An Open Letter to LA State Treasurer John Kennedy

Dear Mr. Kennedy,

I would like to begin by lauding your tireless efforts in ensuring that Louisiana's tax dollars are spent wisely and, specifically, your vocal advocacy for sensibly balancing the needs of our citizens with those of individuals and companies who contract with the state.  Because of the credibility you've established in addressing such matters, I urge you to ensure that the money received from pharmaceutical settlements finds its way back into the healthcare services budget from which it originated and to which it belongs. 

$38.8 million from Allergan, Covidien, United Research Laboratories, Merck, and Pfizer 

+

$258 million (+ $70 million for attorneys' fees) from Johnson & Johnson

+

$8.5 million from Watson Pharmaceuticals  
+

$45 million from GlaxoSmithKline (+ $7 million for attorneys' fees) 

_________________________________________________________________

= $350.3 MILLION DOLLARS FOR MEDICAID 

Attorney General Caldwell and DHH Secretary Kliebert acknowledge that these monies are "the result of Caldwell's office aggressively pursuing the recovery of Louisiana taxpayer's vital Medicaid dollars."  One of the attorneys for the state also stated that the money "will go directly to Louisiana’s Medicaid program."  By my estimate, at least $258 million of this money (from the J&J settlement) should specifically go back into the state's mental health budget.  

Mr. Treasurer, please make sure that happens.  

A jury found Janssen’s marketing campaigns violated the state law 35,542 times at a cost of $7,250 per violation, resulting in $258 million in fines. It awarded the state another $70 million in counsel fees.  The Louisiana Supreme Court will decide whether the verdict will stand. - See more at: http://www.whistleblowerlawyernews.com/2013/03/07/anti-marketing-fraud-statute-used-to-prosecute-johnson-and-johnson-in-risperdal-case/#sthash.6ee2lzso.dpuf

A jury found Janssen’s marketing campaigns violated the state law 35,542 times at a cost of $7,250 per violation, resulting in $258 million in fines. It awarded the state another $70 million in counsel fees.  The Louisiana Supreme Court will decide whether the verdict will stand. - See more at: http://www.whistleblowerlawyernews.com/2013/03/07/anti-marketing-fraud-statute-used-to-prosecute-johnson-and-johnson-in-risperdal-case/#sthash.6ee2lzso.dpuf

 A jury found Janssen’s marketing campaigns violated the state law 35,542 times at a cost of $7,250 per violation, resulting in $258 million in fines. It awarded the state another $70 million in counsel fees.  The Louisiana Supreme Court will decide whether the verdict will stand. - See more at: http://www.whistleblowerlawyernews.com/2013/03/07/anti-marketing-fraud-statute-used-to-prosecute-johnson-and-johnson-in-risperdal-case/#sthash.6ee2lzso.dpuf

 A jury found Janssen’s marketing campaigns violated the state law 35,542 times at a cost of $7,250 per violation, resulting in $258 million in fines. It awarded the state another $70 million in counsel fees.  The Louisiana Supreme Court will decide whether the verdict will stand. - See more at: http://www.whistleblowerlawyernews.com/2013/03/07/anti-marketing-fraud-statute-used-to-prosecute-johnson-and-johnson-in-risperdal-case/#sthash.6ee2lzso.dpuf

 A jury found Janssen’s marketing campaigns violated the state law 35,542 times at a cost of $7,250 per violation, resulting in $258 million in fines. It awarded the state another $70 million in counsel fees.  The Louisiana Supreme Court will decide whether the verdict will stand. - See more at: http://www.whistleblowerlawyernews.com/2013/03/07/anti-marketing-fraud-statute-used-to-prosecute-johnson-and-johnson-in-risperdal-case/#sthash.6ee2lzso.dpuf

 A jury found Janssen’s marketing campaigns violated the state law 35,542 times at a cost of $7,250 per violation, resulting in $258 million in fines. It awarded the state another $70 million in counsel fees.  The Louisiana Supreme Court will decide whether the verdict will stand. - See more at: http://www.whistleblowerlawyernews.com/2013/03/07/anti-marketing-fraud-statute-used-to-prosecute-johnson-and-johnson-in-risperdal-case/#sthash.6ee2lzso.dpuf

A jury found Janssen’s marketing campaigns violated the state law 35,542 times at a cost of $7,250 per violation, resulting in $258 million in fines. It awarded the state another $70 million in counsel fees.  The Louisiana Supreme Court will decide whether the verdict will stand. - See more at: http://www.whistleblowerlawyernews.com/category/false-advertising/#sthash.VVI5MdXy.dpuf

A jury found Janssen’s marketing campaigns violated the state law 35,542 times at a cost of $7,250 per violation, resulting in $258 million in fines. It awarded the state another $70 million in counsel fees.  The Louisiana Supreme Court will decide whether the verdict will stand. - See more at: http://www.whistleblowerlawyernews.com/category/false-advertising/#sthash.VVI5MdXy.dpuf

Too Disgusted to Even Think of a Title

See, this is the kind of shit that leads me to spend my days contemplating whether I should move to another state before I suffer a stroke secondary to the most bomb-ass conniption fit ever recorded in human history.

Posted: Friday, 01 August 2008 1:40PM

Poll: Kennedy leads Landrieu
Dave Cohen Reporting

A Zogby poll shows Republican John Kennedy has taken the lead in the U.S. Senate race against Democrat Mary Landrieu.

