a transplant in less than a year.  There’s no exact science on when to do the transplant.  I had a transplant evaluation last spring (2008) and a surgeon said if I had a donor I could do it then. 

On the other hand, my nephrologist says I could wait until my GFR (approximate percentage of kidney function remaining) is as low as 8, which might not happen until late in the year.  Plus, how you feel is also a barometer and right now my symptoms aren’t too extreme.  The doctors I saw most recently at a transplant clinic said I should do it when my GFR is at about 10 – which may be pretty soon.  These are all estimates, of course.  Right now it’s at 11.  See my chart at http://www.mikeneedsakidney.com/graph.php.

If I wait too long, I may be too sick and the chance of success could be smaller.  On the other hand, I don’t necessarily want to rush into it because post-transplant I’ll have to take immuno-suppressant drugs for the rest of my life which have side effects, though those risks are obviously much better than having kidney failure. 

At least one medical person advised me to have the transplant as soon as I have a donor; another says get as much out of your current kidneys as you can before doing it.  Another factor is that I’m trying to get a federal government job which would give me better health insurance than I have now that would cover 100% – as of right now my insurance covers 80% - and it usually takes a while to get these jobs.  (Either way the donor’s medical expenses are 100% covered by my insurance). 

Anyway, the point is that you may choose to donate for someone who is desperate now (already on dialysis).  But for such a big decision, you should also do it for someone who you really want to do it for.”

Here are some news stories or videos about people in need of kidneys:

·      A 7-year old girl with PKD asks Santa for a kidney:  http://www.11alive.com/rss/rss_story.aspx?storyid=125026; her mother’s blog:  http://www.kidneysandeyes.com/

·      A 38-year old woman in Israel asks for a kidney:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWGGmOJHoW8

·      A musician seeks a kidney: http://davidrosam.co.uk/2009/01/23/david-s-ware-is-ill-seeking-a-kidney/

·      People pass out flyers at convenience stores to try to get a kidney for a friend: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eup4MY9yWI&feature=related

·      A man with diabetes asks for a kidney: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uISjKPRUKJc&feature=related

·      A 36-year old man asks for a kidney: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cYokW6QMIw&feature=related

·      A video asks for funds for a little girl’s kidney transplant in the Philippines:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThI_Ki5kYAA

Stories about donation

·      A mother donates a kidney to her baby daughter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3Td0zocTG4&feature=related

·      A baby gets a kidney transplant:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZoARC1_mwA&feature=related

·      A video about a successful transplant with “So Far Away” by Staind (one of my all-time favorite songs) playing in the background http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUcAfVfM7ok&feature=related

·      A daughter donates a kidney to her mother: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGz0Bg-Zw9o

·      Wife of pro basketball star Alonzo Mourning does a Public Service Announcement (Mourning had a successful transplant): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibCh1i_T2Pk

·      A woman describes what it was like to donate: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oynBMHhlG98.

President Obama Should Know Better

March 20, 2009

President Obama’s gaffe last night on the Tonight Show was unfortunately all too reminiscent of the federal government’s attitude toward people with disabilities.

First of all, when Obama said of his bowling, “It was like the Special Olympics or something,” it was obviously very insulting to people with intellectual or cognitive disabilities.  It’s very possible that Obama talks this way among his peers.  To not understand how offensive that statement is shows a glaring unawareness.  I’m sure there are a lot of Special Olympians who could beat Obama in bowling.

If Obama had made a racist or religious joke, the media would have been all over it.  But a joke against people with special needs?   That’s acceptable. 

I volunteered for two years as a soccer coach for the Special Olympics in Maryland, and I went to a Special Olympics event in California last year (see the two photos I took).  I started volunteering for sports programs for kids with disabilities 10 years ago, and I currently work with kids with autism (www.coachmike.net), so I know a little bit about this subject. 

Special Olympics, Long Beach, California, summer 2008

Special Olympics, Long Beach, California, summer 2008. Photo by Mike Frandsen

 

(Obama sits up there, trying to be smooth and cool.  In fact, let’s face it.  The reason that Obama got elected really isn’t any different than why every U.S. president has gotten elected in the last 40 years.  He was a better speaker than his opponents and people vote mainly on image.  Look it up – of the past 10 presidential elections, it is ALWAYS the candidate who has a better image – the one who is more friendly, possesses more charisma, and is a better public speaker.  The only possible exception was in 2000 when you could argue that Gore had a better persona than Bush [it was about even because while Gore was a much better speaker, he was more stiff and Bush was much more folksy], but many say Gore actually did win that election and he did get half a million more votes anyway. 

