<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: amendments</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'amendments'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22amendments%22&t=%22amendments%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:31:17 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Republicans and the New York Marriage Law</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4975839&amp;cid=t_375836_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FjqIiiUmeSBM%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazSince New York passed a law extending marriage to same-sex couples, Republican presidential candidates have been mostly silent. But not Rep. Michele Bachmann, who has had a long and strong interest in gay rights issues. In an interview on Fox News Sunday she endorsed both New York&amp;#8217;s Tenth Amendment right to make marriage law and the federal government&amp;#8217;s right to override such laws with a constitutional amendment, confusing host Chris Wallace:
WALLACE: You are a strong opponent of same-marriage. What do you think of the law that was just passed in New York state—making it the biggest state to recognize same-sex marriage?
BACHMANN: Well, I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. And I also believe—in Minnesota, for instance, this year, the legislature...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4975839</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 15:50:06 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4975839</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Who’s Afraid of an Amendments Convention?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4436736&amp;cid=t_375836_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FYLO-_XEBUf0%2F</link>
            <description>By Ilya ShapiroThose of us who are upset at how &quot;constitutional law&quot; has gotten far away from the text of the Constitution have more options than just hoping the judiciary tosses us an occasional bone and otherwise writing law review articles and op-eds.  We can also amend the Constitution!
Indeed, the Framers provided a method of constitutional amendment that is easy to understand (if not to execute, at least not since the New Deal Congress and FDR began de facto amending the Constitution without bothering to amend it de jure).  Article V says that an amendment can be sent to the states for ratification upon approval by two thirds of both houses of Congress.  In the alternative, two thirds of the state legislatures can call for an amending convention.  Either way, the resulting prop...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4436736</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2011 04:41:14 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4436736</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Constitution Day</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3980812&amp;cid=t_375836_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F2fQuOVJ_9zE%2F</link>
            <description>By Roger PilonOn September 17, 1787, the Framers of the Constitution of the United States of America, having completed their work over that long hot summer, sent the document out to the states with the hope that conventions in the states, pursuant to Article VII, would see fit to ratify it. Nine months later, on June 21, 1788, New Hampshire became the ninth state to do so, making the Constitution effective between those states. Shortly thereafter, three more states ratified the document; and Rhode Island, the last, did so on May 29, 1790.
The Constitution was not perfect – what human creation is? – not least in its oblique recognition of slavery, believed necessary to ensure union. But it provided for amendment, as with the addition of the Bill of Rights in 1791 and the Civil War Amend...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3980812</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 16:26:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3980812</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>No Doc Fix Vote Before Medicare Reimbursement Cut Kicks In</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3658953&amp;cid=t_375836_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fdoc-fix-vote-awaits-reimbursement-cut-to-take-effect%2F2010.06.14</link>
            <description>Senators visited their districts Friday and again today, so the earliest they could vote on the doc fix is tomorrow (6/15) &amp;#8212; the day the 21.3 percent reimbursement cut takes effect.
Slowing down the process are the numerous amendments. For example, the duration of the fix is still being negotiated. And there are amendments such as redefining what makes up a rural health district. In California, some rural areas are seeing urban levels of patient demand, but giving more money to these counties is being seen as a kickback akin to others that were proposed during healthcare reform. (Part B News, The Hill)

			
			*This blog post was originally published at ACP Internist* (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3658953</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 12:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3658953</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Congress Goes After Citizens United</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3269682&amp;cid=t_375836_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FLD7c7mX6C8Y%2F</link>
            <description>By John SamplesSnowstorm notwithstanding, Sen. Charles Schumer and Rep. Chris Van Hollen introduced legislation in response to the Citizens United decision. A summary of their effort can be found here.
Some parts of the proposal are simply pandering to anti-foreign bias (corporations with shareholding by foreigners are prohibited from funding speech) and anger about bailouts (firms receiving TARP money are banned from funding speech). Government contractors are also prohibited from independent spending to support speech. We shall see whether these prohibitions hold up in court. The censorship of government contractors and TARP recipients will likely prove to be an unconstitutional condition upon receiving government benefits.
Despite Citizens United, Congress will try to suppress speech by...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3269682</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:43:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3269682</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The FISA Amendments: Behind the Scenes</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2992653&amp;cid=t_375836_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F6LxSIjq40OU%2F</link>
            <description>I&amp;#8217;ve been poring over the trove of documents the Electronic Frontier Foundation has obtained detailing the long process by which the FISA Amendments Act—which substantially expanded executive power to conduct sweeping surveillance with little oversight—was hammered out between Hill staffers and lawyers at the Department of Justice and intelligence agencies. The really interesting stuff, of course, is mostly redacted, and I&amp;#8217;m only partway though the stacks, but there are a few interesting tidbits so far.
As Wired has already reported, one e-mail shows Bush officials feared that if the attorney general was given too much discretion over retroactive immunity for telecoms that aided in warrantless wiretapping, the next administration might refuse to provide it.
