DR. PHIL
The problem we have here is that this chicken won't realize that he must first deal with the problem on "THIS" side of the road before it goes after the problem on the "OTHER SIDE" of the road. What we need to do is help him realize how stupid he's acting by not taking on his "CURRENT" problems before adding "NEW" problems.
OPRAH
Well, I understand that the chicken is having problems, which is why he wants to cross this road so bad. So instead of having the chicken learn from his mistakes and take falls, which is a part of life, I'm going to give this chicken a car so that he can just drive across the road and not live his life like the rest of the chickens.
GEORGE W BUSH
We don't really care why the chicken crossed the road. We just want to know if the chicken is on our side of the road, or not. The chicken is either against us, or for us. There is no middle ground here.
COLIN POWELL
Now to the left of the screen, you can clearly see the satellite image of the chicken crossing the road...
ANDERSON COOPER- CNN
We have reason to believe there is a chicken, but we have not yet been allowed to have access to the other side of the road.
JOHN KERRY
Although I voted to let the chicken cross the road, I am now against it! It was the wrong road to cross, and I was misled about the chicken's intentions. I am not for it now, and will remain against it.
NANCY GRACE
That chicken crossed the road because he's GUILTY! You can see it in his eyes and the way he walks.
PAT BUCHANAN
To steal the job of a decent, hardworking American.
MARTHA STEWART
No one called me to warn me which way that chicken was going.I had a standing order at the Farmer's Market to sell my eggs when theprice dropped to a certain level. No little bird gave me any insiderinformation.
DR SEUSS
Did the chicken cross the road? Did he cross it with a toad? Yes, the chicken crossed the road, but why it crossed I've not been told.
ERNEST HEMINGWAY
To die in the rain. Alone.
JERRY FALWELL
Because the chicken was gay! Can't you people see the plaintruth in front of your face? The chicken was going to the "otherside." That's why they call it the "other side." Yes, my friends, that chicken is gay. And if you eat that chicken, you will become gay too. I say we boycott all chickens until we sort out this abomination that the liberal media whitewashes with seemingly harmless phrases like"the other side." That chicken should not be be crossing the road. It's as plain and simple as that!
GRANDPA
In my day we didn't ask why the chicken crossed the road. Somebody told us the chicken crossed the road, and that was good enough.
BARBARA WALTERS
Isn't that interesting? In a few moments, we will be listening to the chicken tell, for the first time, the heart warming story of how it experienced a serious case of molting, and went on to accomplish its life long dream of crossing the road.
JOHN LENNON
Imagine all the chickens in the world crossing roads together, in peace.
ARISTOTLE
It is the nature of chickens to cross the road.
BILL GATES
I have just released eChicken2005, which will not only crossroads, but will lay eggs, file your important documents, and balance your check book. Internet Explorer is an integral part of eChicken. This new platform is much more stable and will never cra...#@&&^( C \..... reboot.
ALBERT EINSTEIN
Did the chicken really cross the road, or did the road move beneath the chicken?
BILL CLINTON
I did not cross the road with THAT chicken. What is your definition of chicken?
AL GORE
I invented the chicken!
COLONEL SANDERS
Did I miss one?
STATE of TEXAS
We are not really concerned as to Why the chicken crossed. Rather we are determined to alleviate the burdens the chicken had in crossing said road. Difficulties like not having access to alternate crossing strategies. Therefore, so that the Chicken will gain greater access to the Other Side of the Road, & save precious taxpayer monies, we will Privatize the Road. The private corporation will install a fee booth on both sides of the road. The private company’s employees will man the booths and provide much easier access to the benefit of road crossing. Additionally, the chicken will apply by computer online for permission. With this new process the chicken will provide information and verification as to WHY he wanted to cross. Once all verification is submitted the booth attendants will receive a task on their computer screen allowing the chicken to pass or to request new information. In this way all the chickens of the STATE of TEXAS will be better served. AND, the STATE of TEXAS will save $$$ by not having to maintain the road.