It’s why Obama beat Hillary – he was “cooler.”  Experience didn’t matter – funny – it always matters when I apply for a job but it doesn’t for the presidency.  I’m not saying people don’t vote for who they think will be the better president, I’m just saying that people vote for candidates who they like the most based on their personality and charisma.)

I personally believe that Obama is one of those people who is somewhat fake and unauthentic because he constantly says things and does things that are calculated to improve his image.  Not that you would expect anything other than that from a politician.

I’m not anti-Obama – I agree with Obama and the Democrats on most issues – for example, people should have a fair chance at health care – the U.S. policy on that is shameful (in fact, if I ever run for office you can look back at this statement:  “I am NOT proud of my country because of our health care situation.”  And I will never retract that statement).  And we need a clean environment to reduce the incidence of autism, breast cancer, and other disorders and diseases.

But back to the point.

There is a startling unawareness in the federal government with respect to hiring people with disabilities.  It starts at the top with the President, filters down to the cabinet members, down to the directors of the federal agencies, and down to the management and hiring personnel.  I’m not saying Obama is worse than other presidents in giving a fair chance to people with disabilities, but I’m not sure he’s any better.  See my report at http://www.coachmike.net/special_report.php.  I concluded that “The federal government’s Schedule A program intended to facilitate the hiring of people with disabilities is severely underutilized, especially in hiring people with cognitive and psychiatric disabilities.”  

Schedule A is a hiring authority set up by the government to help level the playing field and make it easier to hire people with disabilities, whether they be cognitive/intellectual (the government still uses the outdated “mental retardation” terminology), psychiatric, or physical.  (There still isn’t a developmental category to cover autism). 

The Office of Personnel Management created the Schedule A program more than 20 years ago to allow for greater recruitment and hiring of individuals with disabilities.  It allows federal agencies to bypass the competitive process to provide disabled

Special Olympics, Long Beach, California, summer 2008

Special Olympics, Long Beach, California, summer 2008.

 individuals a unique opportunity to demonstrate their ability to successfully perform the essential duties of a position with or without reasonable accommodation.  OPM states that the Schedule A certification is used to “appoint persons who are certified that they are at a severe disadvantage in obtaining employment…Certification also ensures that they are capable of functioning in the position for which they will be appointed, and that any residual disabilities are not job-related.”

In almost all cases in which the hiring authority was used, hires of people with physical disabilities outnumbered those with cognitive and psychiatric disabilities by a very wide margin.

People with disabilities have a 70% unemployment rate.  This figure only includes people who are willing and able to work and it’s still 70%. 

The only problem is that Schedule A isn’t mandatory, so it’s woefully underused except by a few agencies.  Take the National Institutes of Health as an example.  You would think this organization would be better, not worse, than other agencies at hiring people with disabilities through the Schedule A hiring authority.  In fact, I believe that the facts show that NIH discriminates against people with disabilities in their hiring process.  

From 1998 to 2008, NIH, with nearly 18,000 full-time employees, hired just four people with cognitive disabilities and one with a psychiatric disability through the Schedule A program.  I learned this information through Freedom of Information Act requests.

I first notified NIH in 2004 that they had been negligent in hiring Schedule A employees with disabilities.  I also notified them in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008.  Their response was almost always no response.  Each year I contacted the NIH Director, Equal Employment Office, Human Resource Officials, Selective Placement Coordinator, Institute Directors, and Ombudsman multiple times.  I have 200 pages of documents to prove it.  When I brought the subject up, several times speaking at the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee, parents applauded but scientists and NIH leaders laughed at me. 

To this day, NIH refuses to comment on the report, and refuses to take any action to improve the situation.  After eight years at NIH (the last five as an employee), I threatened to quit in December 2006 if NIH did nothing to improve the situation.  They did nothing, I quit, and two years later NIH still hasn’t taken any action.

(This is a little off topic, but now I need a federal job again because the kidney transplant I will need soon will cost $180,000 including medications for the first year, and my insurance currently only covers 80% of it whereas the federal insurance covers 100% – see www.mikeneedsakidney.com.  But NIH is treating me like a private company would treat a whistleblower.  Instead of trying to improve the situation that I brought attention to, they are ignoring it, and holding the fact that I brought it to their attention against me.).