According to the Zogby International website, "Republican John Kennedy is among the GOP's best hopes to oust a Democratic incumbent. He leads Democrat Sen. Mary Landrieu, 47%-41%." The poll's margin of error is less than 5%.

I know it's still a bit early and only a poll, but I mean really, people. Do you know that getting rid of Landrieu would mean getting rid of our most senior Congressperson? Besides Charlie Melancon in the House, who has been a better, more effective advocate for us? Not to mention, if you (cuz it sure as hell won't be me) elect Kennedy, we'd have him and Vitter for Senators -- two Republicans in a Democrat controlled Congress, and possibly a Democrat president too. What the FUCK do you think a newbie and a man more concerned with trying to use his campaign money (i.e., the money you sent him) to pay off legal debts stemming from personal behavior he himself called wrong and sinful can accomplish for us?

And no, I'm not a Democrat. I'm a registered Independent, which is what Kennedy should run as, since he can't make up his damn mind. I used to like the straight-talking, sensible sounding Kennedy; but has anyone else noticed he's been damn quiet and useless since this talk of running for the Senate started.

And if you're part of the old New Orleans establishment who refuses to vote for ANY Landrieu because you think Moon "betrayed" you by being the first mayor to allow black people to work in City Hall, get over it or fucking DROP DEAD ALREADY! You're NOT helping!!!

It Figures...a Retard Analyzed Latest N.O. Death Rate Data

A follow-up to my previous post...

...wherein I commented about the state's recent conclusion that there has been no significant increase in New Orleans' death rate post-K: "There are idiots aplenty in B.R. but not stupid enough to make that sort of basic ass mistake."

Ever a slave to the truth, and thus beholden to setting the record straight, I have no choice but to point out the (irreverently humorous and insensitive politically incorrect) fact that a "Retard" was indeed responsible for analyzing the death rate data. State epidemiologist Raoult Retard, to be precise. See for yourself.

Posted: Saturday, 09 June 2007 9:10AM N.O. health official wants more than stats on city deaths Associated Press Reporting

NEW ORLEANS (AP) The director of the city's health department says a recent study by state health officials seriously downplays an increase in the New Orleans area's post-Katrina mortality rate.

Dr. Kevin Stephens says New Orleans has an astounding death rate and something needs to be done about it.

DHH epidemiologist Raoult Retard used death certificates from New Orleans and surrounding parishes for his study and said that the only increase was a ``slight'' one in early 2006, when it jumped from 11-point-3 per 1000 to 14-point-3 per thousand.

Stephens noted that the increase is a leap of more than 25 percent. He sent a letter to Department of Health and Hospitals Secretary Fred Cerise calling their study disappointing and saying it seriously downplays the true health care crisis facing New Orleans since Hurricane Katrina hit on August 29, 2005.

The state study did not include complete figures for the latter part of 2006. DHH spokesman bob Johannessen says those will be included in an updated study that should be released within a couple of weeks.

Stephens said the study should have been held until all the 2006 figures are available and it should include out-of-state deaths of residents who fled Katrina. But even though it was incomplete, Stephens said, the increase that it found should be alarming.

I was going to just end with that, but the following tidbit was the subject of an elaborate post that was lost forever just as I finished it, of course. The tidbit is that a band of either really loony or really ruthless legislators will present this week House Concurrent Resolution No. 171, which calls for moving the LSU School of Medicine to Baton Rouge -- because clearly they haven't fucked us enough.

I would never suggest a sinister connection between downplaying the death rate in N.O. and this proposal arguing we don't need TWO whole med schools in N.O. (they say we already have Tulane!). Besides, a "Retard" could never pull off such a conspiracy, and it's pure coincidence that the first place most dying people think to go to not die is a hospital.

Like I said, just a tidbit I wanted to share

Just Mah Two Cents, Volume II

It's probably silly to label blog posts "Just Mah Two Cents," since the posts are all me putting in my two cents, more or less; but I like the title dammit. Today's two-cent contribution is this: I don't get all the apprehension people like State Treasurer John Kennedy are stirring up about LSU building a new $700 million+ medical complex to replace "Big Charity." [and why do they call it Big Charity? Is there a Little Charity?]. Kennedy even has Garland Robinette cowering in the corner with him.

It's an expensive project, no doubt, but the arguments against it ignore the advantages which, in my humble opinion, outweigh the cons. Charity is a shithole, and even if we could salvage it, why? The state could buy another building, but why? Why don't our citizens, poor or otherwise, deserve state of the art facilities allowing staff to provide the most technologically advanced care possible? If one of our city's biggest industries was medical care & research, what's wrong with creating a complex that will entice the best and brightest to come back? Research provides thousands of jobs and millions in revenue.

As someone who works in the field and interviewed at LSU/Charity, I can tell you firsthand that those are the things that push institutions above their competitors. My decision wasn't based on facilities, but even as a native who knew what a hellhole Charity was, I was MORTIFIED by the condition of a place where we expect people to go to get better. And the idea that rebuilding an LSU/Charity hospital means we go back to the same two-tier system we had before is ludicrous. The best hospitals are places where those with private and public insurance WANT to go for treatment; and a building has nothing to do with deciding on how health care will be paid for. Even if people on Medicaid have a "medical home," as is proposed, people still need to go to the hospital sometimes.

Lately our citizens' uncanny talent for choosing to not take bold, brave new steps that will likely benefit us, all the while choosing to take bold steps in the wrong direction(e.g., re-electing Jefferson) seems to be resurfacing. I hope we don't fuck this up too.

By the way, I decided to do my training in Chicago at a Top 10 ranked hospital.