Note from Blogger: Again, this was received from another "source". I do know of the author but will not list his name in case he would rather it was "protected". Author from the State of Texas - if you wish to identify yourself, feel free. I enjoyed Texas' response to the dilemma of the chicken! It is so true! :)
Monday, July 17, 2006
I love my job I love my job I love my job....
Nope, still not working.
I used to love my job I used to love my job I used to love my job..................Today, I wanted to walk out! I have hundreds of changes due by this cutoff, which is Wednesday as you all know. I have lost my supervisor and now I have to do my job as well as hers. I can't even answer my phone anymore because if I did, I'd never get anything done (which I'm not anyway because I'm constantly handling complaints at the front desk!) Our workers can't even get their work done timely now but we are expected to "loan" workers to other offices?!? This has gotten completely out of hand!
Now they say that Worker IVs can no longer be "acting supervisors". WELL HELL - Get me a damn supervisor so I don't have to do that job also! These idiots have really pissed me off now!
Anyone reading this an attorney? Know an attorney? We need a class action lawsuit against the State of Texas!
Note from blogger: Received from a "front line staff", names and offices always protected, of course.
I used to love my job I used to love my job I used to love my job..................Today, I wanted to walk out! I have hundreds of changes due by this cutoff, which is Wednesday as you all know. I have lost my supervisor and now I have to do my job as well as hers. I can't even answer my phone anymore because if I did, I'd never get anything done (which I'm not anyway because I'm constantly handling complaints at the front desk!) Our workers can't even get their work done timely now but we are expected to "loan" workers to other offices?!? This has gotten completely out of hand!
Now they say that Worker IVs can no longer be "acting supervisors". WELL HELL - Get me a damn supervisor so I don't have to do that job also! These idiots have really pissed me off now!
Anyone reading this an attorney? Know an attorney? We need a class action lawsuit against the State of Texas!
Note from blogger: Received from a "front line staff", names and offices always protected, of course.
NOTE FROM BLOGGER: This is not HHSC related but I found it absurd and ridiculous! We have got to change the administration in Texas!!!!!
NEWSclips Date: July 17, 2006
Death row for doctors? Absurd - but possible By Editorial Board Austin American-Statesman Imagine a Texas doctor facing the possibility of the death penalty for performing an abortion on a willing minor or even a grown woman. Although some of the most extreme opponents of abortion might welcome just such a prosecution, the idea probably sounds far-fetched to most Texans.
But the Texas District and County Attorneys Association says in a guide to state laws enacted in 2005 by the Legislature that just such a prosecution is possible, even if it is "undoubtedly an unintended consequence" of an effort to limit abortions by teenage girls and women in their third trimester unless their health was endangered.
This interpretation of the law, which even abortion activists reject, is worrisome. Remember, abortion itself remains legal, even constitutionally protected under several U.S. Supreme Court rulings. Lawmakers say they never intended to make doctors vulnerable to a capital murder charge, but this is Texas, where an ambitious prosecutor in a strongly anti-abortion county might well decide to score some political points by bringing just such a case if the opportunity arose.
State Rep. David Swinford, chairman of the House State Affairs Committee, doesn't think the association is right - but he's concerned enough to have asked Attorney General Greg Abbott for a formal legal opinion.
Here's the situation:
A law passed in 2003 makes killing an "unborn child" at any stage of pregnancy a capital murder offense. But a legal defense to such a charge is that a doctor was performing a legal abortion.
Then, in 2005, the Legislature passed a law that requires pregnant girls under 18 to have parental permission or a court order to get an abortion and bars most third trimester abortions. Put the two laws together, the prosecutors' guidebook points out, and a doctor who aborted the pregnancy of a woman in her seventh or higher month of pregnancy or a minor who did not have parental or court permission theoretically could face a capital murder charge.
