From KOTV (//%22http://www.kotv.com/news/local/story/?id=112565%22):
quote:
EMSA Contract Up For Renewal
KOTV - 10/12/2006 5:19 PM - Updated 10/12/2006 5:32 PM
A decision was due at the end of the month on whether Tulsa will renew EMSA's contract for ambulance service. This afternoon the mayor asked EMSA to wait until January for the decision, so she will have more time to go through the numbers. The fire department believes it can do the same job for less money than EMSA. Mayor Taylor has heard from both agencies this week with their plans for the next five years and how much it will cost for ambulance service. She says there are no problems with the care EMSA provides, but the increasing subsidy they require - $1.8 million this year, and an estimated $3.4 million next year - requires her to look at the option of using the fire department instead of EMSA.
Mayor Kathy Taylor, Tulsa: "The important thing for us is to find out which works for our community, to maintain the quality of care, that's the first priority, and then to make sure the dollars are used wisely."
The mayor said she's not just looking at what it could cost the city budget, but what it would cost the people who call an ambulance for each trip. We'll have more on the story and EMSA's first response to the fire department plan, tonight at Ten. Emory Bryan, The News on 6.
About EMSA (//%22http://www.emsaonline.com/aboutemsa.html%22)
quote:
Emergency Medical Services Authority (EMSA) is the exclusive emergency medical services provider for more than 1.1 million people in Central and Northeast Oklahoma.
We provide pre-hospital advanced life support to patients who suffer injuries and illnesses and offer care en route to and from the hospital.
EMSA was established in Tulsa in 1977. The service area was expanded to include Bixby, Jenks, and Sand Springs, and then into Oklahoma City and Edmond in 1990. EMSA now has two divisions -- the eastern division, with Tulsa as the major city, and the western division centered around Oklahoma City.
Each year, we respond to more than 100,000 calls for help. We transport more than 60,000 patients to health care facilities each year.
Tulsa made the transition from one of the worst emergency response systems (think "Mother, Jugs and Speed") to being a model EMS that cities many times our size would send emissaries to study it's success. It's not going to be enough that the fire department can do it for less, but rather if they can keep the bar high without breaking the bank.
I would hate to see that model being subject to hits every time someone wants money for their special projects, and the EMS Authority buffer seems to function as that safety net.
If they are smart they will stcik with EMSA.....Tulsa had either the lowest or second lowest subsidy per call of surrounding major cities...Some of those cities being outside Oklahoma.....
Why do we send fire trucks to every fender bender?
That big fire truck has to be the most fuel-inefficient vehicle ever.
I think EMSA works well but I think sending TFD paramedics and an ambulance to almost every medical call is a bit of a waste.
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
Why do we send fire trucks to every fender bender?
That big fire truck has to be the most fuel-inefficient vehicle ever.
A lotta times they don't know for sure until they get there if there are any injuries. And, since there are fire stations all over the city, a fire truck can usually get there in about half the time that EMSA can.
Now that doesn't mean that if TFD takes it over response time will be cut in half. There's no way in hell they're going to spend the money to put a MICU at every fire station.
This is a good question. I think EMSA has done a very good job. But since firefighters, as already mentioned, are trained first responders, it could make sense for the TFD to have the contract. Or perhaps EMSA should start having an ambulance posted at each fire station to improve response times.
That's what they do in some Texas towns. The ambulance drivers live at the fire station and are on the same shifts 24 on 48 off.
Yeah, I guess my point is, firemen get called out to car wrecks, medical emergencies at homes, etc. It seems like it would save money over sending out a fire truck and an ambulance to every call.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
But since firefighters, as already mentioned, are trained first responders, it could make sense for the TFD to have the contract
Please dont assume First Reponders and Paramedics are the same thing. There is a huge gulf between the two skill levels and procedures each are qualified to cary out.
quote:
Originally posted by patric
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
But since firefighters, as already mentioned, are trained first responders, it could make sense for the TFD to have the contract
Please dont assume First Reponders and Paramedics are the same thing. There is a huge gulf between the two skill levels and procedures each are qualified to cary out.
Patric, good point, I don't think anyone is confusing the two (it's like the difference between a PA and an MD) or implying that the FD wouldn't have paramedics if they had the contract.
I just got a chance to peruse the TW story this morning, and the FD claims they can cut costs by $11M a year...but it looked like they were saying they could do it with a fee increase to the same scale OKC charges.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by patric
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
But since firefighters, as already mentioned, are trained first responders, it could make sense for the TFD to have the contract
Please dont assume First Reponders and Paramedics are the same thing. There is a huge gulf between the two skill levels and procedures each are qualified to cary out.
Patric, good point, I don't think anyone is confusing the two (it's like the difference between a PA and an MD) or implying that the FD wouldn't have paramedics if they had the contract.
I just got a chance to peruse the TW story this morning, and the FD claims they can cut costs by $11M a year...but it looked like they were saying they could do it with a fee increase to the same scale OKC charges.
That 11 million in savings is over 5 years.....
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Patric, good point, I don't think anyone is confusing the two (it's like the difference between a PA and an MD) or implying that the FD wouldn't have paramedics if they had the contract.
Good point, as well, but I wonder what effect the expense of additional Paramedic training will have on the Fire Departments existing budget.
Lots of layers to this, and all needing to be explored.
"That 11 million in savings is over 5 years....."
Yep, you caught me, that's what I get for skimming[:I] I finally re-read the story in detail.
I was unaware that they already have over 40 trained paramedics on the FD until I re-read it, I think the story said 44.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
"That 11 million in savings is over 5 years....."
Yep, you caught me, that's what I get for skimming[:I] I finally re-read the story in detail.
I was unaware that they already have over 40 trained paramedics on the FD until I re-read it, I think the story said 44.
Happens to me to.. I also like the fact that this is not some big fight between the Fire Department and EMSA...It's the city looking at options to see whats the best....
The city of Tulsa paid paid almost two million dollars in subsidies to EMSA this year. That cost is expected to increase substantially over the next few years. Not to mention, that it looks like Tulsa is also subsidizing EMSA service to the suburbs. I am willing to give the TFD a shot.
Firefighters seek to supplant EMSA
By P.J. LASSEK World Staff Writer
10/11/2006
The Tulsa Fire Department will submit a proposal Wednesday that claims it can provide ambulance service to the city cheaper than EMSA can, Deputy Fire Chief David Dayringer said.
