Frankly, I am not one of those bleeding heart plaintiff lawyers. I absolutely believe in compensation for preventable injuries, too often mislabeled "accidents." But I also believe in accountability and reasonable expectation of risk assumption when engaging in many of life's activities. In essence I believe the pendulum swings both ways - too far one way is no good nor too far the other.
My biggest upset about the Massachusette's election of a Republican Senator to replace long time Democrat Senator Kennedy is not the "shift in power." Rather it is the amount of time, money and energy that went into crafting health care bills in the House and Senate which, by many accounts, will all be for naught. That is a shame. Health Care reform could have failed, but it was never given a chance. What has failed is the time, money and energy that was expended and wasted by one election.
Politics suck.
That said, here is the latest from the Wallstreet Journal:
JANUARY 25, 2010, 9:19 A.M. ET
Democrats Focus on Key Elements of Health Bill
By JANET ADAMY
WASHINGTON—The White House, with its health-care initiative in doubt, on Sunday zeroed in on several elements it hoped would survive, including measures to extend the life of Medicare, lower prescription drug costs for seniors and cap consumers' out-of-pocket medical expenses.
As Democrats regroup on plans to overhaul the health-care system after a Republican win in last week's Massachusetts Senate election, comments Sunday indicated that any revamped legislation would likely focus on the least-controversial elements of earlier proposals.
White House officials notably didn't emphasize that any revised legislation should include a major expansion of health insurance. Expanding coverage to the uninsured was the key plank of the separate health bills passed by the House and Senate last year, but such efforts largely accounted for the about $1 trillion cost of the bills, and Republicans decried them as too costly.
President Barack Obama spoke with congressional leaders over the weekend to determine how to move forward on the issue. Now that the Democrats no longer have a filibuster-proof 60-vote majority in the Senate, they are likely to need Republican support to pass any new legislation, something they weren't able to win last year. Officials stressed that discussions were still going on, and Democrats are also looking at ways to salvage the current legislation.
White House adviser David Axelrod, appearing on ABC News's "This Week," said the president didn't want to abandon several elements of the current bills. These include extending the life of the Medicare insurance program for the elderly, which the bills propose to do through payment cuts to health providers, and issuing tax breaks to help small employers provide insurance. Medicare will become insolvent by 2017 without more funding or payment cuts.
Mr. Axelrod also cited assistance to help seniors pay for prescription drugs. The bills would help close a gap in Medicare Part D insurance that forces some seniors to pay thousands of dollars a year for medicine. He also said the overhaul should help people with pre-existing health conditions buy insurance and cap out-of-pocket medical costs. He didn't discuss how these measures would be paid for.
A White House aide said Sunday those were just some of the provisions, among others, that the administration hoped to include in a final package.
Republicans agree that Medicare needs to become more sustainable, but argue that the Democrats' proposed payment cuts are the wrong way to do it. Some Democrats also fear they are too deep.
While Republicans have also emphasized helping small businesses and lowering consumers' out-of-pocket costs, their approaches have been different.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) said Sunday that Republicans wanted to start over and craft a plan that did more to lower the growth of health costs.
Mr. McConnell, speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press," said the plan should change the tax code to allow individuals who buy policies without the help of an employer to get the same tax break that companies get. He said the overhaul should also reduce the number of medical malpractice lawsuits and allow insurers to sell policies across state lines.
The Democrats' bills contain no substantive changes to the malpractice system and they don't make insurance tax-free for individuals, as is the case for companies.
Malpractice is one area where Democrats could show more flexibility in any revamped legislation. Reducing unnecessary lawsuits is an area that resonates with voters, regardless of party affiliation, and Democratic leaders have already added some malpractice provisions into the current bills, though they remain largely symbolic.
Mr. Obama signaled shortly after the Massachusetts election that he might be willing to sign a scaled-down version of the House and Senate measures. In addition to the provisions Mr. Axelrod outlined, revamped legislation could include new restrictions on insurance companies, such as limits on the amount they can reap in profit and a revocation of their decades-old antitrust exemption.
Congressional Democrats are also weighing several options aimed at salvaging the current bills. One idea is to make a series of modifications to the Senate bill, aimed at addressing House Democrats' concerns. Changes likely would include minimizing a tax on high-value insurance plans and stripping out sweeteners aimed at winning Senate votes, such as a deal to fund Nebraska's Medicaid expansion, Democrats have indicated.
The Senate would need fewer votes to pass the changes—a simple majority compared with the 60 they would need to block a filibuster—and the House could pass the package of modifications with the Senate bill.
But many Democrats consider that a complicated scenario that would be difficult to pull off.
Democrats are also still considering some mechanisms to expand insurance coverage, such as by broadening the Medicaid federal-state insurance program for the poor, and by allowing young adults to stay on their parents' insurance policies until they reach their late 20s.
Write to Janet Adamy at janet.adamy@wsj.com
A movie about the solitude of explosive munitions neutralizer soldiers. The entire movie portrays disarming Improvised Explosive Devices (IED) sometimes successfully and sometimes not. The movie is nominated for an Oscar.
that are often dealt with in rehabilitation and assisted living centers. While hospitals initially treat TBI patients, often times the injuries may require medical specialists who can be found at facilities like 
.jpg)
A 5-year study of patients with severe traumatic brain injury conducted at Hennepin County Medical Center in Minneapolis shows significant benefit of hyperbaric oxygen therapy to improve brain metabolism and its ability to recover from injury. The results were recently published in the 