Even anti-abortion groups are shying away from such an interpretation, though apparently more because of political reality than principled objection to the idea of such a prosecution. Kyleen Wright, president of Texans For Life Coalition, said murder prosecutions were not the intent of the new law and: "We're not trying to get out ahead of public opinion."
Those who oppose abortion want eventually to make it illegal, she said, with "stiff measures to act as a deterrent" - though not capital punishment.
After all, she said, even among abortion opponents there are diverse views about the morality of capital punishment.
Sarah Wheat, spokeswoman for NARAL Pro-Choice Texas, said she welcomed the request for the attorney general's opinion because "when it comes to abortion, you can't assume anything."
Wheat is right. Somewhere in Texas a prosecutor is looking at the new abortion law and thinking, "Hmm . . ."
http://online.dshs.state.tx.us/oc/newsclips/default.htm
NEWSclips Date: July 17, 2006
Death row for doctors? Absurd - but possible By Editorial Board Austin American-Statesman Imagine a Texas doctor facing the possibility of the death penalty for performing an abortion on a willing minor or even a grown woman. Although some of the most extreme opponents of abortion might welcome just such a prosecution, the idea probably sounds far-fetched to most Texans.
But the Texas District and County Attorneys Association says in a guide to state laws enacted in 2005 by the Legislature that just such a prosecution is possible, even if it is "undoubtedly an unintended consequence" of an effort to limit abortions by teenage girls and women in their third trimester unless their health was endangered.
This interpretation of the law, which even abortion activists reject, is worrisome. Remember, abortion itself remains legal, even constitutionally protected under several U.S. Supreme Court rulings. Lawmakers say they never intended to make doctors vulnerable to a capital murder charge, but this is Texas, where an ambitious prosecutor in a strongly anti-abortion county might well decide to score some political points by bringing just such a case if the opportunity arose.
State Rep. David Swinford, chairman of the House State Affairs Committee, doesn't think the association is right - but he's concerned enough to have asked Attorney General Greg Abbott for a formal legal opinion.
Here's the situation:
A law passed in 2003 makes killing an "unborn child" at any stage of pregnancy a capital murder offense. But a legal defense to such a charge is that a doctor was performing a legal abortion.
Then, in 2005, the Legislature passed a law that requires pregnant girls under 18 to have parental permission or a court order to get an abortion and bars most third trimester abortions. Put the two laws together, the prosecutors' guidebook points out, and a doctor who aborted the pregnancy of a woman in her seventh or higher month of pregnancy or a minor who did not have parental or court permission theoretically could face a capital murder charge.
Even anti-abortion groups are shying away from such an interpretation, though apparently more because of political reality than principled objection to the idea of such a prosecution. Kyleen Wright, president of Texans For Life Coalition, said murder prosecutions were not the intent of the new law and: "We're not trying to get out ahead of public opinion."
Those who oppose abortion want eventually to make it illegal, she said, with "stiff measures to act as a deterrent" - though not capital punishment.
After all, she said, even among abortion opponents there are diverse views about the morality of capital punishment.
Sarah Wheat, spokeswoman for NARAL Pro-Choice Texas, said she welcomed the request for the attorney general's opinion because "when it comes to abortion, you can't assume anything."
Wheat is right. Somewhere in Texas a prosecutor is looking at the new abortion law and thinking, "Hmm . . ."
http://online.dshs.state.tx.us/oc/newsclips/default.htm
More articles....
Houston Chronicle
7/16/2006
Since the Texas Health and Human Services Commission approved an $899 million contract with a consortium led by Bermuda-based Accenture, very little has gone right. The people who've paid for the blunders are the state's poor, particularly children and the elderly.
Since the state instituted the privatization effort, enrollment and reinstatement rates in the Children's Health Insurance Program have slumped; hundreds of persons have erroneously been denied Medicaid and food stamp eligibility; and applications were mistakenly directed to a Seattle warehouse. Planned layoffs of state caseworkers, which were supposed to result in big savings, were canceled as overwhelmed call centers were forced to return thousands of cases to state employees.
