Congressman Walt Minnick participated in a moderated and structured question-and-answer session about health care last night at the North Idaho College Schuler Performing Arts Center.
Commenter “citizen” says, “Now that Minnick has done his ‘Health Care’ program, I think it would be good to get the reaction of those attending. I have my opinions of his performance, but I would like to hear from others.”
Did you attend? What were your reactions to the questions and answers? To the audience’s understanding of the issue and participation?
I did not attend, however I emailed him my concerns of what I believe might be an abuse of federal money within our Idaho Judicial System. You see, they get REALLY special attention that we pay for, without a vote, without a bid?, and without any public input. We just have to digest and it’s all done by a cozy little group of folks who play with our money. This one concern – we are paying for – is a very special doctor who will get his very special table at the Judicial Conference in Sun Valley this September.
From the April 2009 Judicial Wellness Committee minutes:
Then here is some frosting:
From the June 2009 Judicial Wellness Committee minutes:
Gee, healthcare in Idaho just got more expensive for some of us.
Comment by Stebbijo — August 26, 2009 @ 1:12 pm
The forum was more interesting than I thought it would be. I liked the questions from the audience and was impressed by the courage and intelligence of the people getting up on stage in their shorts and sandals to ask questions. The audience reaction was great too: Polite but rambunctious and highly reactive.
Minnick’s position on a public option was tenuous, in my view. He seems bully on the private sector as his first choice for reform but hedges and equivocates on future intrusion by the government. And his answer about the S-Chip revealed his obvious belief that government should run these programs. Did everyone notice his reluctant admission that once the government has its foot in the door, it’s impossible to pull it out?
Comment by mary — August 26, 2009 @ 1:14 pm
And your point is Stebbijo? Your information is incomplete. You are complaining about a topic without cohesive reasoning.
Mary, it is a huge commentary on Sali, that Minnick was elected in the first place. I believe he was “forced” in to this in person meeting because of all the criticism he received for his “tele-meeting” proposal. At the end of the day, he will vote in his own best interest….which is the hope of re-election. And if he votes yes on this disasterous proposal, he can kiss his political career goodbye. With a good opposing candidate, he should be a one termer anyway. I suppose I’m a total cynic about politics. The “foot in the door” comment was true.
Of great and frightening interest, was the article about the national debt. The greatest in the history of this country. That in a very short time the national debt will be 75% of our GNP. Bearing in mind that as a Senator, Barry Obamas vote (yes that is how he was known until it became beneficial to become Barack) contributed greatly to that debt. His actions as president (although in actuality, the real president(s) are Rham Emmanuel and Nancy Pelosi, have simply pushed that debt to a staggering stratosphere.
Comment by Faringdon — August 26, 2009 @ 2:17 pm
Farringdon,
I am sorry if you do not understand my point. My apologies, our justice system is very complicated. Without going into a lenghthy lesson, I assume that most of us on this blog our aware of the formation of judicial committees which are unrelated to the house and senate committees in the legislature. It can get confusing.
I am doing research into judicial committees. These committees are appointed by our Supreme Court Justice. The one I am looking at now is the Wellness Committee. I have their minutes.
They have decided to spend lots of money on a form of healthcare for our judges that I think is friovolous by hiring out a private contractor in the form of a
“hotline.” We are paying for it. You did not have any choice.
This “hotline” will be established so our judges with addiciton, substance abuse problems will have a special “outside” source so things don’t get “spread” around, they obviously value their privacy, just like many of us do.
Additionally, when many folks cannot afford their own health care in Idaho, it doesn’t make any sense that we are working this into the budget at this time, so the judges and their families get extra gravy when they already of plenty of it. It’s an abuse of power, and it’s an abuse of the management of tax dollars when a few hens can get around the table and decide to play God with our hard earned money. Our justices already have healthcare in place. We pay millions of dollars per year to make sure they are well taken cared of.
If you have any other questions, I would be happy to answer them. I can give you links that provide you with the orders and more of it is on my site. Idaho is right now, the only state in the nation that has a justice system that works this way, without any oversight by the people or their legislature. They can change court process at this level and that had a bigger impact on us than some of the statutes which before they become law go through several steps.
Comment by Stebbijo — August 26, 2009 @ 4:19 pm
Here are the news clips of last night’s meeting, from Channels 2 & 4. Check it out, I think these are good clips, of course I’m in one of them!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRdqggM592w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMmXJT5NcPU
Comment by mary — August 26, 2009 @ 8:14 pm
What I heard from Minnnick at NIC was essentially…I will vote for socialized medicine if the first stage of government controls and regulations do not work. Well, guess who gets to judge if government interference in our health care works…..the same people who are about to make it worse. What I wanted to hear from him was that he would NEVER vote for socialized single payer health care.
Minnick said we, the audience, should all want Obama to succeed. This brought the largest BOOs. Wishing for Obama’s success is wishing for Obama Care. So, Mr. Minnick what was your point?
It is my opinion that he “acts” conservative, and his liberal base is giving him room to play his tricks as they want him to hold the seat in Congress.
