The Dangers of Government Healthcare: Reagan Warned Us

http://www.youtube.com/user/SueMyrickNC09#p/u/0/O55-LBSdbYo

90 Seconds to Government Run Healthcare

http://www.redstate.com/aarongardner/2010/03/18/90-seconds-to-govt-run-healthcare/

Hands Off My Healthcare

This is an ultrasound of my little girl, who is due on March 26th. Notice her hand. Not only is she saying hands off my healthcare, she specifically is saying: "Don't use federal healthcare dollars to fund abortion! "

Repost of John Hood's Excellent Health Care Rebuttal

John Hood's Daily Journal
I Will Not Comply
By John Hood

March 16, 2010

RALEIGH – I’ve been arguing the case against ObamaCare for more than a year. I’ve argued that it will raise costs, reduce freedom, and federalize the funding and regulation of a sixth of the nation’s economy. I’ve also pointed out that it is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of why medical costs are rising, and would destroy the only trend working against health care inflation – the rise of consumer-driven health care.

But now, I’ve lost my passion for continuing the debate. I’ve lost my motivation to identify the bill’s flaws and failures. I’ve even lost my anger at the arrogance of Washington politicians who think they know best how to manage my medical care and rearrange my personal finances.

Why? Because it’s becoming clear to me that I and other critics of ObamaCare have already won the intellectual battle. We’ve already succeeded in informing the public about the particulars of the bill, and the public now strongly opposes ObamaCare. The more President Obama shouts into his microphone, the more the public comes to oppose his plan. There is no conceivable way that the president or the leaders of Congress can legally enact their legislative monstrosity.

Instead, they are going to cheat.

They are going to employ some kind of legislative trickery to pretend to pass a bill that, they now realize, will never become law through constitutional means. They may use the now-infamous Slaughter Rule, which would allow House members to claim to have voted to amend the objectionable Senate bill without actually having passed it through the House. Or they’ll come up with an even-zanier scheme, including a subsequent reconciliation process in the Senate designed to overcome the very filibuster they’ve used to block conservative bills and nominees in the past.

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m not planning to recognize such a result as legally binding. I’m not going to pretend to obey any dictates from federal health-care bureaucrats that have never been authorized by a constitutional vote of both houses of Congress. I will not submit to any extra-constitutional order to dismantle the consumer-driven health plan I have set up for my employees.

I will not comply. If the government tries to make me comply, I’ll sue. And I’ll win.

This is not (yet) a banana republic where constitutions are seen as inconvenient impediments to the rule of the despot. This is not (yet) a European-style welfare state where some powerful parliament can exercise legislative, executive, and judicial power all in one stroke. This is a constitutional republic in which government power is divided, its exercise is strictly limited, and our rights are not some generous gift of those in power, to be withdrawn at their whim, but are instead a permanent check on their power.

If the House fails to hold a straightforward vote on the Senate bill that was passed a couple of months ago, that bill can neither become law nor be amended by future congressional action. It will have died. There will be no ObamaCare bill, no new taxes or regulations, and no unconstitutional mandate that Americans buy health plans approved by politicians.

The president and his allies may claim otherwise, but that won’t change the reality of the situation. If they command the rest of us to pretend they have passed the bill, I will not comply.

You shouldn’t, either.

Hood is president of the John Locke Foundation

Grab a copy of HR 3200 and Meet Me in the Shower

I'm not a huge Dick Morris fan, but he put together an excellent list of the Members of Congress likely to be the swing votes on the health care bill. These are the people whom President Obama and Rahm "no towel" Emanuel will be twisting arms and cutting deals with over the next two weeks. Good list to use if you want to call and do your own arm twisting.

http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2010/03/05/obama-bribes-threatens-and-rewards-congress-to-pass-health-care/#more-732

I've Solved the Health Care Stalemate

So President Obama will meet with radical Iranian President Ahmadinejad with no pre-set conditions, but will not meet with Constitutionally-elected House Republicans on Feb 25th to discuss Health care without pre-set conditions. Hmmm.

So here's the solution to the health care stalemate: Republicans need to invite Ahmadinejad to the meeting on the 25th. Then there would be no pre-set conditions to the conversation and we could start from scratch on health care.

Who said this had to be difficult.

