Hillary Clinton Holds Up AIDS Renewal Bill

[politmuse1]

Thanks for nothing, Hillary. Lieberman must love you.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/22/AR2006082201161.html?referrer=email&referrer=email&referrer=email

[11cents]

1. How dreadful!

Hillary doesn't want any AIDS funding AT ALL! and she wants everyone with AIDS to DIE!!!!

Well, no. She's apparently holding it up because it cuts funding to New York, the state she represents in the United States Senate.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ronnykmarshall]

8. Maybe you should READ the article

I swear these Hillary bashers are no better than freepers.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ronnykmarshall]

12. Sounds like a broken record.

[AZBlue]

20. No better than?

In my opinion, "equal to"...or "the same as"....maybe just remove the words "no better than" from your statement?

I love how they've taken a great move in support of those with AIDS and the hardest hit areas and used it to create YET another Hillary-bashing thread!

[Hav]

23. .

Because you would probably get your post deleted if you wrote that they apparently are *cough* with a certain agenda.
I have to admit that some posts here are really suspicious.

[AZBlue]

28. Yeah, and I see why. And I don't want that changed.

As much as I would like to call some of these folks out, it would just add to the bickering and heated discussions that already occur!

Nonetheless, I do wish there was a way to weed those folks out - the ones who obviously are wolves in sheep's clothing, so to speak.

[paulk]

30. no better than?

;-)

[cherokeeprogressive]

39. I read it

"On the other hand, Christopher M. Hamlin, chaplain for an outpatient clinic at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, favors the new formula. "The money needs to follow the virus," he said. "More funds need to be directed to the part of the community that has seen the numbers increase so much, especially rural communities."

Christopher M. Hamlin, Chaplain for an outpatiend clinic at the University of Alabama, Birmingham; Basher, or Freeper?

"Asked why Clinton might countenance lower funding for Southern and rural states, Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, the nation's largest community-based HIV/AIDS medical provider, said, "I don't think she expects to carry the South."

Michael Weinstein, President of the Aids Healthcare Foundation; Basher, or Freeper?

What it sounds like to me is that she's ensuring her victories in the states with the largest amount of electoral votes SHOULD (that's a laugher) she decide to run for the office of President of the United States.

[itcfish]

45. You are Right

I think people should read the article before convicting Hillary. Wow "Kill Hill" seems to be the thing around here.

[JackBeck]

3. You have to understand, though,

that the Ryan White money will be distributed the same way that Homeland Security funds were distributed. As a rough, exaggerated example: NY will get $1 per HIV/AIDS infected person, while Wyoming will get $50 per HIV/AIDS infected person.

[LynneSin]

17. Wow, seeing that makes me realize Hillary is doing a good thing

I'm not trying to dis Wyoming, but the problem is greater in the major urban areas and should be distributed accordingly. I think the fairest thing (although a bit dire sounding) assign a value of $$XX/person with Aids and distribute the money that way. Then we'll know that the larger urban areas will get the money they need to combat the problem.

Thanks for pointing this out. Obviously some people just read headlines and refuse to learn the truth or perhaps they're just posters from Wyoming

:shrug:

[JackBeck]

19. The small, non-profit agency I work for in NYC

got $330,000 cut from the Ryan White Care Act, and it had nothing to do with the renewal. We just flat out got written out of the contract on a local level.

When I recently spoke to a woman from the Dept. of Health, she explained how even though the Ryan White Care Act most likely will be renewed, there will be SERIOUS cuts for NYC and other major metropolitan areas where the money is desperately needed.

I go out in the field all the time and go to agencies that are barely hanging on by a thread. I can't imagine what's about to happen in this City.

It's ashame that the OP had no clue what this article is actually about.

[LynneSin]

22. Tell everyone to move to Wyoming

Hopefully then they'll be able to get the treatment they need and really piss off the braindead repukes living there.

I know Hillary isn't the favorite around here but when she does something good we should we should post accordingly.

[Hav]

24. "It's ashame that the OP had no clue what this article is actually about."

The headline of the article was "Sen. Clinton Delays AIDS Law's Renewal, Citing Cut in N.Y. Funds".

[JackBeck]

25. So not only did the OP clearly not read the article,

the OP likes to edit headlines, as well. I'm sure it was just an honest mistake. :eyes:

[LynneSin]

26. It's easier to use it as an excuse to bash Hillary, just like

...it's easier for WashPost to make it out like it's some campaign tactic. It's simple, the money should be divided based on the number of people affected with AIDs in that given state. That way everyone gets helped equally and not based on how they voted overall in the last election

[karynnj]

32. Or more simply segment those with HIV or AIDS

into a small number of categories - even 2 would help; those with AIDS and those who are HIV positive, but without AIDS at this point. Then estimate a cost for each group. Then the monery could be allocated versus the sum of (cost for category) times (the number in the category).

I agree that there is a need to be forward looking into where AIDS will be in a year and have resources allocated to help people in areas likely to have high incidence within a few years.

BUT, Hillary is right the cities need the most money - and they pay more in taxes than they get anyway.

[JackBeck]

35. Kind of.

First off, do you know the difference between HIV and AIDS? HIV is a virus that may lead to an AIDS diagnosis. One of three things must occur for an AIDS diagnosis: 1) CD4/T-cell count (the immune cells that HIV uses to reproduce, leading to their death) drops below 200; 2) CD4% drops below 14%; or 3) one or more opportunistic infections.

An AIDS diagnosis came into play in 1991 in order for our government to: 1) track how many people go from an HIV diagnosis to an AIDS diagnosis and 2) for benefits. Once you get an AIDS diagnosis you get a whole slew of different benefits. Once you have an AIDS diagnosis, you keep that diagnosis even if your CD4 count goes back above 200, or CD4% goes back above 14%, or you rid yourself of an opportunistic infection. And the reason is primarily so you can keep your benefits.