Tina Wells, a spokeswoman for the Emergency Medical Services Authority, responded that no service provider can match EMSA for cost and quality.
This is the first year that the city has been asked to subsidize EMSA because of reductions in Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement.
The cuts, which started in 2002, are scheduled to lower the reimbursements to 27 percent less than the cost of service by 2010, Wells said.
EMSA was able to absorb the reduction-fed deficit through its cash reserve, but that is now depleted.
The subsidy for EMSA this year is $2,745,000. Tulsa is paying $1,873,000; Bixby, Jenks, and Sand Springs are paying a total of $192,000; and EMSA is paying $680,000 from its cash reserve.
The City Council has until Oct. 31 to
decide whether to renew the EMSA Trust for five more years.
The renewal will be automatic if the council does nothing. If the council dissolves the trust, there will be a two-year transition period.
Dayringer said the department was asked during the budget process last spring to submit its costs for providing ambulance service after it became apparent that EMSA would seek a direct city subsidy.
Dayringer said he could not release specifics until after Mayor Kathy Taylor reviews the proposal, "but we think we can provide at least the same quality of service at a savings to the city."
He said the Fire Department already had an emergency system and available staff.
Firefighters Local No. 176 President Dennis Moseby said this was not the first time the department has suggested taking over the ambulance service. The department is already the city's first-responder to medical emergencies, he said.
The department also has cross-trained firefighters as paramedics or emergency medical technicians, he said.
EMSA provides a good service, but it is run for profit, Moseby said. The Fire Department "can take the profit nature out of it and return the profit back to the general fund," he said.
The Oklahoma City Fire Department also is trying to determine whether to take over ambulance service, Moseby said.
Wells said EMSA was included in the Oklahoma City Fire Department's cost analysis and was able to review its figures for providing service.
"We don't know what Tulsa is doing," she said.
The situation is not isolated to Tulsa, she said. No matter who provides ambulance service, she said, the cuts in federal reimbursement are an issue.
Wells said 49 percent of EMSA patients are covered by Medicare or Medicaid; 30 percent are uninsured; and 21 percent pay billed charges.
A rate increase would cover only about 9 percent of costs because the uninsured can't pay and the federal government reimburses according to its own schedule, she said.
"How high can you raise the rates?" Wells asked. "They have to be an amount that the officials can stand behind politically."
Wells said EMSA had been "highly successful in limiting costs for cities it serves and providing excellent value for patients."
She noted that EMSA has the second-lowest subsidy per response among 10 other comparable cities.
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
The city of Tulsa paid paid almost two million dollars in subsidies to EMSA this year. That cost is expected to increase substantially over the next few years. Not to mention, that it looks like Tulsa is also subsidizing EMSA service to the suburbs. I am willing to give the TFD a shot.
So a city "subsidy" is the only basis for your opinion on the subject?
What about the fact that the city is "subsidizing" TFD to the tune of $56,000,000 this year? What about TFD's Hazmat and other response "subsidies" to the suburbs?
City Budget - Public Safety (//%22http://www.cityoftulsa.org/ourcity/budget/documents/Sec03a-DepartmentalBudgetHighlights-PublicSafetyAndProtection.pdf%22)
For that matter, what about our $80 million annual "subsidy" to the Tulsa Police Department? Maybe all public safety responses should be offered only a fee-for-service basis?
I was billed for over $700 dollars for a non-emergency 10 mile transfer by EMSA. Compare after finding out how much an emergency run will cost the taxpayer who is maintaining two standby services where only one is needed. Let the FD transfer non-emergency transfers.
Trying to get the collective bargaining unit of TFD to agree to the duties of an EMS will be next to impossible. Plus EMSA subsidy is less due to non-emergency transfers. Do we really want our FF out making nursing home runs when your house is on fire? I do agree that first responders should be driving smaller vehicles.TextText
It is time to have an outside audit of the operations and compare cost anticipated. This government has too many non-producing duplicating management. Who do you think is paying for office and management space for EMSA?
quote:
Originally posted by shadows
It is time to have an outside audit of the operations and compare cost anticipated. This government has too many non-producing duplicating management. Who do you think is paying for office and management space for EMSA?
I wonder how much the executive compensation packages are for EMSA?
Correct me if I am wrong - but doesn't it seem like no matter who you call the Fire Department shows up first....that is a plus if you think about it!!!
The thought of the Tulsa Fire Department taking over EMS is an endeavor I hope to never see in my lifetime. As a resident or Tulsa and someone with firsthand knowledge of both entities, I hope the superb clinical care of EMSA is not dissolved. Several years ago, the Tulsa Fire Department put some firefighters through training to be "paramedics" and they began to provide first reponse at that level. Tulsa Fire "paramedics" take care of patients for only 2-3 minutes before an EMSA paramedic arrives and transports the patients. Some of them are excellent paramedics and have experience taking care of patients, they all happen to work at EMSA as well. I will not get into specifics, but I hope that pre-hospital care is left to those who are experienced in managing the patient for more than 60 seconds. If money needs to be saved than the fire department should stop sending their 4 mile to the gallon fire trucks to stubbed toes or headaches to justify their existence. The system works well with an excellent fire supression agency and a separate EMS provider.
I don't know what's best on this but I sure don't have any problem with looking at stuff like this once in a while and asking the question. I'm just not sure that TFD fully realizes what they'd be getting in to. And there are questions of money that go beyond just the day to day cost of running the operation. There's a lot of capital that the City would have to buy if TFD took it over. I ASSUME that EMSA owns its rolling stock and I doubt if they're gonna just hand it over to the City as a present.
As far as the better response time goes, that's one of many factors. And just because the fire truck is usually on scene before the MICU doesn't mean that TFD could routinely get there first with an MICU. I know that one poster said that EMSA has units all over Tulsa, but I'd have to see the distribution on that before I would agree that the distribution of the fire stations wasn't the main reason for that. And unless you're gonna have a MICU at EVERY FIRE STATION, you can't assume that TFD would be able to have a quicker response time than EMSA does now.
Update on the EMSA contract:
OKC decided today to renew with EMSA Western Division (Oklahoma City and surrounding suburbs).
Tulsa's City Council seems to be pro EMSA once the fire departments proposal was looked at in depth.
quote:
Originally posted by papaspot
I ASSUME that EMSA owns its rolling stock and I doubt if they're gonna just hand it over to the City as a present..
Actually the city owns most of our non-disposable items, including trucks, equipment like monitors, our building, etc...