When I contacted Congressman Chris Van Hollen’s (D-MD) office, they promised to respond.  They ignored the issue for more than a year and then stonewalled until they thought I went away. 

You may say that it costs too much to include people with disabilities in the workforce.  But in fact, it costs too much not to do it.  You can get productivity at a relatively low price by hiring people with disabilities, and prevent them from relying on government programs like Social Security disability when possible.  (Same with health care – a little bit of preventative care goes a long way to save money in the long run).

The success or failure of any organization starts at the top.  The President’s remarks were dismissive of the abilities of people with special needs.  There is an attitude throughout the government that people with disabilities are to be ignored.  Taking action would be to admit that there is a problem, and agencies such as NIH are more concerned with their image than doing the right thing, so they would never admit that they have been deficient in hiring people with disabilities through the Schedule A hiring authority.  

The media doesn’t care either.  As I write this at 2:30 p.m., I just saw an interview on MSNBC with Chuck Todd about Obama’s appearance last night on the Tonight Show.  Todd said the show went great for Obama.  Not once in this ridiculously long interview did they bring up the President’s remarks about the Special Olympics.  The interview went so long that it delayed the Presidential Press Secretary’s press conference.  If Hillary had made those remarks, you can bet that MSNBC would be all over it. 

As for NIH, if they can’t handle hiring people with disabilities through the Schedule A program, and they were made aware of this problem five years ago, I’m sorry to say but you have to question whether they can handle other important initiatives such as stem cell research.  Don’t get me wrong – I think stem cell research is critically important to save lives and improve the quality of lives, and as much research should be done as soon as possible.  However, it would be a mistake to just throw a ton of money at the problem like the government did for the banks just because they are supposedly smarter than us. 

If there are competing organizations that can get the job done, they should be considered as well.  Either way, there should be a stringent process that funding goes to the programs that are most deserving and will be held accountable for what they do.  This process should be stringent but also expedited so that bureaucratic red tape doesn’t delay research.  You can argue that stem cell research is more important than ensuring that people with disabilities get a fair chance to contribute to the missions of government agencies.  I would say they are equally important – but they are not mutually exclusive.  The government should do both. 

This blog entry has been a little scattered, but I thought it was important to address the subject quickly.   In summary:

1.  The NIH and other federal agencies must do a better job of hiring people with disabilities using the Schedule A hiring authority.  The only way to do this is to make it or a similar program mandatory because otherwise, the government will discriminate.  

2.  President Obama (“Teflon Barry”) should set an example by hiring people with disabilities to work in the White House.  He should also give a better apology.  He should also ensure that the federal government is held accountable for giving people with disabilities a fair chance, otherwise, hiring officials and management will do the same things they have always done about this situation:  ignore it or laugh about it. 

Please see my websites:  www.coachmike.net and www.mikeneedsakidney.com.  

Finally – I reviewed this post and was going to tone it down because I thought it might be a bit harsh, but I actually decided to add to it and make it stronger.  I think Obama is a good person and a good president – we shouldn’t be afraid to criticize him, though, when he deserves it.  I’m a big Redskins fan but I’ve criticized them mercilessly for the last 15 years.  As for this and other blog posts, I try to be honest and tell it like it is.  Hopefully you appreciate it but if not, it is what it is.  


Note to NFL GMs: Winning should Matter

March 15, 2009

Last year, I wrote that Byron Leftwich wasn’t getting a fair chance to be an NFL starting quarterback, and that NFL people were concentrating too much on his deficiencies instead of his winning record (24-20) as a starter.  A lot of NFL owners, general managers and coaches prefer style over substance, and they’d rather have a player who has what they believe to be the necessities to be a good quarterback (height, arm strength, mobility, etc.) than someone who is great at winning football games. 

Another example of this – NFL people putting a higher priority on style than substance – was Doug Flutie, who if he were given a fair chance would have been a very good NFL starting quarterback for 15 years.  Still another example was Trent Dilfer, who was the starting quarterback during the 2000 season for the Baltimore Ravens who won the Super Bowl.  Dilfer was 58-53 for his career, and he didn’t play on many good teams other than the 2000 Ravens.  For that 10-1 record and Super Bowl championship, Dilfer got kicked out of the door in favor of Elvis Grbac and then Kyle Boller, the poster boy for the first round draft choice who doesn’t work out. 