Now 60 Texas state representatives, including eight from Houston, have signed a letter to Health and Human Services Commissioner Albert Hawkins calling for the Texas Access Alliance headed by Accenture to pay the ultimate price by having the contract revoked. The missive, written by Rep. Patrick Haggerty, R-El Paso, asks Hawkins "to cancel the contract with Accenture for nonperformance and commit the remaining resources to rebuilding the human services eligibility system that, as little as two years ago, was among the best in the country."
A group of 30 Republican legislators, including some in the leadership team of House Speaker Tom Craddick, earlier sent out their own letter supporting Accenture. Craddick has defended the contractor in comments to the Houston Chronicle editorial board and Gov. Rick Perry also opposes canceling the contract. So far more than $90 million has been paid to the group.
Commissioner Hawkins has said state officials are considering levying penalties against Accenture for its performance.
In attempting to minimize the damage, Hawkins delayed full implementation of the contract and postponed the layoff of state workers for a year. It's now clear that the sweeping privatization plan approved by HHS commissioners has harmed the access of poor Texans to critical safety net services and failed to provide the big savings that were the deal's rationale.
At minimum, HHS officials need to develop much tighter monitoring procedures of the new call centers to guarantee proper handling of applications and eligibility screening. Accenture should be financially penalized for its failure to meet promised service levels and its contract revoked if problems continue.
State cancels $171M Medicaid contract with ACS Lee Weisbecker Triangle Business Journal
7/14/2006
The North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services on Friday canceled its $171 million contract with Texas-based Affiliated Computer Services, ACS, to provide the state with a
new Medicaid claims paying system.
DHHS officials began sending out the notice to terminate after the close of business and couldn't be reached for further comment.
The action follows a dispute between DHHS secretary Carmen Hooker Odom and ACS over costs, staffing levels and delivery schedules in supplying the hardware and software needed to get the new claims system up and running.
The North Carolina Medicaid system currently pays over $8 billion in medical bills for over a million low-income recipients annually.
Outside of large highway projects, the contract is the largest in state government.
In an earlier action, Hooker Odom had given the company, which has set up such processing systems in 31 states, until July 13 to resolve the state's objections, particularly in the area of staffing and contract deliverables.
"ACS has failed to satisfy either of the above requirements for cure,"
Hooker Odom says in her notice terminating the five-year agreement.
She also directs the company to cease all work on the contract, preserve work product related to it and cancel any subcontracts on the job.
In letters on the dispute to various state officials and in a briefing on the issue before a panel of lawmakers at the General Assembly this week, ACS officials called any termination action unjustified and pinned the problems on DHHS' mismanagement over several months.
ACS has also said that termination would result in legal action.
Whatever the outcome of that prospective battle, the state will continue to pay Medicaid claims. Another Texas-based company, Electronic Data Systems, EDS which operated the system for 25 years before losing a contract rebid to ACS in 2004, has continued to pay claims while the new system was being put in place.
EDS will carry on with that function until DHHS rebids the contract.
Triangle Business Journal reported in its June 30 issue that state information technology chief George Bakolia had issued an ultimatum to Hooker-Odon to resolve the ACS contract or he would suspend approval for it.
7/16/2006
Since the Texas Health and Human Services Commission approved an $899 million contract with a consortium led by Bermuda-based Accenture, very little has gone right. The people who've paid for the blunders are the state's poor, particularly children and the elderly.
Since the state instituted the privatization effort, enrollment and reinstatement rates in the Children's Health Insurance Program have slumped; hundreds of persons have erroneously been denied Medicaid and food stamp eligibility; and applications were mistakenly directed to a Seattle warehouse. Planned layoffs of state caseworkers, which were supposed to result in big savings, were canceled as overwhelmed call centers were forced to return thousands of cases to state employees.