Republican Leadership Puts Their Own Healthcare Bill in the Mix

The Republican leadership in the US House, dropped their own version of a health care reform bill today. Read the bill here: http://www.politico.com/static/PPM143_091103_amendment_boehner_ohio.html

Two Health Care Bills Side By Side: Let the People Decide

Yesterday, Congresswoman Sue Myrick signed onto a free market driven alternative health care bill and simultaneously called on Speaker Pelosi to put the bill on the floor opposite the Democrat health care bill(s) so that the American people can compare for themselves which bill is more to their liking.

Sue supports HR 3713, the American Health Care Solutions Act. The primary bill the Dems have been pushing in the House is HR 3200.

I believe the Republican leadership in the House is making a tactical mistake by not putting forth a health care bill that encompasses the reforms and values we as a party believe in. To not put a bill together is to risk being labelled as the party of no. In fact, that is exactly what we are routinely called in the national media.

Here's the deal, if we believe in our ideas... I mean truly believe them, then why not put them out their for the world to see. What good is an idea if you are just going to hide it away.

Sue believes that a government run health care plan is BAD for America. We stood up to HR 3200 and helped fight it. We continue that fight.

But while we fight Against that bill, why doesn't the Republican leadership push FOR the bill that accomplishes the reforms we believe in? From a political perspective, to do otherwise, is to appeal to your base of political support only and do nothing to reach out to Independents and Swing Democrats. Why would we do that? We can enact meaningful reform, help reform parts of the health care system that are broken, help lower the cost of heath care for millions of people in a free market-friendly way, and politically appeal to that cross over vote, thereby strengthening our parties appeal to other demographics.

We simply must start fighting for what we are FOR with the same voracity that we fight that which we are Against.

So in that spirit, Sue signed onto a great health care reform plan drafted by Rep. Mike Rogers (MI-08).

“Rep. Rogers’ bill addresses all of the issues I’ve been talking about for months – things that can truly make a difference within our health care system,” said Rep. Myrick. “The reforms in this bill are common sense changes that still allow patients and doctors to make decisions about medical care. The American people have the right to know what alternative plans are being proposed, and I call for the Speaker to bring both bills to the floor so that the American people have the opportunity to compare the plans and decide what’s best for them”.

Some of the key provisions of the bill include:

· Preventing insurance companies from denying care based on pre-existing conditions or becoming sick
· Expanding federal block grants for state high-risk pools that accept all patients
· Creating association and small business health plans
· Allowing families to purchase insurance across state lines
· Enacting comprehensive medical liability reform
· Expanding and improving health savings accounts
· Allowing employers to offer discounts for healthy behaviour through wellness and prevention programs
· Strengthening penalties for Medicare and Medicaid fraud, and expanding funding for federal anti-fraud monitoring
· Establishing “transparency portals” in each state to provide families more information about health plans and providers

Let the fight begin.

Sue Myrick Gives National Republican Response to President Obama's Weekly Radio Address

Sue Myrick was selected to give the Republican response to President Obama's Weekly Radio address. Picked up this morning by the LA Times, AP nationwide, Wall Street Journal, etc. Here is the link to her remarks.

http://www.newsday.com/business/gop-lawmaker-warns-against-health-care-changes-1.1461347

Great Video Showing Flaws in Canadian Health Care System

As Congress debates health care, you probably keep hearing about the Canadian health care model. If you are trying to figure out the merits or pitfalls of the Canadian system, this video will help shed some light on the situation. John Stossel put this together. I found it very helpful information: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9GMKK_fWKg

Mr. President. Stop Talking. Start Listening.

Last night we heard President Obama give a speech. He is a very gifted orator, no doubt. He had a prime time audience, a hot microphone and a teleprompter... what more could Obama want?

A week prior to him giving the speech, my boss, US Rep. Sue Myrick, wrote the President and asked him to not give a speech during the joint session of Congress, but rather make a bold move and preside over a town hall meeting type session of Congress where one by one, members of Congress could ask the President for clarification on key issues in the bill and share with him the thoughts and concerns they had heard from their constituents during August recess.

The President could take a question or comment from one side of the aisle, and then move to the other side, and then back again, and so on and so on. This would be a bold move, because the President would have to think on his feet. He would not have a teleprompter to read his scripted verse. In order to answer the probing and no doubt tough questions he would get from the Congress, he would have to know the bill inside and out. He would conduct such a meeting LIVE, with no editing, no pre-production, no nothing... just democracy... kind of a Obama Unplugged type thing.