Paramedics Plus, which is our contract owner, pays for all disposable items like one-time use medical eqipment, personnel, etc...
quote:
Originally posted by papaspot
As far as the better response time goes, that's one of many factors. And just because the fire truck is usually on scene before the MICU doesn't mean that TFD could routinely get there first... ...one poster said that EMSA has units all over Tulsa...
Actaully our trucks aren't considered MICU units, just regular Paramedic units which is basically the next step down. Response vehicles are generally classified (from lowest to highest) as First Responder, Basic, Paramedic (which is what EMSA has), MICU (Mobile Intensive Care Unit). A first responder is someone (generally an EMT or Paramedic) without an ambulance. Basic would be an ambulance with only Basic level EMT training. Paramedic would be an ambulance with at least one Paramedic on board. I believe in Oklahoma, a MICU is an amublance with at least one Paramedic and one Intermediate. We do have Intermediates at EMSA, but we really don't consider any of our trucks MICU even though we might have two Para's on a truck.
Now on the response times. TFD has an average response time of 4m20s. EMSA's average is 6min. The catch is this: We use what is called System Status Management (SSM) to place our trucks around town. This means we have no stations, but "posts" (where you see the ambulance setting at QuikTrip). The system is designed to keep the trucks evenly distributed in strategic locations around town. So each time a call comes in, the trucks move to even out coverage. This is very nice in the event that you have multiple calls in the same area in an hour or less (which happens all the time). So in a lot of situations, the fire dept. arrives first because they are responding from no more than a mile or two away, while the amulance might be four or five miles away. The fire dept first responds on a lot of our calls because they have trained Basics and some stations have Paramedics that can begin to treat the patient until an amulance arrives. Then they return to the station. Now in the event another call goes out in the same area say 5 minutes later after the first call was made, the fire dept can first respond to the call to treat the patient while the next truck is en-route. This is best for the patient because they call 911 and within minutes someone is there to help.
Now the issue that can lie with having ambulances at stations is after that second call, a third goes out in the same area. Now instead of having an ambulance either already in that area or headed that way, you have to call a third ambulance from a station which now is farther away than the first two. So now you REALLY have no coverage for that area until one of those three amulances is done. Assuming they all transported, you're talking about 25-35+ minutes until they are ready for another call, so that area of town would be left short. Nevermind how busy the stations in the busy areas of town would be for a whole shift and the other stations would get very few calls. SSM keeps trucks distributed so that there is always one close by, no matter how many calls are going out in that area. I can't tell you how many times we've had calls literally within minutes of each other that were located within blocks of each other, or in the case of like the Day Center or Salvation Army area, we might have 3-4 trucks on calls within an 1/8th mile area around Archer and Denver area which is home to the Day Center, Salvation Army, and John 3:16 shelters as well as the YMCA and the Jail.
Hope that wasn't too confusing, but I'm just trying to demonstrate how our SSM is better than having ambulances at a fixed station when it comes to response times. Tulsa Fire does an excellent job with medical calls and helping us when we need an extra hand. But I would rather live in a city that when I call 911, I know someone will be there within minutes to help. So by the fire dept. first responding, then EMSA taking over care and the fire dept. clearing from the scene, they are now available within minutes of them arriving at the call to take another emergency if need-be. We also try to help each other out by if we show up first and don't need fire, we will cancel them. If they show up and there's no need for an ambulance, they will cancel us.
Welcome to the forum, Mike.
It is nice to have an EMSA EMT on the forum. We have experts in many areas on this forum and we love to share information.
I don't have any firm positions on the topic, but feel there has to be a more fuel-efficient vehicle to respond besides the big fire trucks.
You said that the Tulsa City Councilors had looked at the Fire Department proposal and now were pro-EMSA. Do you know which councilors?
I liked your rational for having ambulances staged at better locations than just at fire stations? Could there be a combination of some fire stations and some Quik-Trips for staging?
I was not aware of the contract owner, Paramedics Plus. I always assumed it was ran by EMSA themselves. How long has the work been contracted to them and how much time is left on the contract?
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
I don't have any firm positions on the topic, but feel there has to be a more fuel-efficient vehicle to respond besides the big fire trucks.
Miami, FL uses motorcycle responders. Probably more for quicker times through traffic jams more than fuel efficiency. EMT Mike, thanks for the inside scoop. Very enlightening read.
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
Welcome to the forum, Mike.
It is nice to have an EMSA EMT on the forum. We have experts in many areas on this forum and we love to share information.
I don't have any firm positions on the topic, but feel there has to be a more fuel-efficient vehicle to respond besides the big fire trucks.
You said that the Tulsa City Councilors had looked at the Fire Department proposal and now were pro-EMSA. Do you know which councilors?
I liked your rational for having ambulances staged at better locations than just at fire stations? Could there be a combination of some fire stations and some Quik-Trips for staging?
I was not aware of the contract owner, Paramedics Plus. I always assumed it was ran by EMSA themselves. How long has the work been contracted to them and how much time is left on the contract?
The cost of running big fire trucks is nothing compared to the ENORMOUS fire stations they are building. The one at 111th and Yale looks to be about 15,000 square feet. That much space for 4 firemen? I cant imagine what it would cost to run the utilities.
Why cant the city build with an eye toward the future? Do they assume tax revenue will increase forever? The answer is YES when you take a look at this new station. It seems highly irresponsible.
I would imagine that 15,000 sq ft is more than 4 fireman.
most stations have 1 company. thats 4 or 5 men
some stations have 2 companies. 8-10 men
only a few have chiefs, so 9-12 men max.
I have been told that new south station will have 1 company, no chief.
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
Welcome to the forum, Mike.
Thanks, glad to be here.
quote:
You said that the Tulsa City Councilors had looked at the Fire Department proposal and now were pro-EMSA. Do you know which councilors?
No I don't, but I believe it is the cost/quality-of-service that is the kicker. EMSA is one of the best EMS services in the nation and is also one of the cheapest to operate.
quote:
I liked your rational for having ambulances staged at better locations than just at fire stations? Could there be a combination of some fire stations and some Quik-Trips for staging?
Doubtful as long as EMSA is a private service. It's better to have all of the trucks in the same game with SSM. One of the pluses to SSM is we are constantly refining it based on call volume and data to keep it up-to-date with our calls.
quote:
I was not aware of the contract owner, Paramedics Plus. I always assumed it was ran by EMSA themselves. How long has the work been contracted to them and how much time is left on the contract?
