Re: PA needs help passing Lyme legislation

From: A_Weisman (a_weisman_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 11/18/04 

Date: 17 Nov 2004 23:30:40 -0800

GregGerber@hotmail.com (Greg Gerber) wrote in message news:<146041df.0411170012.387d9fed@posting.google.com>...
> a_weisman@yahoo.com (A_Weisman) wrote in message news:<e55e6d97.0411161510.6e3bcc0f@posting.google.com>...
>
> > It is Tuesday now. Presumably the bill was "assigned" or died?
> > Which one?
> > If it wasn't assigned and didn't die then we were LIED to again.
>
> Weisman, given your

well earned

>skepticism, wouldn't it be best if you called the
> legislature yourself and reported back to us?

Don't need to do so. I KNOW what the situation is. I know that the
lame duck session ends and when it ends. I know that this bill has two
chances this session, slim and absolutely none. I know that a bill
with no real constituency behind it, and some real constituency
against it, passed the house near the end of a lame duck session for a
reason (it was meant to go nowhere but permitted some legislators to
tell a few constituents that they did their part when they really did
little or nothing--this is how politics really works).

>Even if you were
> provided with an answer by Phyllis or Ellen, would you accept it,
> absolutely? I doubt it.

You're right about that. See I KNOW what it means for the bill "to be
assigned."

However I doubt E L or Phyllis do. And telling people to call and use
this phrase without telling them what it means is likely to lead to
confusion. Because "to be assigned" doesn't explain what that means
and the offices of legislators may not know what the callers mean.

So what if an office staffer says "what do you mean? Assigned to what
or whom?"

How will the sheep making the calls answer?

Let's say that there is a choice of to whom or what it would be
assigned. Are the callers told a suggestion as to whom or what would
be most preferable? Or let's say that the bill needs to be assigned to
more than one person or thing. How do the callers answer? What if it
is assigned to one person or thing only but requires more?

And after assignment, are the callers told the next step?

While there isn't and never was a Monday deadline, there is an end to
the lame duck session coming relatively soon. Is there a plan to
advance the bill through all of the steps necessary to get it passed
(in identical form as the House bill) in this session?

Or might people's energies and efforts be better spent?

OR, alternatively, greg, what if all of this effort is merely
ceremonial in terms of this session and is meant to gain some
momementum or create an impression for the next session (with a number
of new legislators elected by the way). So why not tell people that?

Don't the people deserve some honestly from these self appointed
"leaders?"

And some of the statements made are simply absurd on their face as I
tried to point out in an earlier post.

A new fairly absurd statement was made in "response" to sir der's
question (though not truly responsive to the one question and no
answers to most of the rest of his questions not to mention no answers
at all to mine).

That was that PA passing a bill would have an effect on other
legislatures so that was why out of state folks should pester PA
legislators.

Come on.

This ignores some very basic realities. Including the fact that Lyme
is (perhaps wrongly) perceived as a regional issue, affecting only a
few regions of the country.

California doesn't consider itself as having a large problem with Lyme
(*perhaps wrongly). So how are they going to be influenced by this
bill?

>So why not do the yeoman's work of
> investigation and let the group know what you have found yourself?

I KNOW that there was no drop dead deadline on Monday for a start
greg. I know that the bill was basically DOA already anyway.

> If
> misinformation has been delivered, that is important to know,

And for someone who urges others on this very thread to do their own
research, why should I do it for you? It is easy to find out when the
PA legislative session ends, what the process of passing legislation
in the PA legislature entails.

And then it is fairly easy to figure out what is going on here.

> but if
> not, continued suggestions to that effect amount to a red herring and
> should be dispensed with due to lack of proof.

Well if it weren't true, I wouldn't be saying that the red herring is
what E L and Phyllis are telling people, and that this is a rotting
fish at that.

I'm NOT misleading people. THEY are. AGAIN!

And I don't know whether it is deliberate or incompetent. Or both.

> When you make the calls
> you should also be able to ferret out the answers to the logistical
> questions you have posed and get back to us with complete,requisite
> detail. These are important issues that should certainly be clarified,
> but I don't think you will get the clarity you seek by continuing to
> ask on sci.med.

Does that mean you support their call for action without question?
That they should issue orders that shouldn't be questioned? Given
their track record?

Because it was THEY who brought it to sci med NOT ME. So should I and
everyone else that action is requested, no, demanded of, not expect
that we can ask questions and receive answers that are responsive?

I mean it is not as if anyone elected any of them. Or gave them
authority to claim to represent anyone other than themselves. Or
issues orders to us.

Particulary given their track records.

>I look forward to your report to the group. Gregory
> Gerber

My report: they're full of it again. My question: are they delibeate
or incompetent in misleading us AGAIN?

Relevant Pages

  • Interesting exchange at LymeNUT
    ... I called and the Lyme bill was considered dead in the fall of 2007. ... support and no bill will get to the floor without a certain number ... all legislators in committees get money from ...
    (sci.med.diseases.lyme)
  • Re: PA needs help passing Lyme legislation
    ... That a bill of fewer ... Either one is death by bunda. ... who are not patients or god forbid legislators. ...
    (sci.med.diseases.lyme)
  • Mass. Shared Parenting Bill has 40 co-sponsors
    ... The bill has 40 co-sponsors and is expected ... Mr. Maguire urges legislators to "please do ... by John Maguire ... The shared parenting bill John Maguire urges ...
    (soc.men)
  • Re: PA needs help passing Lyme legislation
    ... and more time contacting legislators or designing pamphlets ... The minister who was to bless the PA senate this morning could not ... It was announced to the full senate that the reason was his ... and looking to put the bill on the docket today and consider & vote on ...
    (sci.med.diseases.lyme)
  • Re: Phyllis: Activists Say YIKES We need to KILL the MD BILL! LOL
    ... I'm not so sure defeating this bill is the proper way to go. ... By appointing this task force, the legislators have passed the buck to ...
    (sci.med.diseases.lyme)