Now 60 Texas state representatives, including eight from Houston, have signed a letter to Health and Human Services Commissioner Albert Hawkins calling for the Texas Access Alliance headed by Accenture to pay the ultimate price by having the contract revoked. The missive, written by Rep. Patrick Haggerty, R-El Paso, asks Hawkins "to cancel the contract with Accenture for nonperformance and commit the remaining resources to rebuilding the human services eligibility system that, as little as two years ago, was among the best in the country."
A group of 30 Republican legislators, including some in the leadership team of House Speaker Tom Craddick, earlier sent out their own letter supporting Accenture. Craddick has defended the contractor in comments to the Houston Chronicle editorial board and Gov. Rick Perry also opposes canceling the contract. So far more than $90 million has been paid to the group.
Commissioner Hawkins has said state officials are considering levying penalties against Accenture for its performance.
In attempting to minimize the damage, Hawkins delayed full implementation of the contract and postponed the layoff of state workers for a year. It's now clear that the sweeping privatization plan approved by HHS commissioners has harmed the access of poor Texans to critical safety net services and failed to provide the big savings that were the deal's rationale.
At minimum, HHS officials need to develop much tighter monitoring procedures of the new call centers to guarantee proper handling of applications and eligibility screening. Accenture should be financially penalized for its failure to meet promised service levels and its contract revoked if problems continue.
State cancels $171M Medicaid contract with ACS Lee Weisbecker Triangle Business Journal
7/14/2006
The North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services on Friday canceled its $171 million contract with Texas-based Affiliated Computer Services, ACS, to provide the state with a
new Medicaid claims paying system.
DHHS officials began sending out the notice to terminate after the close of business and couldn't be reached for further comment.
The action follows a dispute between DHHS secretary Carmen Hooker Odom and ACS over costs, staffing levels and delivery schedules in supplying the hardware and software needed to get the new claims system up and running.
The North Carolina Medicaid system currently pays over $8 billion in medical bills for over a million low-income recipients annually.
Outside of large highway projects, the contract is the largest in state government.
In an earlier action, Hooker Odom had given the company, which has set up such processing systems in 31 states, until July 13 to resolve the state's objections, particularly in the area of staffing and contract deliverables.
"ACS has failed to satisfy either of the above requirements for cure,"
Hooker Odom says in her notice terminating the five-year agreement.
She also directs the company to cease all work on the contract, preserve work product related to it and cancel any subcontracts on the job.
In letters on the dispute to various state officials and in a briefing on the issue before a panel of lawmakers at the General Assembly this week, ACS officials called any termination action unjustified and pinned the problems on DHHS' mismanagement over several months.
ACS has also said that termination would result in legal action.
Whatever the outcome of that prospective battle, the state will continue to pay Medicaid claims. Another Texas-based company, Electronic Data Systems, EDS which operated the system for 25 years before losing a contract rebid to ACS in 2004, has continued to pay claims while the new system was being put in place.
EDS will carry on with that function until DHHS rebids the contract.
Triangle Business Journal reported in its June 30 issue that state information technology chief George Bakolia had issued an ultimatum to Hooker-Odon to resolve the ACS contract or he would suspend approval for it.
Bell joins welfare screener critics The Democratic governor hopeful urges HHS to drop privatization deal, keep jobs in Texas
Houston Chronicle
Clay Robison
7/14/2006
AUSTIN - Democratic gubernatorial nominee Chris Bell said Friday the state should cancel an $899 million human services privatization contract that also has come under fire from Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn and many legislators.
"It's every bit as nightmarish as the reports indicate," Bell said of the contract awarded to Accenture LLP for screening applicants for public assistance programs.
The Bermuda-based company, which manages a consortium of subcontractors called Texas Access Alliance, has been attacked by social services advocates, who say low-income Texans are losing benefits because of inadequate staffing and training at private call centers.
The contract is part of a massive reorganization of health and human services agencies ordered by the Legislature in 2003 in an effort to streamline the delivery of public services and reduce costs.
HHS leader still backs plan
Health and Human Services Commissioner Albert Hawkins, an appointee of Gov.