Each state already tracks those who have HIV and those who have an AIDS diagnosis. Now, if they use these numbers to figure allocation of monies, I don't know. But I can tell you that benefits aside, just because you have an AIDS diagnosis doesn't automatically mean you are sick. The media does a great job of instilling fear in people by misusing the word "AIDS" all the time.

[karynnj]

41. Thanks - although I new HIV was the virus that

causes AIDS and that there was often a period where the virus was latent, I didn't know the benefits and - assumed that AIDS meant you were sick.

[TayTay]

4. That's a totally misleading headline

I cry bullshit on it. Sen. Clinton is holding the bill up because of moral reasons; the bill cuts funding for people with Aids in her State.

Why are you in favor of cutting AIDS money to New Yorkers in need. Do you find that a moral action that should be rewarded with a quick vote in the Senate?

[ronnykmarshall]

6. Hillary bashers don't care.

If it fuels the flames ..... so be it!

[rodeodance]

13. so many Hil bashers here that Repugs are not needed.

[NYCGirl]

7. Looks like the OP is trying to stir up some shit. NT

[ronnykmarshall]

10. What else is new?

[noonwitch]

18. The bill is still in the House, so she is not holding it up at all

She's voicing objections before, probably in hopes of resolving it more quickly.

Also, she is the senator from NY, so it is her job to represent NY's interests.

[bahrbearian]

5. Is it because she must prepare of her Taisini Debate?

[ronnykmarshall]

9. Nice try ....

this nothing but flame bait.

[11cents]

14. Counterproductive to your own aims, too.

I don't want Hillary to run for President and am not a fan of hers in general, but this topic's title and premise is so obviously deceptive that here I am, with others, defending her. What have you accomplished, politmuse1?

[William769]

15. Since this Bill affects me personally.

I just want to say Thank you Hillary Clinton.

Some people's pure hatred here of her, can't see the forest because of the trees. What a fucking shame.

[ronnykmarshall]

16. I'm starting to think that ...

they are really ...... you know?

[LynneSin]

21. I can't understand why New York needs all that AIDs money....

http://www.statehealthfacts.org/cgi-bin/healthfacts.cgi?action=compare&category=Health+Status&link_category=HIV%2fAIDS&link_subcategory=Cumulative+AIDS+Cases&link_topic=Cumulative+AIDS+Cases+All+Ages

Who can blame her, even Schumer is behind her. You go Hillary!

[Jed Dilligan]

27. Ghastly picture

Apparently the WP editors aren't fond of Hillary either!

[Poetmnwj28_F_M]

29. I have lurked on DU for months and for once someone said it

I may get Flamed on This But I'm Kinda New to Posting But have Lurked so Long I feel Like Like I've Been posting Forever,
I have told Told My Husband that I was Hesitant to Converse with Folks on here Because so many jump The Gun... I am a Liberal on Most but I hate it when some PEOPLe fail to do what they say the other side does and simply follows along like SHEEP! I' read all of the Article before making my opinion and not just the headline and then formed my somewhat Educated and medically limited but thought out opinion and thought that Hillary was very smart in her choice of wanting the measure re-thought for the division of funds. It made no sense for how it originally was before. Whether it was Blue state or Red state.. People Were going To be Missing the HEALTHCARE they needed do to the cuts.
Just my Humble Opinion!
From A Newcoming Poster but Longtime Lurker,
Poet

[LynneSin]

31. As a longtime poster since back in 2001 I have this to say to you

Damn Straight!!!

Thanks for posting that, I thought the same thing too when I first read the headline and then I went and read the article and realized that New York state was about to be screwed AGAIN if this bill was to pass. That and other large states with major urban areas. I hope that the other democratic senators step in and support her in this fight because it will affect many of their states too including California, Illinois and Michigan

Welcome to DU :hi: Don't be such a stranger!!!

[AtomicKitten]

38. welcome

oh wise one, and don't be a stranger. :)

[ruggerson]

33. I trust the gay men's health crisis far more than I trust you

and they agree with Hillary.

[AtomicKitten]

34. California, New York, Illinois, and Florida

are the most populated states. It doesn't make sense to cut funding to them. Hillary's stance sounds reasonable to me.

Keep in mind if Hillary farts, it will be construed as looking toward 2008.

[JackBeck]

36. God! I love how most people actually do some research around here.

Instead of just plopping down half a headline and making some grand, divisive statement.

:yourock: :headbang:

[AtomicKitten]

37. The MSM is worse than useless,

they are going to annihilate the Dem contenders and it is incumbent upon us to use our heads and stop them in their tracks.

Unless, of course, one just hates the victim of their bias in which case they're riding the jihad train anyway and it isn't stopping at the station of truth and reason. :)

[SaveElmer]

40. Doing what she was elected to do...

Watching out for her constituents...

[JI7]

42. where did the OP go

[benny05]

43. Without looking at the bill and formula

I cannot tell if she is right or wrong.

But I find it ironic considering the International Aids conference recently in Canada, and Bill was one of the keynotes.

[dsc]

44. The OP is very misleading to say the least

but for those who can't see why rural states might actually need new funding under this act think about some of the following. Rural doctors often are both overworked and not very up to date on AIDS. Rural hospitals virtually never are up to date on AIDS. In many rural areas the percentage of AIDS suffers can be fairly high due to the very small subset of people who engage in the behaviors that often lead to AIDS. My state gets very short changed currently and it shows. We have the lowest income threshold for getting free AIDS drugs in the entire nation. Without seeing the formula I can't tell if the revisions went too far or not but the notion that rural states shouldn't be getting these funds is totally without merit.