Great grains! 1990 pages! Gimme a sec to read it all... ;)

I'm not going to read it all.
:D


You know, just like the rest of the country, lawmakers included...

As demonstrated by Alex earlier, that's hardly 1990 pages of dense reading. It's 1990 pages of double-spaced, 14pt text w/2" margins
(actually, the left margin approaches 3" once you lop off the line numbering and add in the indentation from outline formatting). Still a lot of reading, but well under half of what "1990 pages" sounds like.

I assume you mean that the evergreening was granted to the pharm companies and not the insurance companies (which would really not make any sense).

That said, does that really deny the drugs to the poor? If there is a requirement to provide the coverage, and controls on how much the insurance can cost (or the gov. subsidizes cost for those who can't afford) and lifetime and annual caps are eliminated doesn't this just mean that almost immediately the insurance companies will immediately begin advocating with the government to change this?

If such drugs are excluded from the required coverage floor then it does seem a problem, though I don't really have a problem with an initial 8-12 year patent so long as evergreening is reasonably difficult.

All this said, I've been out of country and am not remotely up to date. But the specific text of the House version strikes me as so thoroughly irrelevant that I'm not sure I'll find the energy to read it like I did the initial Ways & Means version as a baseline. I'll probably wait until conference if it ever gets that far.

Yes, Alex, pharm companies. My mistake. I don't think it's yet known what drug coverage will be like under the new plan. But assuming it's even similar to, let's say, my fairly standard Blue Cross coverage .... having no generic drug option means paying a small fortune for prescription drugs. Right now, if I can't get a generic, my insurance will make me pay through the nose for a prescription. My assumptions for the insurance company / big pharma cave-in now underway in Congress are based solely on my self-anecdotal experience.


Gemini Cricket, I'm not going to be so politically correct that I pretend Mr. Obama is not our first, ya know, colored president. I think I made it quite clear that my potential suggestion for his hypothetical bill signing was insensitive. Absolutely it is. So what?

Was a certain thread in the parking actually removed from the LoT?

The thread title was changed

Ah. Got it. Thanks.

I didn't think CNN.com could get any lamer but their new format bugs. Huge ads up top that expand for no reason, smaller font, sometimes the stories that are videos are not labeled as videos (I don't like clicking on their videos, they load really slowly) etc. Oh well, I shouldn't be checking these websites so often anyway. It stresses me out.

Completely. I go there less and less