I don't know if/when the contract comes up for renewal, but the last contractor was AMR (American Medical Response). EMSA itself is a privately owned company, but we are also a public trust. We are ran by EMSA, Paramedics Plus, and the City of Tulsa. Each controls a different aspect and work together as checks and balances to provide the highest quality of care at the cheapest price possible.
I work at a local media outlet. My job in no small part consists of listening to scanners for a living. I also deal a lot with both EMSA and TFD.
I think it's been pointed out that fire is already a first responder on all traumatic injuries and other life-threatening incidents. That system has been in place for a few years now. However, I hear the words "waved off by EMSA" a LOT on the scanners. In other words, EMSA got there first and had the situation handled. Moreover, TFD always runs lights and sirens, EMSA doesn't, so comparing response times might not be all that accurate. Now it's important to note that I'm NOT trashing TFD, they do an excellent job. I'm simply saying I don't think you'll see a big drop in response times if TFD takes on ambulance service. As far as the equipment goes, that's not owned by EMSA. EMSA manages the service and employs the people. As for taking sides on the issue, I don't think I know enough about it. I know the TFD chief has said they can do the job for less money for many years now. Cheaper, however, doesn't necessarily mean better. I guess I lean toward the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" solution.
Maybe the Head Cheese allowed politics to figure into her decision to look at the "high" subsidies to EMSA and give the job to TFD? Naaaaaaaaaaaaah.
Okay here it is... I am new to this forum but I have read all of your recent posts. I apprieciate the tone that you are all taking. It sounds as though you are simply concerned about the EMS service to tulsa. I am a Paramedic with considerable knowledge of this situation.
First, EMSA is a public trust of the City of Tulsa and does own almost all of the rolling stock and nonperishable equipment. Paramedics plus is contracted by EMSA to provide the service ti the city. EMSA's job is to find a the best and most cost effective service. EMSA is basically the oversite to Paramedics plus. It has been that way for many many years.
As far as TFD arriving first most of the time....That is completely wrong. I will find hard numbers but they basically respond to half of the emergencies that EMSA does and then arrive onscene first only part of those times.
TFD is great and as someone said earlier many of thier medics work for EMSA part time. That is great, but as I should point out, only a few actually work as a medic regularly or ever have. Many of them have often been heard saying that they are relieved when EMSA arrives to take over patient care. They are very unsure of themselves and thier skills.
The 11 million dollars over 5 years....Way off.
The numbers are actually going to come out millions of dollars over EMSA to have TFD do the job and not have the same response times. This has been proven by TFD. I agree that the service should be questioned from time to time. But right now the best choice seems to be EMSA.
I hope I did not seem to forward but the facts should be mentioned. I would be glad to answer any other questions.
All the talk about the cost of none emergency transfer between is published as amounting to 60% of the calls, involving three for profit operations. In a recent none emergency transfer between local hospitals the bill was $777.00. Lets take a long look at the proposal of the TFD who says they can save us millions where EMSA wants over a million subsidy. If it is a none emergency just call a cab and it will save ever one money. I am sure the TFD has a van to transport with.
Welcome to the forum, Jason.
It is interesting that we are getting new opinions and new posters on this topic. It must be one of those good community discussion topics that TulsaNow does better than anyone.
The dollars do matter. If one of the proposals truly saves millions, it will be hard for any of the decision makers to not choose them.
But this decision is way to important for just the finance guys to make. Every call they respond to has the potential to save your or my loved one.
Keep the information coming. Having good and well-informed posters will lead to community support for whatever decision is made.
quote:
Originally posted by Jason
Okay here it is... I am new to this forum but I have read all of your recent posts. I apprieciate the tone that you are all taking. It sounds as though you are simply concerned about the EMS service to tulsa. I am a Paramedic with considerable knowledge of this situation.
First, EMSA is a public trust of the City of Tulsa and does own almost all of the rolling stock and nonperishable equipment. Paramedics plus is contracted by EMSA to provide the service ti the city. EMSA's job is to find a the best and most cost effective service. EMSA is basically the oversite to Paramedics plus. It has been that way for many many years.
As far as TFD arriving first most of the time....That is completely wrong. I will find hard numbers but they basically respond to half of the emergencies that EMSA does and then arrive onscene first only part of those times.
TFD is great and as someone said earlier many of thier medics work for EMSA part time. That is great, but as I should point out, only a few actually work as a medic regularly or ever have. Many of them have often been heard saying that they are relieved when EMSA arrives to take over patient care. They are very unsure of themselves and thier skills.
The 11 million dollars over 5 years....Way off.
The numbers are actually going to come out millions of dollars over EMSA to have TFD do the job and not have the same response times. This has been proven by TFD. I agree that the service should be questioned from time to time. But right now the best choice seems to be EMSA.
I hope I did not seem to forward but the facts should be mentioned. I would be glad to answer any other questions.
When you say "many of them are relieved when EMSA arrives..." are you referring to TFD paramedics or EMT/first responders?
The EMT/fr would surely be relieved to have a paramedic show up, especially on cardiac runs.
As far as being unsure of themselves, what would happen if you told a paramedic to crawl to the back of a burning house and find the patient in total blindness?
The point is TFD fights fires & EMSA does EMS. Each does a great job. It is far more efficient to have specialized organizations, rather than a "jack of all trades" approach.
Now that OKC stuck with EMSA, the chances of Tulsa kicking EMSA out went way down.
Which is good, because the system works fine.
At the last count, 64% of Tulsa Police officers live outside the Tulsa city limits.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
At the last count, 64% of Tulsa Police officers live outside the Tulsa city limits.
Does the city or FOP provide that data?
quote:
Originally posted by shadows
All the talk about the cost of none emergency transfer between is published as amounting to 60% of the calls, involving three for profit operations. In a recent none emergency transfer between local hospitals the bill was $777.00. Lets take a long look at the proposal of the TFD who says they can save us millions where EMSA wants over a million subsidy. If it is a none emergency just call a cab and it will save ever one money. I am sure the TFD has a van to transport with.
I do nto disagree that we should look at a proposal when we are told it will save the city millions. I can tell you that the numbers are not true and will be proven as in OKC. As far as calling a cab for what I can only assume you mean to be "non" emerency "transfers", Many of these people cannot even stand or sit upright let alone sit in a wheelchair. If you mean minor emergency "transports", the last I heard is that anyone requesting transport in an ambulance to a local ER could not be told no and to take a cab. I believe that is a city ordinance given to EMSA.