Comment by citizen — August 26, 2009 @ 9:37 pm
Stebbijo…now that is a cohesive explanation, although I do not agree with your arguement. Life is not equitable. Nor should it be. Your prior post left just what this doctor was to do, Was he to be an expert witness? That didn’t seem likely. As to keeping info sub rosa, that is true for all of us. Like it or not, a medical problem is personal even for judges. If they are breaking the law, that is another story. Special care is nothing new. The politicians holding all of us captive to this horrific proposal, all will receive lifetime private care. Ted Kennedy, the quintessential limousine liberal, is a great example of do as I say, not as I do. Does anybody believe that the brain surgery and subsequent treatment he received, woul be available to the rank and file (of any age, let alone in the 70’s) under this health care proposals?
Back to the judiciary. Believe me, I need no explanations of the American judicial system. Of course there are faults. But all in all, it is an excellent system. With what would you replace it? I realize you must have some grudge regarding our legal system. Nothing is perfect, however I’ll take our system any day. IMO, it leans too heavily toward protecting the guilty. Better that than a shot to the head and a bill for the bullet sent to survivors.
Comment by Faringdon — August 27, 2009 @ 8:39 am
That’s okay Farringdon. We are obviously going to disagree. Our judicial system in IDAHO is broken.
I do not have a grudge, I have a legitiaate concern and not only do I have this concern, but so does a Judge in Lewiston who is suing the Idaho Judicial Council. Does he have a grudge, too? Oh, and btw, he was elected by the people. They must be full of grudges too.
I can see that my comments/critizism about our judicial system are not that well received and since I don’t know you, it is pointless to inform you.
Additionally, if anyone on this site has personal ties to any of the judges here in town, I understand.
Comment by Stebbijo — August 27, 2009 @ 9:35 am
Stebbijo,
It sounds like Idaho is trying to provide judges with an Employee Assistance Program.
I’ve included a link to DHS’s explanation of what its EAP does. The one with the Secret Service was similar. The key is that not everything the employee tells the counsellor is confidential. By virtue of the job involved, certain disclosures by the employee must (either by law or by agreement) be provided to the employee’s supervisor. I suspect a similar proviso exists for judges in Idaho if what you’re describing is, in fact, an EAP.
Comment by Bill — August 27, 2009 @ 1:20 pm
I don’t know Bill.
This is as close as it gets to anything called EAP.
They just do what they want. It would be interesting to get a copy of the contract.
I will work on that next.
Comment by Stebbijo — August 27, 2009 @ 2:32 pm
stebbijo, you have a right to your opinion. What I find distressing are your blanket statements. “Idaho judicial system is broken”. Every single judge, attorney, police officer? Based on what? The law is the law. Often I don’t like how it is administered. But when judicial errors are made, appeals can also be made. What proof do you have that the Idaho judiciary is bent? You have in previous posts alleged that whole groups of people are crooked. This is just not so. I’m not related to any judge in this area. But I believe your personal prejudices cloud your view of the facts. And I find it disturbing when entire groups of people are maligned on this or, indeed any public forum.
Comment by Faringdon — August 27, 2009 @ 3:51 pm
Stebbijo,
You probably would like to see the program’s policy manual as well as the contract with the doctor. The policy manual should reveal what may and may not be released to the public. The policy manual should also disclose the arrangements for securing professional services such as the doctor’s contract.
Comment by Bill — August 27, 2009 @ 3:53 pm
Farringdon,
Some things you cannot appeal. And when a judge makes a BIG mistake along with other professionals, for instance publishing medical records and releasing them to the public – not to mention false testimony. You have a problem. A big one. And, I have lots of proof – but it’s personal and confidential, so I am not going to elaborate. I have ethics.
Bill,
I am not sure, but the policy manual might be the Spousal Handbook. I will be looking into it.
After all, I can understand where a judge’s wife might need “special” help, let’s say she is getting abused by her judge husband (like the local cops are going to help?), or the judge’s wife is getting doped up every night on valium and needs rehab, they might have issues locally. Then, the wife to the judge might have a problem with a drunk husband or he might be acting strange from all the meds he is taking from his local psychiatrist because he/she cannot get enough. So, this hotline can refer them “out” so the local medical community does not know. They don’t want it “spread” (a term used in the minutes). This way, they could go to California for a week or two and get straight – and this Dr. could refer them to someone that was safe and the public would never know and his/her career would be safe. The poor judge’s wife who is getting beat, however, might be SOL. It’s also supposed to be a tool where they can rat out each other.
Comment by Stebbijo — August 27, 2009 @ 4:20 pm
Stebbijo,
I’m assuming your examples in the last comment are hypothetical. However the comment about using the hotline to refer allegations out so the local medical community does not know, they don’t want it “spread” — that’s interesting. The lawyers who are promoting this policy and practice do not acknowledge the sanctity and inviolability of the doctor-client privilege, yet they would expect everyone else to believe in the sanctity and inviolability of the attorney-client privilege. Doctors gossip but lawyers don’t?