A couple other t...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2992653</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 21:53:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2992653</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Yes, California, There Is an Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2347775&amp;cid=t_375836_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FuZgmGhQTKSM%2F</link>
            <description>Last June, the Supreme Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects an individual&amp;#8217;s right to keep and bear arms, at least in the home for self-defense.  Here&amp;#8217;s our own Bob Levy, who masterminded the Heller litigation, talking about that decision:

While the Court&amp;#8217;s ruling was a watershed in constitutional interpretation, it technically applied only to D.C., striking down the District&amp;#8217;s draconian gun ban but not having a direct effect in the rest of the country.
Well, today the Ninth Circuit (the federal appellate court covering most Western states) ruled that the Second Amendment restricts the power of state and local governments to interfere with individual right to have guns for personal use.  That is, the Fourteenth Amen...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2347775</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 21:21:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2347775</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>No Taxation Without Representation?  OK, I’ll Take the No Taxation</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2217419&amp;cid=t_375836_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FnHtAJ0f6gKY%2F</link>
            <description>The Senate is taking up, and looks ready to pass, legislation granting the District of Columbia full representation in the House of Representatives.  And the bill is co-sponsored by Utah&amp;#8217;s Orrin Hatch, whose state would also get one additional House member &amp;#8212; but only until 2012, when the new census will again reapportion representatives nationwide.
The problem (setting aside the cheap politics of adding one safe seat for each party) is that the DC Voting Rights Act is facially unconstitutional. The plain text of Article I limits representation in Congress to voters residing in &amp;#8220;states&amp;#8221; &amp;#8212; a species of jurisdiction that the District of Columbia is not.
Now, this simple legal fact does not affect the moral argument that the voices of D.C. residents should reso...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2217419</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:36:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2217419</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Lost In Translation?  FDA Believes That LabCorp’s Ovarian Cancer Early Detection Test (OvaSure) Lacks Adequate Clinical Validation</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1729819&amp;cid=t_375836_136_f&amp;fid=37846&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthinfoispower.wordpress.com%2F2008%2F08%2F23%2Flost-in-translation-fda-believes-that-labcorps-ovarian-cancer-early-detection-test-ovasure-lacks-adequate-clinical-validation%2F</link>
            <description>The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sent a letter to the Laboratory Corporation of America (LabCorp) on August 7, 2008, stating that it believes the Yale ovarian cancer early detection test (marketed by LabCorp under the name OvaSure™) &amp;#8221; &amp;#8230; has not received adequate clinical validation, and may harm the public health.&amp;#8221; In that [...] (Source: Libby's H*O*P*E*)</description>
            <author>Libby's H*O*P*E*</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1729819</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:17:19 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1729819</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>RE: Nursing Home Reform Amendments of OBRA, Residents &quot;Know Your Rights, &quot; Guest Post by Matt Raven</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1519011&amp;cid=t_375836_158_f&amp;fid=36018&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fcaregiversbeacon.blogspot.com%2F2008%2F06%2Fre-nursing-home-reform-amendments-of.html</link>
            <description>“Know your rights” is important for residents of nursing homes. The Nursing Home Reform Amendments of OBRA were implemented in early 1987. According to the for the people website, the act mandated that nursing homes “promote and protect the rights of each resident.”The law aims at doing a number of things, but here are the general rights of residents:1) Right to Self-DeterminationResidents have the right to:-select their own doctor.-have access and involvement in all medical decisions.-receive personalized services at the facility based on individual requirements.2) Personal and Privacy RightsResidents have the right to:-partake in social, religious, and community events as they see fit.-confidentiality of personal and medical documents.3) Rights Regarding Abuse and RestraintsResid...</description>
            <author>The Caregiver's Beacon - Resources, Links, Ideas, News</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1519011</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 14 Jun 2008 03:59:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1519011</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>McClellan Talks Up FDA Patient Database</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1058441&amp;cid=t_375836_150_f&amp;fid=35777&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FPharmalot%2F%7E3%2F192350233%2F</link>
            <description>The former FDA commish yesterday praised a recently enacted plan to overhaul the way drug safety is monitored in the US, citing the recently passed FDA Amendments Act, which will create a vast new database of drug patients by 2012, CNNMoney.com reports.
Such a database could prevent another debacle like Vioxx, he contended, and major health care organizations such as eHealth Initiative, Partners Healthcare and Kaiser Permanente will coordinate with insurers like Unitedhealth Group and Wellpoint, to gather and collate the data from patients. McClellan sees the info as being more complete and more objective.
&amp;#8220;If they work together and follow the same rules (in how they define adverse events and how they use the data), then you&amp;#8217;ve got tens of millions (of people) in the database,&amp;...</description>
            <author>Pharmalot</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1058441</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2007 11:25:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1058441</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