Many people also believe that they would be paying tax dollars and therefore would not get a bill from TFD for ambulance service. This is alos not true. In fact TFD has hired a billing company in not only another city but another state to bll the citizens of Tulsa for service.
When it all said and done we will all see that TFD would require much more money and not be as efficient.
quote:
Originally posted by protulsa
quote:
Originally posted by Jason
Okay here it is... I am new to this forum but I have read all of your recent posts. I apprieciate the tone that you are all taking. It sounds as though you are simply concerned about the EMS service to tulsa. I am a Paramedic with considerable knowledge of this situation.
First, EMSA is a public trust of the City of Tulsa and does own almost all of the rolling stock and nonperishable equipment. Paramedics plus is contracted by EMSA to provide the service ti the city. EMSA's job is to find a the best and most cost effective service. EMSA is basically the oversite to Paramedics plus. It has been that way for many many years.
As far as TFD arriving first most of the time....That is completely wrong. I will find hard numbers but they basically respond to half of the emergencies that EMSA does and then arrive onscene first only part of those times.
TFD is great and as someone said earlier many of thier medics work for EMSA part time. That is great, but as I should point out, only a few actually work as a medic regularly or ever have. Many of them have often been heard saying that they are relieved when EMSA arrives to take over patient care. They are very unsure of themselves and thier skills.
The 11 million dollars over 5 years....Way off.
The numbers are actually going to come out millions of dollars over EMSA to have TFD do the job and not have the same response times. This has been proven by TFD. I agree that the service should be questioned from time to time. But right now the best choice seems to be EMSA.
I hope I did not seem to forward but the facts should be mentioned. I would be glad to answer any other questions.
When you say "many of them are relieved when EMSA arrives..." are you referring to TFD paramedics or EMT/first responders?
The EMT/fr would surely be relieved to have a paramedic show up, especially on cardiac runs.
As far as being unsure of themselves, what would happen if you told a paramedic to crawl to the back of a burning house and find the patient in total blindness?
The point is TFD fights fires & EMSA does EMS. Each does a great job. It is far more efficient to have specialized organizations, rather than a "jack of all trades" approach.
Now that OKC stuck with EMSA, the chances of Tulsa kicking EMSA out went way down.
Which is good, because the system works fine.
I think you and I are thinking exactly the same. I think our fire dept is great and I sure dont want to crawl around in a burning building.
BA seems to do well with the FD running the ambulance service.
But then again, they don't have either the size, or the body politic that Tulsa has to deal with either.
quote:
Originally posted by TeeDub
BA seems to do well with the FD running the ambulance service.
But then again, they don't have either the size, or the body politic that Tulsa has to deal with either.
Mod, why are you CENSORING posts delving into the political considerations of EMSA v. TFD?
Are you narrow-minded or are you just being a dude-bag? Go ahead. STOP me.
EMSA is only a third party in the city bureaucracies. The city does not use the manpower of the city but looks other places to run it's bureaucracies. There is a cloud on which city the mayor is from.
The city of Broken Arrow may or may not have an ambulance service as the hospitals in their city call ambulances from other cities. Why?
The changes of that fellow who freed Iraqi also worked over Medicare where if it would have gone broke in 17 years, it now has awaken all those who increased medical cost over 400% wanting even a bigger cut of the pie. The insurance companies are relying on the new changes because the average person cannot understand what in the hell they are talking about. EMSA is not going to turn loose their hold on the peoples check book of open signed checks
quote:
Originally posted by shadows
EMSA is not going to turn loose their hold on the peoples check book of open signed checks
I am not really sure what you mean by this last statement. I can only assume that ou are not pro-EMSA. I wonder if you have any knowledge at all about what the costs really are when referring to EMSA. Since you speak so freely I again can only assume that you are aware that EMSA, even with a greater subsidy, is one of the lowest subsidised EMS systems in the nation. All while maintaining one of the top 5 cardiac arrest save rates in the nation. The check book is far from open to EMSA.
It will be show very soon that EMSA is the wise choice for the emergenc healthcare and the financial well being of the city. I can only hope that those who make these decisions do not let their emotions get the better of them. OUr system works great as is. TFD and EMSA work very well together and should be left alone.
Tulsa Mayor Kathy Taylor has announced that the EMSA trust has been renewed.
I think that is a wise decision. Both EMSA and the Tulsa Fire department are doing good work. I thought it would be hard to make a drastic change when everything was working smoothly.
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
I think that is a wise decision. Both EMSA and the Tulsa Fire department are doing good work. I thought it would be hard to make a drastic change when everything was working smoothly.
Mike your reading all her lines for her...
EMSA (//%22http://www.tulsaworld.com/NewsStory.asp?ID=070112_Ne_A1_Tulsa7813%22)
I had no idea what she was going to do on this topic. I have many friends on the fire department and work with them often. I was kinding of rooting for them because I know how thorough and professional they are.
I only know the top guy and the PR lady at EMSA. I like and respect them both.
I asked myself, what what I do? My answer was that this was the wrong time to make a change of this magnitude. The system is working fine.
I think the Mayor made a wise decision.
I also didn't know until this morning that there would have been a two- or three-year transition period in which both EMSA and the fire department would have been answering ambulance calls. The mayor said the city simply didn't have the money for such an expensive transition.
Based on that and other factors RM mentioned, I agree that she made the right call.
Sorry I have been misinformed. I was lead to believe that EMSA was another of the letterhead bureaucracies which Tulsa is famous for. I was lead to believe that the rolling stock belong and was paid for by the citizens of Tulsa. That the paramedics are furnished by a company on the contract basis.
The city through the FD could continue the same system as the letterhead bureaucracy that is now operating it is using. Being it is a desk corporation then one would assume that it is protected from the open records codes and statutes.
Course if we were to make the change then we would have to buy possibility three new desks.
An informed public has been known as a rebellious public thus it becomes where the people paying the total cost of maintaining governmental practices are kept uninformed.
We are winning the war in Iraqi!
TFD
I think the worst assumption in this thread that TFD would be using their fire trucks as response.
They would be using the same ambulances as EMSA is currently using...
-They would have better response times. This should be the biggest factor, period.
-You would be using one vehicle as opposed to two, this saves money.
-You have a better trained fire department.
I have no idea why EMSA is needed, and I scanned this how thread and still disagree. I think you all are just used to having EMSA around.
How would the FD laundry campaign funds at election times?