Needless to say, the President did not take us up on our offer. For the record, he didn't even respond. Instead he gave a speech. A partisan speech. He started off his remarks by looking not to the future but to the past, as he did several times during the night. Finding areas to nip at the prior Bush administration. I wonder how long he can get away with blaming Bush for everything under the sun. With his liberal base, probably 4 full years. But with middle America, not much longer. Don't get me wrong, I didn't much care for the Bush Administration. But they've been gone for awhile now, and the President should stop shadow boxing with the past and start defending his own mismanagement problems. Van Jones? Hello, is there a Communist in the House? AIG, Auto bailout, second bank bailout, $787 Billion Stimulus bill, Cap and Trade, 44 Czars and counting and now a march to Socialized medicine.... This is on your watch Obama. Wake up.

So as he spoke last night I could not help but contrast his speech, with my boss's recent town hall meetings. In his speech, Obama stood with a scripted and rehearsed telepromter-supported speech for about an hour, took no questions, and seemed shocked when someone yelled out a contrasting view.

Sue Myrick on the other hand stood for 4 and a half hours each night for three consecutive nights, a combined 13.5 hours of standing in front of a live audience that ranged from 2000 one night to 900 on the last night. There was no teleprompter, no speech. In preparations for the meetings, she read the 1,000 plus page bill and she took EVERY question, from every participant every night. No exceptions. We did not screen people, we did not take RSVPs or anything that even gave the appearance of screening people. Just unedited democracy, from a woman who believes it her duty to do so. Sue had people yell at her numerous times over three nights. She took it in stride. Sometimes tempers flair. That's politics. But she listened. Get it? She listened to the people. She works for them. They don't work for her.

Contrast that to President Obama slapping his chest and telling us that he wants to be the last President to tackle Health care reform. As if, whatever he gets passed with his imprimatur of finality, the stamp of Obama, the end all be all, the omega in the alpha equation... will end our health care troubles forever and ever, amen. Give me a break. What an ego.

Obama said several times last night in a rhetorical way... "This is not what we came here..." Remember that line? I didn't count how many times he said it, but it was several, and usually at the tail end of a liturgy he had built up and was hoping for an applause response. I do not doubt the President is a smart man, and I respect the office he holds. But I do not believe he is qualified to make a statement alluding to the motivations and desires of why members of Congress came to Washington. What do I mean by that? Simple. There is a hell of a difference between why Sue Myrick came to Washington in the Gingrich lead Republican Revolution and why say Nancy Pelosi or even the President himself, came to Washington. Totally different motivations. Totally different game plans. Totally different world views. I don't need Obama clumping us all together as some monolithic piece of clay that he the President can mold to his agenda. "That is not why we came here..." Give me a break, try asking us why we came here for a change. You might learn something Mr. President.

And about this bickering stuff. The President implied that those who disagreed with this bill are just nay sayers and wanting to bicker, I think that was the word he used. At what point is disagreeing bickering? At what point, can a member of congress say "I disagree", without the President, his team in Congress or the major media outlets calling them a naysayer? HR 3200 was written without Republican input. Not because we didn't want to help, but because we were shut out of the process. At what point do we get to speak our peace? At what point do we get to ask our questions or give our input? Ever? What are the Democrats in Congress and the President so scared of? Our questions? Our input? And Pelosi what is she afraid of? When a member of Congress is scared of their own constituency or can't tell the difference between the populace rising up in defence of their country and the Nazi party (remember that statement?) then its time for that member to leave office. Plain and Simple. A leader without a following is just out taking a walk.

Rep. Wilson should not have yelled at the President. Not because of what he said, but because, like it or not, the President is the leader of the free world and deserves respect. If you disagree with giving him, personally, respect, then give it to the office he holds. It was there before him, and will be there when he is gone.

However, was Rep. Wilson right? The President told the American audience with a straight face that illegal aliens would not get health care coverage under his plan. In fact, he ridiculed the other side (Republicans) for using it as a point of contention on the bill (IE -- see bickering). I guess it depends on what the meaning of "is" is. Remember that? Thought you were getting change with this President didn't you. Wrong. You just got a liberal.

The President can truthfully tell you the bill does not give illegals health care. HR 3200 expressly says that illegals will NOT get health care. But wait. Here is what the President did not tell you. Here is what caused Rep. Wilson to yell out. Here is why the whole Republican caucus was mumbling audibly during that section of the President's speech. Ready? Here is the truth. When HR 3200 came through committee, the Republican members took the line in the bill saying that no illegals would get health care, and attached to it language that would require the government to legally require proof of citizenship before health care would be administered. Specifically they wanted the E-Verify system currently available for businesses to screen for illegals to be used in health care. That amendment was not accepted in the bill. It was shot down by the Democrat majority. So, now if the bill becomes law, even if the bill says illegals won't get health care, they will. Why? Because the hospital that asks for proof of citizenship will be sued for profiling or discrimination and therefore illegals will get care. End of discussion. Sound familiar? Go to the emergency room today. Same system is in place. The President knows all this. Did he lie? You decide.