Comment by Bill — August 27, 2009 @ 4:59 pm
Great hypothetical examples,yes. However, we need to realize that our judges and their families are humans with real human problems like gambling, stress, burnout, mental health issues, substance abuse, and domestic violence. That is why they need this special hotline.
The “gossip” factor is interesting. Evidently, lawyers/judges don’t trust anyone.
Here is the direct quote from the 2009 April Wellness Committee minutes.
Here is another good one where they rat each other out.
Then we have issues with marketing the spousal handbook and how to get it to the spouses – email, snail mail, it’s being discussed and quite the subject.
From the 2009 April Minutes:
Great stuff – don’t you think?
Comment by Stebbijo — August 27, 2009 @ 5:45 pm
Oh for crying out loud! “rat each other out”. stebbijo, everyone isn’t dishonest. This is nuts!!! Perhaps, instead of “ratting”, other judges seeing a problem with the ability of a sitting judge, endeavor to help on a private level. Your big complaint is that your private records were made public. But you seem to think that is fine for everybody else. If it is wrong for your problems to be made public, why is it okay for others?
In an earlier post you claimed you were refused health care. When I asked about being on your husbands policy, you then said he had his and you had yours. You also claim that the hospital and everybody else were in “cahoots” to cheat the public. And on and on.
This entire state is not out to get you. This is a serious site, addressing serious problems with local govt. It is not here to address personal grudges, yours, mine or anybody elses. It is not my site and I make no claims about controlling it. But I am disturbed when anybody accuses a group in total of being dishones and/or in cahoots to commit wrongs.
Comment by Faringdon — August 28, 2009 @ 9:23 am
Oh for “cry and out loud” Faringdon – I am sorry you are disturbed.
I never claimed I was refused health care – you are making stuff up now.
And, I want you to know, I am very serious about what I say. If you don’t like my terminology, I am sorry.
You sound like you may not be related to some of these “judicial” folks, but maybe you know them. You are quick to defend them.
I bet you are happy that your medical records did not become public record.
What I find entertaining about your tirade is that you do not address any of my factual information, but instead attack me with a game of semantics through the old but well used ad hominem attack, because it’s all you have.
Gee, who’s your good buddy(s) in the judicial system?
Take your own grudge.
Comment by Stebbijo — August 28, 2009 @ 10:00 am
There was an excellent article in Friday’s CdA Press, page 1 of C section in
“My Turn” column by Paul Truebenbach. It was about concerns of trusting Minnick’s expressed stands on issues. A Blue Dog Democrat by the very nature of the breed is not a conservative.
I would like to hear other opinions.
Comment by citizen — August 28, 2009 @ 2:35 pm
This is a serious and necessary site. However I am not interested in dueling with a person who uses gutter pejoratives en masse and claims she is going to vomit all over people and places. Whose story changes at will and who extrapolates bits and pieces to serve her purposes. This kind of posting simply detracts from the gravitas of this site. Not good at all.
Comment by Faringdon — August 28, 2009 @ 2:57 pm
I am really sorry Farringdon that you are offended, but you are right, I do have a purpose. I don’t want to duel with you either -because, you obviously care about the privacy of judges, but you neglect to see where the justice system violates the people’s privacy. Obviously, there is a problem, or the Supreme Court would not have formed the Protection of Personal Information in Court Files Committee.
Y
You have your own agenda and you are inspired to defend purposes that I will deem genuine, however you surpass my legitimate concerns by doing the only thing you can do – defame, discredit, and attack my character just because you don’t like the way I write.
You sound like you might have some legal smarts – so you obviously think it’s okay that judges call this special hotline to talk with someone over the phone about another judge or relative and this is wellness? I call it malpractice. Judges are not doctors. What is this – special intervention training? Is that better than “ratting?” That is absolutely as low as it can get. You cannot get a professional opinion over the phone about someone’s medical condition. You just can’t. No wonder Idaho hired out an independent contractor from another state – saves the state a lawsuit, if it all falls apart. I think it is way to risky for the taxpayers to have to support this.
What isn’t good is that folks like yourself, who are obviously connected fail to listen to people like myself because when we have a real concern like two area judges, a handful of lawyers, and some appointed experts who fail to protect the privacy of the people, you bark that my case is a grudge and the privacy of our justices is a given. I guess I don’t count, along with how many other people who have been violated?
Our system will continue to make these very big mistakes unless folks like myself stand their ground and demand change with our justice system. I do beleive it is broken, I do believe there are groups that collaborate, and if I said “vomit,” and you are offended, I am sorry, but that is how I feel.
You are just upset because I emailed Minnick about the mess we have in our judicial system here in Idaho and it’s relative to healthcare and federal money, and you can’t take it. Thank God, it wasn’t Craig.
BTW – I am Independent – but, I am not voting for Kennedy.
You really sound like you are trying to push me off this site – and I am offended.
Comment by Stebbijo — August 28, 2009 @ 4:46 pm