Is this another trash burner that the public paid for and the operators sold it to a third party?
Fool them once, fool them twice, fool them three times,......................
quote:
Originally posted by deinstein
I think the worst assumption in this thread that TFD would be using their fire trucks as response.
But wouldn't they?
quote:
They would be using the same ambulances as EMSA is currently using...
Probably true.
quote:
-They would have better response times. This should be the biggest factor, period.
1) I don't know about you, but my biggest factor is patient care. I don't care if you can get to me in seconds if you can't save my life.
2) There is very little evidence that can support a station-based system will have better response times than our current system status management (SSM). Now this is assuming TFD wouldn't use SSM as a method of situating trucks around town.
quote:
-You would be using one vehicle as opposed to two, this saves money.
No necessarily true. I believe most fire based EMS systems still send an engine on higher acuity calls, same as TFD does now.
quote:
-You have a better trained fire department.
True, but TFD is working on getting more paramedics. The other side to this is for TFD to staff enough paramedics to cover a city of this size adequately, they would need roughly 105-135 (this was stated by TFD). We currently have about 55 paramedics at EMSA and we have trouble keeping up with demand. Now take into account all of the potential paramedics that either couldn't or wouldn't join a fire department based service. I'm not sure where you are going to find over 100 paramedics that are able to pass a fire department's requirements. Now you have the option of making a fire-based ambulance with non-sworn personnel, but that's basically what we have. It's no secret that there's a nation-wide shorted of paramedics.
quote:
I have no idea why EMSA is needed, and I scanned this how thread and still disagree. I think you all are just used to having EMSA around.
EMSA is not just another EMS service. EMSA is one of the best, well-known services in the country and is in the top five for services with the highest rate of cardiac arrest saves. EMSA is also one of the cheapest EMS services in the nation since it is a private company and bills patients and not tax-payers for the bulk of the operational cost.
Let me ask you this: Do you think that if TFD took over the ambulance that your tax dollars are going to pay for your ambulance ride? Not in your life. TFD claimed they would have a better collection rate from MediCare/MediCaid (I assume this means they are going to bill). I'm also not sure how likely that is, being EMSA employees one of the top, nationally awarded insurance collectors in the nation.
Now I'm not saying fire based EMS is a bad thing. It works great in towns like Owasso and Broken Arrow. But with the call volume with a city the size of Tulsa, it requires a lot of work to keep up with the calls, yet still provide a service that's cost effective and has the quality anyone should expect. I can't see how the fire department, having to hire more people (double the number of EMSA paramedics) to staff ambulances can be cheaper. Plus there's the cost of vehicle maintainence, supplies, shift length, etc... EMSA pays for all of that themselves. And if you think a $1.9 millon subsidy is a lot, look at what other services subsidize from their city (either fire-based or private EMS). You're looking at figures in the range of 10 to 30
times as much for a service equal to or lesser than EMSA.
Just some food for thought.
quote:
Originally posted by shadows
How would the FD laundry campaign funds at election times?
Is this another trash burner that the public paid for and the operators sold it to a third party?
Fool them once, fool them twice, fool them three times,......................
Or sometimes just a paranoid fool.
Since the mid 1970's EMsa has provided top notch service for costs that are among the cheapest in the nation. Relax and know that EMSA is there when you need them.
YOu really believe that TFD would have been a better option for the city? Here are some facts for your "assumptions".
The city does own the bulk of the rolling stock that EMSA has. However not all of it. The contractor Paramedics Plus does own a portion of the vehicles and equipment. These things were purchased by Paramedics Plus to help the city when money was tight.
As far as not using fire trucks to respond to emergencies...How is 1 ambulance in a station going to manage multiple calls alone? TFD had no plans that would allow a second abulance to move around to cover a busy area. So the truth of things is that fire trucks would be responding more.
Fast response times are very imporant. However you are misinformed if you believe that TFD's responses are faster than EMSA's. You do realize that TFD only responds to about half as many emergency calls and then is only there part of those times before EMSA. These are proven numbers. Paramedics plus is obligated by contract to respond to all calls within 8 min and 59 seconds with a 90% efficiency. And it is done. TFD used their plans to demonstrate whether they could do this....THEY FAILED. consistantly. They then increased the number of thruck they would use and.....THEY FAILED. THey had to increase their numbers by approx 25% to even get close and then it was only sometimes.
Lets talk about training. TFD uses EMSA's training dept to assist with their traing because they do not have the capability to do it on their own. TFD may be able to put out a fire better than some of EMSA's paramedics but EMSA would put their medics up against any others in the nation and are confident that they could not be matched by many.
Yo usay you scanned this thread and was still not convinced? Well fortunatley for the citizens of Tulsa it was not your decision. EMSA has once again come out the best choice for Tulsa and OKC.
By the way... You seem like a conspiracy guy...Do not believe the nonsense regarding the reasons for keeping EMSA. TFD was millions of dollars over their claimed numbers. Infact they were millions over what EMSA will be needing for the next 5 years.
EMSA is liken to the Tulsa Trash Burner. They hire and are furnished paramedics through a quasi union of Paramedics Plus (who are to furnish trained personnel) and use the transportation bought and paid for by the taxpayers of Tulsa. There was no intend to use the FD to have a fireman play the part of a nurse. Being I was a resident of Tulsa for fifty years before EMSA came on the scene and before Medicare overcharged billing, now is time for the city to survive and in the future will be on cost efficient operations. Heaven Forbid!
It is not my ideal situation to see the present duplication of services in a city that is rapidly becoming over taxed and the suburbs are reaping the spoils as the money goes with them. Neither has there ever been any intent to converter fire trucks to ambulances that I can recall.
I would agree that the citzens of Tulsa are overtaxed. My point is simply that the FD takin the EMS service would have caused a terrible decline in the care of those citizens who need it. If you were to ask the firefighters themselves, without their UNION or chiefs present, I know that most would say that it would have been bad to move the EMS care to them.
As far as a "quasi union". I truly can not understand what it is you are saying. Paramedics Plus does not in any way resemble a union. It is a company who provides not only trained personel but manages and operates all prehospital emergency medical care for the city. OKC paramedics are infact union and have been longer than Paramedics plus has existed. Tulsa medics have repeatedly refused to have a union. The FD, as I am sure you know, Does have a union and have held the city "hostage" more than once for more money. I promise you that keeping EMSA has saved money but more importantly, lives.