Did you also pick up the change in statistics used last night? For weeks on the stump and on TV, President Obama has been saying we need health care reform for the 47 million people who are currently uninsured. 47 million is the key number to remember. He said it three times in August alone in response to the town hall meeting protests. Last night however, he used the phrase "30 million Americans who need health care." Got it? Did you see the smoke and mirror? Throughout his campaign for President, and even mere days before this televised speech, he has been saying we need health care for 47 million uninsured people and now in the face of people (IE- Republicans) saying he wants to give health care to illegals, he changes the stat to 30 million Americans. Wonder where those 17 million other people went? Note: They didn't go anywhere. They are still there. Waiting for this plan to go through. The President just can't mention them anymore, because he knows we will tell you the true American public all about it.

The President last night said that if you like your current health care plan, you can keep it. He walked us through the process whereby all employers will be required to provide coverage for their employees or pay a 8% penalty (IE -- see tax). Sounds simple. Right?

Here is where Obama is misleading you. Most businesses are paying 16% to 25% in payroll just for health care. Get that? If I own a business and I am paying 16% in payroll just to cover health care, and Obama comes along with a mandate to provide coverage or pay an 8% penalty what am I going to do? I'm going to drop the coverage of my employees, pay the 8% penalty and save 8%. Got it? That is why Republicans are correct when they say this bill will cause you to lose your coverage. You will. Obama thinks the 8% penalty will encourage a business to provide insurance. He is wrong. It will incentivize them to drop it. We are right.

See why we needed to have a chance to ask questions last night? Imagine how much progress we could have made if we just laid it all on the table and hashed it out. Instead, we got a speech.

Myrick to Obama: Come to Congress to Listen, Not Talk.

Sue Myrick today wrote President Obama, asking him to cancel the speech he plans to give to a joint session of Congress on September 9th, and instead preside over a town hall meeting style event where he listens to members of Congress tell him what they heard from their constituents over the August recess.

In other words, come to Congress to listen, rather than to talk. Following is the link containing the letter Sue sent the President: http://www.myrick.house.gov/Letter%20to%20President%20on%20Joint%20Session%20of%20Congress.pdf

Gaston County Town Hall Meeting

Over 900 people attended the health care town hall meeting at Gaston Day School on August 27th. The third of three such meetings held on consecutive nights, the event was a great success. Overwhelming opposition to the President's ideas for health care reform was voiced from the audience. We began the night with an introduction from the school's headmaster, Dr. Rankin. Sue took the stage at 7:00 pm and after leading the audience in the pledge of allegiance, spoke briefly about her opposition to HR 3200, told what reforms she did favor, and then opened the meeting to questions. As she did the two prior nights, Sue pledged to take as many questions from the audience as they liked. We ended just before 11:00 pm with every one's questions being answered.

Cornelius Town Hall Meeting

On August 26th Sue Myrick held a town hall meeting on health care at JV Washum Elementary School in Cornelius. The event was held in the gym and was attended by over 900 people. We began at 7:00 pm when Cornelius Mayor Pro Tem Susan Medlin led us in the pledge of allegiance and then introduced Sue to the stage.

Sue gave a brief overview of why she opposes HR 3200 and then opened the floor for questions. She pledged to answer all questions and did. We finished the event at 10:58 pm.

Weddington Town Hall Meeting Photos

On August 25th we hosted a health care town hall meeting at Weddington High School. The event started at 6:30 pm with a packed auditorium that overflowed into the cafeteria. Estimated size of the crowd was 1400 people.

After the pledge of allegance lead by Weddington Mayor Nancy Anderson, Sue was introduced on stage. Sue gave a brief overview of her opposition to HR 3200 and then spent about ten minutes talking about common sense reform options that could be implimented without the need for HR 3200. She then pledged to take any and all questions and did so. We ended with the last question at 11:00 pm.

