Search

Posts Tagged ‘Legislation’

Q&A: Are the Folks against Health Care legislation “Un-American” because they disagree with Obama?

Question by Bill O: Are the Folks against Health Care legislation “Un-American” because they disagree with Obama?
In an Op-ed piece appearing in USA Today, Nancy Pelosi called dissenters at Town halls “Un-American” and stated that “Americans have been waiting for nearly a century for quality, affordable health care.”
Fact: We already have the best quality health care in the world.
Fact: Even the Leftists are now promoting HEALTH INSURANCE REFORM
So whats wrong with the Insurance industry? It costs too dam much and there is one reason it does!
Greedy patients that cry malpractice and unscrupulous lawyers that file multimillion dollar law suits against doctors that make mistakes BECAUSE THEY ARE HUMAN!
What say you America?

Please opine anytime anytime with pithy comments. And when answering please don’t be…pugnacious…in the No Spin Zone!
YES! I AGREE THAT PELOSI IS UNAMERICAN AND SHOULD IMMEGRATE BACK TO MARS.
For the several answers that pick at semantics…ABC News reported that Pelosi called the protesters “Un-American” too!

Best answer:

Answer by Mr. Wolf (blocked by many)
What was said:
“These disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views — but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American. Drowning out the facts is how we failed at this task for decades.” ~ from the USA article you sited

The spin:
Folks against Health Care legislation “Un-American” because they disagree with Obama.

Add your own answer in the comments!

21 comments - What do you think?  Posted by - February 7, 2011 at 4:12 am

Categories: Lawyer Malpractice   Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

What Tax Lawyers Need to Know About the Codification of the Economic Substance Doctrine in the Health Care Reform Legislation (ExecSense Webinars)

What Tax Lawyers Need to Know About the Codification of the Economic Substance Doctrine in the Health Care Reform Legislation (ExecSense Webinars)

In What Tax Lawyers Need to Know About the Codifiction of the Economic Substance Doctrine in the Health Care Reform Legislation, ExecSense examines the codification of the judicially-developed economic substance doctrine in the health care reform legislation recently passed by Congress, and what tax lawyers need to know regarding whether a transaction that has economic substance under new Internal Revenue Code section 7701(o) may differ from the analysis previously applied by courts under the judicially-developed doctrine. Take the 60 minutes to view this webinar (on your computer, mobile phone, iPod or printed out) to make sure you have answers ready to key questions you are sure to be asked by colleagues, clients, and other professionals with whom your discuss this issue about how the codification of the economic substance doctrine will impact the way courts analyze challenged tax transactions and what you should be doing for your clients as a result.

The webinar is led by an expert on the economic substance doctrine and the new health care reform legislation, Schyuler Moore (Partner, Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP), and focuses on:

Everything you need to know in 60 minutes about the codification of the economic substance doctrine in the health care reform legislation, and what it means for future analysis of challenged tax transactions

Perspective on the impact of the codification of the economic substance doctrine on future tax litigation regarding whether a given transaction has economic substance, including what language in section 7701(o) will be the likely focus of future litigation, whether application of section 7701(o) will be more or less favorable to transactions than the judicially-developed economic substance doctrine as historically applied, what kind of transactions might be particularly affected, and whether the IRS may step up its enforcement efforts as a result of this codification

Price: [wpramaprice asin=”B003NHF2N2″]

Be the first to comment - What do you think?  Posted by - January 23, 2011 at 11:13 pm

Categories: Tax Lawyer   Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Does the current Healthcare Reform legislation include allowing Doctors to say “I’m Sorry”?

Question by 12-25 Never Forget: Does the current Healthcare Reform legislation include allowing Doctors to say “I’m Sorry”?
“Believe it or not, the risk of being sued for malpractice has very little to do with how many mistakes a doctor makes. Analyses of malpractice lawsuits show that there are highly skilled doctors who get sued a lot and doctors who make lots of mistakes and never get sued. At the same time, the overwhelming number of people who suffer an injury due to the negligence of a doctor never file a malpractice suit at all. In other words, patients don’t file lawsuits because they’ve been harmed by shoddy medical care. Patients file lawsuits because they’ve been harmed by shoddy medical care and something else happens to them.