Rick Perry, isn't backing down from the contract, and neither is Perry.
Hawkins, however, has slowed down the privatization effort to try to address complaints about a call center pilot program, including lost or backlogged applications, long wait times on phone lines and eligible recipients being cut from services.
The commissioner has canceled plans to lay off hundreds of state workers who were to have been replaced by contract employees.
Perry spokeswoman Kathy Walt has said the governor is unhappy with the privatization problems but has "utmost confidence that Commissioner Hawkins will address the issues."
Earlier this week, 60 members of the Texas House, 12 Republicans and 48 Democrats, called for the state to cancel the Accenture contract and use the money to "rebuild a community-based system that works."
But 30 other legislators, all Republicans, urged Hawkins to continue the transition to privatization.
Strayhorn, running for governor as an independent, announced plans two months ago to investigate the contract. Spokesman Mark Sanders said Friday that Strayhorn didn't want to comment on whether the contract should be canceled until after the investigation has been completed.
"It's a huge contract with huge problems," Sanders said.
Strayhorn also targeted
Bell has criticized Strayhorn for once advocating privatization of some health and human services programs.
Sanders said the privatization approved by the Legislature and the Health and Human Services Commission was broader than the comptroller had recommended as a cost-cutting measure in 2003.
Bell said screening of public assistance applicants should be handled by state employees.
Spokeswoman Jill Angelo said earlier this week that Texas Access Alliance was working with the state and had made "significant progress over the past several months to improve performance."
Second thoughts Absent remarkable improvement, the state should cancel the massive contract with a private company hired to screen applicants for state assistance.
Clay Robison
7/14/2006
AUSTIN - Democratic gubernatorial nominee Chris Bell said Friday the state should cancel an $899 million human services privatization contract that also has come under fire from Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn and many legislators.
"It's every bit as nightmarish as the reports indicate," Bell said of the contract awarded to Accenture LLP for screening applicants for public assistance programs.
The Bermuda-based company, which manages a consortium of subcontractors called Texas Access Alliance, has been attacked by social services advocates, who say low-income Texans are losing benefits because of inadequate staffing and training at private call centers.
The contract is part of a massive reorganization of health and human services agencies ordered by the Legislature in 2003 in an effort to streamline the delivery of public services and reduce costs.
HHS leader still backs plan
Health and Human Services Commissioner Albert Hawkins, an appointee of Gov.
Rick Perry, isn't backing down from the contract, and neither is Perry.
Hawkins, however, has slowed down the privatization effort to try to address complaints about a call center pilot program, including lost or backlogged applications, long wait times on phone lines and eligible recipients being cut from services.
The commissioner has canceled plans to lay off hundreds of state workers who were to have been replaced by contract employees.
Perry spokeswoman Kathy Walt has said the governor is unhappy with the privatization problems but has "utmost confidence that Commissioner Hawkins will address the issues."
Earlier this week, 60 members of the Texas House, 12 Republicans and 48 Democrats, called for the state to cancel the Accenture contract and use the money to "rebuild a community-based system that works."
But 30 other legislators, all Republicans, urged Hawkins to continue the transition to privatization.
Strayhorn, running for governor as an independent, announced plans two months ago to investigate the contract. Spokesman Mark Sanders said Friday that Strayhorn didn't want to comment on whether the contract should be canceled until after the investigation has been completed.
"It's a huge contract with huge problems," Sanders said.
Strayhorn also targeted
Bell has criticized Strayhorn for once advocating privatization of some health and human services programs.
Sanders said the privatization approved by the Legislature and the Health and Human Services Commission was broader than the comptroller had recommended as a cost-cutting measure in 2003.
Bell said screening of public assistance applicants should be handled by state employees.
Spokeswoman Jill Angelo said earlier this week that Texas Access Alliance was working with the state and had made "significant progress over the past several months to improve performance."
Second thoughts Absent remarkable improvement, the state should cancel the massive contract with a private company hired to screen applicants for state assistance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