Why don't we try and save money somewhere else like city transportation. How many city employees drive city cars? How many Fire chiefs take home fire dept vehicles? How many police take home their cars? How many attractions has passed Tulsa to go to other communities because narrow minded people are afraid to spend money for the city to grow? Tulsa has many problems. EMSA is far from one of them.
By the way....The outlying communities do pay a subsidy for EMSA's services. And I never said anything about converting fire trucks to ambulances either. I believe the Fire dept should not respond to any health emergencies. EMSA should be doing their own first response.
I think the big problem is that we as Americans see Firefighters as Americas heroes. Don't get me wrong, they are. However, they are not all powerful. How many Paramedics died on 9/11? more than a dozen. Not to mention the hundreds who assisted that day in New York and at the Pentagon. No one ever mentions them. Why is that? Paramedics are allowed by law to provide more care than most RN's and yet they make sometimes less than half the money. Paramedics are required ever 2 years to renew their licenses by providing proof of more than 50 hours of training. RN's have to send a check and a signed application with no proof of continuing education training.
Paramedics save lives more often than any firefighter anywhere. In some of the worst conditions. All without complaint. They do ask for a little respect. Something which even the fire dept gives them. Now if only the narrow, close, minded public, who knows very little of what they are talking about would give some respect.
I suppose I am one of those who questions the need for all the highly educated paramedics making 60% of the runs on non emergence transfers. The city transportation system once provided a limited transfer costing only a dollar or so not in the hundreds of dollars.
I am also familiar with companies that furnish medical personnel on daily or weekly or monthly basis. In the beginning the unions were obligated to furnish by their contracts the trained workers (I realize worker is a nasty word) to employers. Now such unions of public employees are not obligated to furnish any training services. The plumbers, pipefiters, ironworkers, boilermakers, electricians and others had their own training programs.
I have a copy in the files of the $50,000 dollar study on how to more efficiently operate the city. It's conclusion was we have too many chiefs and not enough Indians. We solved that by increasing the budget and hiring more Indians. The copies of this survey I am sure was what helped to emit the gases that forced the trash burner to close or be repaired.
You and do agree on a few things. Most of the nonemergency transfers could be done by a lesser trained and more cost efficient entity. Right now it is on the contract Paramedics plus has with the city that they are done by them. Now some of the transfers need continued care during transport.
EMSA/Paramedics Plus has made it the policy to provide continued training and continued education to make their medics the best. This info is available to those who ask. Paramedics and EMT's are required by the State dept of health to provide proof of training every 2 years to renew licenses. I do understand your point though.
EMSA has had the same "chief" since its inception the only thing that has chnaged is the contractors. Every 5 years the EMS service for Tulsa is up for review and for potential bids. But every month a budget is turned into the city for review to make sure the money is not being spent in the wrong way. EMSA has not asked for an increase insubsidy for many years because the excess funds that had been generated before the insurance companies began cutting costs were bieng used to support EMSA. Paramedics Plus paid back to EMSA last year almost a million dollars in excess profits. As well as purchased several ambulances so EMSA would not have too.
I understand that sometimes the wrong people are making the decisionss in Tulsa and money is not being used as it should, but this is not one of those areas.
I can understand the failure for an average person to be aware of where the budget money winds up. Hundreds of pages composed by several little kingdoms to spend one half a billon dollars of the taxpayers money. And citizen can protest the budget in an appearance before the councilors. You are given 5 minutes to go through 300 pages of requests for the distribution of $500,000,000 dollars, Just divided the approximately 375,000 residents and get the cost per child though adults. Or we have approximately 150,000 city water meters which can be used to obtain the average cost.
The pensions will become another item to be considered as more employees are retiring early from one job and re-dipping into the proposed new budgets.
When you do a little arithmetic and you say Paramedic Plus reimbursed the city a million dollars just to be good buddies, them it raises a question if they have overcharged the citizens through a private corporation. They are shore congenial buying the rolling stock from their funds when the city budget provides them,
The budget should be in the libraries by now. EMSA is by no means a hospital nor a operating room but it's intent as sold by the Doctor's wife to the public was for transportation. In cases of cardiac arrest, in most cases if conformed, the 8 minute response time is very critical and in most instants fatal.
The FD's are assigned to districts to provide the earliest response. Lets us turn the FD over to EMSA and reduce the double dipping.
I was trying to be polite and come to an agreement between you and I but bow you are being an donkey. It is no secrest that Paramedics Plus is a for profit company. However they have committed to limiting, by contract< the amount of profit they can make. Everything else goes back to the city. That is pretty congenial. The cities budget is all screwed up. Again not a secret. They bought the new equipment because the city did not have the excess money to do it. How is that a bad thing? I told you the required response times, not the average response time of just over 5 minutes. The fire stations are strategically placed? Then why is it that EMSA arrives half or more times before them? It is a proven misconception that TFD always arrives before EMSA.
So, using your math, an increase of $10.27 per person per year in Tulsa, is what it would take to fund EMSA each for the next 5 years. I an not sure but that sounds like a pretty sweet deal. Especially when, using the same math, TFD running EMS would be more like $37.33 plus pensions. EMSA is again the way to go. Thanks for proving my argument again.
I am not sure that in the topic discussed that it is not with a shill. Your arithmetic could be improved with a $3.00 hand calculator. We can achieve the ultimate solution when the 50 some thousand workers, living in Tulsa, that are employed in the city of Tulsa, thousands as direct employees of the city and the 100 thousand workers who drive into the city each day, from the suburbs, are taxed enough to pay for the infrastructure and upkeep of our little kingdoms.
It is not in search of fore-sight but of hind-sight to save a society from destroying it's self. Having sat through the budget planning meetings. I find the system beyond rational think when statements are made as " If there is a surplus of funds needed it can be transferred into other departments during the budget year." (Same is indicated in your post)
A person just walking into the office who had came from one of the little kingdoms offices. Without any mention of pending answers he made the statement that he had suggest a way for the kingdom to save money. He said he was told " If we don't spend all our budgeted money they are required to reduce our next year budget by the amount we save on our present allotment".
Lets save the city from the duplications and double-dipping. Consolidate the little kingdoms and quit the pie-in-the-sky request for the working poor's money that they need for them to survive,
Shadows...why do you hate city government so much?
Every post you make has included attacks on the city and anyone associated with them. Your posts have been this way no matter who was in power.
Tell us the story.