(At least Boller started for a few seasons.  Top 3 overall draft picks Tim Couch, Ryan Leaf, and Akili Smith were all out of the league after a few seasons).  I guess it’s high risk/high reward, like stocks.  A good veteran quarterback (value stock) who can lead you to winning seasons is often passed over for a younger quarterback (more volatile, aggressive stock) who fits the mold but ultimately may not become a winner, but at least seems to have more potential. 

I was reminded of this oddity – how NFL teams don’t always like winners – when Denver Broncos QB Jay Cutler was in the news lately.  Not because of Cutler’s anger at almost being traded, but because it made me remember that Cutler’s predecessor, Jake Plummer, went 40-18 with three playoff appearances with Denver.  Plummer was 7-4 in 2006 when he was replaced by Cutler, who lost 3 of the final 5 games of the season for the Broncos.  Denver failed to make the playoffs that year.  Ok, so you say the Broncos had to sacrifice a year for the future. 

But Cutler’s record as a starter is 17-20 with no playoff appearances.  Denver coach Mike Shanahan replaced Plummer with Cutler at the time because Plummer hadn’t played well in the playoffs, but he missed the point.  First you have to get there, and once you get there, you have an excellent chance to win it all.  The point is putting yourself in a position to win, which Plummer did.  Look at the Cardinals this year, the Giants last year, and the Steelers three years ago.  Each team barely made the playoffs but won or made it to the Super Bowl.  You have to get to the playoffs – after that, there is some luck involved.

There are two sides to every story, and Plummer did make too many mistakes, while Cutler has a very strong arm and will probably have success one day.  But at some point, production – wins – should matter.  Substance should matter over style.  Unfortunately, too often in the NFL, it doesn’t.     

In Favor of the Mid-Majors

March 15, 2009

I was watching ESPN’s college basketball analysts today talk about who belongs in the NCAA tournament.  (As I write this, it’s still a half an hour before the NCAA selection committee announces which teams get into the 64-team field). 

The three commentators, Digger Phelps, Jay Bilas, and Hubert Davis were really arguing in favor of the major conference teams and against the mid-majors.  All of them kept talking about how teams that finish .500 in major conferences are better than the best of the mid-major at large teams.  They claim that the schedules of the mid-majors are too easy.  Of course teams from major conferences are all going to have a few wins against big time programs because they play against those teams a lot more.  Bilas asked, “Who can you beat that is really good?”  He said of the mid-majors, “They’ve gotta go out of conference and find those teams.”  The fact is that the majors are afraid to play the mid-majors because they don’t want to lose to them, and it’s very hard for the mid-majors to schedule major teams because they won’t play them.  

When you have a panel debating something, you can’t have everybody on one side.  Bilas, Davis, and Phelps all either played for or coached teams from major conferences.  They obviously have a lot of friends who are coaches from the major conferences. 

Finally, at least ESPN had Joe Lunardi on who said that the record of double seeded mid-major teams (10 seeds, 11 seeds, 12 seeds, etc.) is better than the record of equivalent seeded major conference teams.  So even though the selection committee is probably biased against mid-major teams because of strength of schedule and gives the mid-majors worse seeds than they deserve, the mid-majors still outperform similarly seeded major conference teams.

It was shameless how Bilas, Davis, and Phelps kept politicking for Arizona and Penn State in favor of Creighton and St. Mary’s.  And Rece Davis failed to reign them in.  The arrogance with which they look down upon the mid-majors and the disdain they have for them is apparent.  

I’m sick of seeing boring teams that finish 8-8 or 9-9 in their conferences get into the tournament in favor of mid-majors who only have a few losses.  Does anyone really want to see Penn State in the tournament?  Phelps had to look at his paper to name the supposedly great players on Arizona’s team while saying that Creighton would have no chance to beat them.  Bilas scoffed at Creighton’s 2-2 record against the top 50 and said Penn State’s 6 wins against the top 50 was so much better.  But they also had 10 losses against the top 50.  Creighton was 9-5 against the top 100 while Penn State was 7-10.

I’m a Maryland fan and I hope they get in but quite frankly I don’t think a team that finishes below .500 in its conference deserves to get in.  Otherwise, why play the regular season?  

Contrast this with ESPN’s college football gameday crew who at least has the guts to bring up differing opinions. 

I think it’s time for ESPN to bring in a commentator from a mid-major school in place of Bilas or Phelps.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.