What is that something else? It’s how they were treated, on a personal level, by their doctor. What comes up again and again in malpractice cases is that patients say they were rushed or ignored or treated poorly. “People just don’t sue doctors they like,” is how Alice Burkin, a leading medical malpractice lawyer, puts it. “In all the years I’ve been in this business, I’ve never had a potential client walk in and say, ‘I really like this doctor, and I feel terrible about doing it, but I want to sue him.’ We’ve had people come in saying they want to sue some specialist, and we’ll say, ‘We don’t think that doctor was negligent. We think it’s your primary care doctor who was at fault.’ And the client will say, ‘I don’t care what she did. I love her, and I’m not suing her.'”

http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/excerpts/2005-01-07-blink_x.htm

Best answer:

Answer by Lord
No, that’s purely voluntary.

Add your own answer in the comments!

3 comments - What do you think?  Posted by - November 30, 2010 at 11:13 pm

Categories: Lawyer Malpractice   Tags: , , , , , , ,

Missouri DWI Lawyer Outlines Ramifications of Gov. Nixon’s Proposed DWI Legislation

Kansas City, Mo. (PRWEB) February 10, 2010

Missouri DWI lawyer Christopher Angles today issued a statement in response to proposed legislation that will change the way Missouri DWI cases are recorded and tracked and the way Missouri DWI defenses are conducted.

Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon announced legislation on Dec. 9 to overhaul the way Missouri deals with drunken-driving cases. Nixon wants to eliminate loopholes that block prosecutions, ensuring that all DWI offenses are accurately recorded and tracked.

“What’s being proposed here would alter the rights of DWI defendants throughout the state of Missouri and could potentially harm a defendant’s ability to mount a DWI defense,” Angles said. “It’s important for everyone to understand the legal ramifications of what’s being proposed here.”

Nixon convened a DWI Summit on Nov. 4 to collect ideas for improving Missouri’s DWI system from 30 participants including police chiefs, sheriffs, county and municipal prosecutors, judges, court clerks and victims’ advocates. Based on that summit, Nixon is proposing a wide range of Missouri DWI legislative changes.

“Perhaps the most significant changes to Missouri DWI law involved the blood-alcohol test,” Missouri DWI attorney Christopher Angles said. “This legislation proposes making it a crime for any driver to refuse to submit to a blood-alcohol test. Beyond that, repeat DWI offenders, drivers with a blood-alcohol level of .15 or above and drivers who refuse to submit to a blood-alcohol test would be charged in a state court rather than in municipal court. This means a Missouri DWI defense for the defendant would be subject to the most rigorous standards in bringing the defendant to justice and tracking cases to avoid repeat offenses.”

Missouri DWI attorney Christopher Angles outlined other key points of the proposed legislation, including:

     Enhanced penalties for offenders with blood-alcohol levels of .15 and above. (Under Missouri law .08 is the presumed level of intoxication.)
     Expanding the use of ignition-interlock devices to include cases when the driver’s blood-alcohol level was.15 or above or when a driver refuses to submit to a blood-alcohol test; current law limits the required use of these devices to repeat offenders.
     Eliminating the provision under current law that allows DWI offenders to have their records expunged after 10 years without another offense.
     Requiring all jurisdictions to enter DWI arrest and case information into the Missouri State Highway Patrol’s Driving While Intoxicated Tracking System (DWITS) to strengthen the tracking of DWI offenders. (Grant funding could be withheld from agencies that fail to report.)
     Prohibiting a defendant from withdrawing a guilty plea for DWI when reaching the end of his probation under a suspended imposition of sentence (SIS).
Upon announcing his response to the proposed changes, Missouri DWI lawyer Christopher Angles said he looked forward to informing Missouri DWI defendants how the Angles Law Firm will help them address the proposed additions to Missouri DWI laws.

“This legislation would certainly constitute a significant overhaul of Missouri DWI law and would restrict DWI defendants from mounting a strong DWI defense,” Angles said. “I welcome the opportunity to discuss the proposed legislation and assist DWI defendants with their DWI defense.”

For more information, visit the website of MIssouri DWI attorney Christopher Angles at http://www.angleslaw.com/kansas_city_dui_dwi_lawyer/

Source: governor.mo.gov/newsroom/2009/Reform_Missouri_DWI_Laws

###



Be the first to comment - What do you think?  Posted by - November 11, 2010 at 5:12 pm

Categories: DWI Lawyer   Tags: , , , , , , ,