It is not my intent to find fault in government but it only to make available the inequities that exist. History list a long line of governments that fail the citizens. The truth to some people becomes offensive. Expressive it maybe offensive to those who spend their lives smelling the roses in the city halls on the poor working people's money, while we have the homeless and starving children as we look the other way. Those people we moved out of tent city sure were not there by their choice.
Yes we are sending our youth to their deaths to reinstall a government that was removed by force and now we are using force to reinstall that government in Iraq at a great loss of human life.
Is there some reason that the people should not be told of how their government reacts, local, state and national as they stand in line for donated food at the churches?
Tell us why they should not be told of the double dipping, high cost of duplicated department heads, and over budgeted divisions of all governments. Tell us why the average person should not know that when city employees retire from one city job with a penson off times they get another salaried city job?
I only seek for the truth to be known. I am not aware that the truth ever hurt but allows everyone to choose their own direction of travel.
I believe it your intent to find fault in our goernment. While I agree it is far from perfect, I also believe that sometimes things are not as black and white as you see them. I belive that EMSA being kept the way it is was a good thing. I hope that you will see that someday. However, I do belive that many of your points are valid. Iraq is a stupid, now, pointless venture that is the work of a mad man. I am an Iraq war vet. I spent 11 1/2 months outside of Fallujah and Ramadi. I have seen the loss of lives that were there only for the gain of corporation and those attatched to them. I have also seen the good that is never shown on your television. The people who could have a chance at a free life like you have. If only our "leaders" would be truly concerned about it. It is no secret that the leaders of our country are often only in government for their own gain.
By the way my calculator cost $19.95. [8D]
I currently do work for 12 governments (I have a nightmare job). There are exceptions, but generally every person I know who works for the city, the county, the state and the federal government are dedicated, committed, underpaid and under-appreciated for their work.
The trash guys want to pick up your trash, the water guys work hard making sure our water is safe and always there when you turn the faucet, the fire-fighters I know would risk their life over and over again for any of us and the budget people to the person answering the phone at city hall do their job almost perfect every work day of the year.
I have seen problems and spent a short portion of my life focusing on the few bad ones that didn't fulfill the public trust. But I know of so many more that work so hard that I get offended for them when "shadows" throws out innuendo attacking government workers.
I have also followed local government longer than most of you. As a teenager, my mother was the city hall beat reporter for the Tulsa World. My wife and I met when she had the same beat for the Tulsa Tribune.
I remember "shadows" from all those years ago. He has always been this way and just wants to believe that it is all a conspiracy to tax the poor so certain government officials get rich.
I had a conversation last night with two of our city councilors about how we fund needed work for EMSA and other safety programs. Both councilors said that the last thing they wanted to do is to raise utility rates because of the impact on our citizens, especially the elderly ones like "shadows". If he only knew how much they cared about him and everyone else in his situation, I think he would sing a different tune.
Somewhere I get the idea we are not taking about the same city but seems to be a story of "The tale of two cities". When one hangs their hat in the city hall and takes a deep breath of the pink gases there they see a rose colored world that many of the working poor paying the bills, are too hungry or cold to see. I believe there is a utility raise coming already on the books. Course some of the councilor's may not be aware of it as they only say "yes" to all proposals and "is my check ready"
I could cite incidents that I have encountered over the decades when cows grazed at Third and Lewis. There is the wide street where the streetcars returned back down town nearby. I have seen many incidents whereas there have been foolish operation where employees were told to go hide until they were needed or time to go home. But the city grew and most of all the bureaucracies grew twice as fast. EMSA is only one operation that combining it with other operations and using the standby personnel for muscle power could save dollars to make sure that no child went to bed cold and hungry. Few can remember or does not want to remember when the city did not need to collect sales taxes to operate on. But it is understandable that if there is a way to collect more money there is always a way to form a bureaucracy to make the regressive tax on the poor justified.
Tax the poor and give it to the rich is the logo we have come to. The spread between the over salaried non-productive department heads and the productive workers is a widening gap which we should address before we face another riot or a street to street civil war like is happening in Bagdad.
I am sorry I do not believe everything I write but I lay it face up on the table and hope some who might read it will heed the storm clouds that are forming. I would like to write of some of the incidents that have been a total waste of the citizens tax money but if I did all this would be deleted from the board. It may be anyway.
If you paid $19 dollars for your calculator you should have waited and got your change.[:D][:D][:D][:D] lol
<shadows wrote:
I am sorry I do not believe everything I write but I lay it face up on the table and hope some who might read it will heed the storm clouds that are forming.
<end clip>
If you do not believe in everything you write, then you are a liar or a propagandist, neither of which I particularly like.
Say what you mean, dammit.
And quit cloaking everything in tortured metaphors and purple prose. If you're going to persuade people, use something that remotely resembles plain speaking.
Sorry I cannot disagree with you more. We are a nation of liars. The prez' lies to us. The senate lies to us. The repres' lie to us. The local politicians that claim they represent the people. lie to us. The attorney before the court that defends a client that knows is guilty, lies to the court and the people. The person who serves on city boards that says they have no inherent interest and will serve without compensation could be lying to the people. The time for taxes are again due and there are many that will lie on their forms. When city employees claim they need to retire but take another job could be lying to the people as they are only after double dipping in the till.
When I try to point out in alarm that the mighty Athens and Rome fell in the same trash heap, as history records, could I be lying?
When it is written that every knee will bow and every tongue will confess, was that lying?
Time to wake up because the alarm has gone off three times already.
So if you admit that you lie, why should we bother taking you seriously?
Considering that the voters tossed out a bunch of politicians in Washington because of their corruption and lying, I think they are more aware of the consequences. Sorry, I don't buy the cynical "everyone is liars" baloney.
And if you do, why are you bothering to speak up on this forum?
If you can't be truthful, go back to being silent. You'll do the country less damage that way.
It is very sad that we do live in a time where it seems as though all politicians are only representing themselves. I believe that some are in it for our intrests. The problem with shadows is that he has lost all hope that our government may actually do something in the best interest of the people. It is a shame really. It is our responsibility though to question our leaders. If we don't then we will be taken advantage of. I commend Shadows for keeping an eye on things butI would caution that not everything in our government is bad. Also that some "beauracracies" (to use his word) or necessary. It is a method of checks and balances.
I wonder, does he even believe what he says or is he just trying to get us all worked up?
Quoted from the old 66 route.
shadows is that he has lost all hope that our government may actually do something in the best interest of the people. It is a shame really.
I suppose you are going to add "all the people" in your prayers.