Perfectly sensible, to me. The resistance by nine states to the law that guarantees equality of care to
Americans regardless of handicaps reminds me of the case of Beethoven. He was born with a venereal disease, was difficult to get along with and became prematurely deaf. If some authorities had decided he didn't deserve medical care at little cost, his painful life may well have been shortened. Ending Section 504 could have the same effect on many poor, handicapped citizens who potentially could give much to their fellows.
Thank You, good information for people out there who are disabled and their extended familes, for the country that has the most, at the top and the GOP, who are cruel, who are heartless and only think about more money or more power and seeking out the most marginalized or anyone they can hurt, hence like their dear leader
It sounds as if the states disagreeing with the law are objecting to having to follow the law in order to get paid. That may be because having to make physical adjustments to equipment etc may simply be beyond their budget. Allowing some places to do that (ie not meet requirements for care) without paying them less makes no sense, unless perhaps they must then use the extra funds to get the equipment or expand the services needed. If they are not providing the services stipulated, that may reflect a difference in what is necessary/good care, and they should be paid at a lower rate to reflect the lower level of care.
Perfectly sensible, to me. The resistance by nine states to the law that guarantees equality of care to
Americans regardless of handicaps reminds me of the case of Beethoven. He was born with a venereal disease, was difficult to get along with and became prematurely deaf. If some authorities had decided he didn't deserve medical care at little cost, his painful life may well have been shortened. Ending Section 504 could have the same effect on many poor, handicapped citizens who potentially could give much to their fellows.
Thank You, good information for people out there who are disabled and their extended familes, for the country that has the most, at the top and the GOP, who are cruel, who are heartless and only think about more money or more power and seeking out the most marginalized or anyone they can hurt, hence like their dear leader
It sounds as if the states disagreeing with the law are objecting to having to follow the law in order to get paid. That may be because having to make physical adjustments to equipment etc may simply be beyond their budget. Allowing some places to do that (ie not meet requirements for care) without paying them less makes no sense, unless perhaps they must then use the extra funds to get the equipment or expand the services needed. If they are not providing the services stipulated, that may reflect a difference in what is necessary/good care, and they should be paid at a lower rate to reflect the lower level of care.
Health care is now the BIGGEST reason citizens are leaving the US for other countries.