Selected News Coverage of Recent Town Hall Meetings

Last week, Sue held three town hall meetings, one in each county of our district. Here is a sampling of the news coverage from those events. Will post photos I took later today.

http://www.gastongazette.com/news/health-37347-care-myrick.html

http://www.wcnc.com/news/local/stories/wcnc-082709-al-health_care_debate.11eefaaa8.html

http://davidsonnews.net/2009/08/27/in-the-news-hundreds-attend-meeting-with-myrick/

http://http//davidsonnews.net/2009/08/27/in-the-news-hundreds-attend-meeting-with-myrick/

http://www.wbtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=10999324

http://www.wbtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=11006366

http://www.wbtv.com/global/video/flash/popupplayer.asp?ClipID1=4077253&h1=Sue%20Myrick%20speaks%20to%20another%20packed%20house%20in%20Cornelius%20about%20healthcare%20reform&vt1=v&at1=News&d1=156166&LaunchPageAdTag=Search

Reminder: Town Hall Meeting Tonight

Tonight marks the first of three town hall meetings Sue Myrick is holding on health care reform. We expect large crowds at each. Hope to see you there.

August 25, 2009
Weddington High School Auditorium
4901 Monroe Weddington Road
Matthews, NC 28104
6:30pm

August 26, 2009
J.V. Washam Elementary School Gymnasium
9611 Westmoreland Road
Cornelius, NC 28031
7:00pm

August 27, 2009
Gaston Day School Auditorium
2001 Gaston Day School Road
Gastonia, NC 28056
7:00pm

Health Care to Die For

Nova Scotia Health Care Wait Times: http://gov.ns.ca/health/waittimes/

How do you know the government will take over health care? Here's how I know.

If you are one of the thousands if not millions of people who have taken it upon themselves to actually read the content of HR 3200, the Obama backed Health Care Bill, then please consider the following cliff notes as a public service to help you cut to the chase.

This research information was compiled and made available for your consideration by the House Republican Conference in Washington:

These pages document how the Obama plan can lead to a government take over of health care:

Pages 116-118; Section. 221 – Requires the Secretary to establish a government run plan that is supposed to play by the same rules as private plans in the exchange. The bill, however, requires the government to set the benefits of all of the plans, including its own, creating an implicit unlevel playing field by allowing the government to set rules for itself.

Page 120, lines 4-21; Section. 222 – Gives $2 billion and as much money as is needed to pay claims for 90 days from the Treasury to the government plan. While it requires the government run plan to repay the money, it only requires the plan to repay the money over ten years – and without any interest payments. This gives the public plan an enormous capital advantage over private plans.

Page 124, lines 24-25; Section. 223 – This section shelters the government plan from any administrative or judicial review of any payment rate or methodology it uses. No company can sue the government for price fixing.

Page 118, lines 14-22; Division A, Section 221(g) – Unlike private insurance plans, who can be sued in state courts, the government-run plan could only be sued in federal court. This affords the government plan significant advantage over the plans it is supposed to “compete” against.

Pages 41-47; Division A, Sections 141 and 143 – House Democrats would establish a new government-run “Exchange,” through which a new government-run plan would offer coverage alongside private plans. The Exchange would be run by a new “Health Choices Commissioner,” who is nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. As the Commissioner is serving at the pleasure of the President, some may be concerned about the lack of independence of this individual. The Commissioner would also be required to work with the Secretary of HHS, creating the potential for a serious conflict of interest that could significantly disadvantage the private health plans where more than 170 million Americans currently receive their health coverage.

Will An Apple A Day Keep the Government Away?

The House Republican Conference has compiled a list of the new boards, bureaucracies, commissions, and programs created in H.R.3200, "America's Affordable Health Choices Act."

They are listed below along with the bill page number for your reference:

1.. Health Benefits Advisory Committee (Section 123, p. 30)

2. Health Choices Administration (Section 141, p. 41)

3. Qualified Health Benefits Plan Ombudsman (Section 144, p. 47)

4. Program of administrative simplification (Section 163, p. 57)

5. Retiree Reserve Trust Fund (Section 164(d), p. 70)

6. Health Insurance Exchange (Section 201, p. 72)

7. Mechanism for insurance risk pooling to be established by Health Choices Administration Commissioner (Section 206(b), p. 106)

8. Special Inspector General for the Health Insurance Exchange (Section206(c), p. 107)

9. Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund (Section 207, p. 109)

10. State-based Health Insurance Exchanges (Section 208, p. 111)

11. "Public Health Insurance Option" (Section 221, p. 116)

12. Ombudsman for "Public Health Insurance Option" (Section 221(d), p.117)

13. Account for receipts and disbursements for "Public Health Insurance Option" (Section 222(b), p. 119)

14. Telehealth Advisory Committee (Section 1191, p. 380)

15. Demonstration program providing reimbursement for "culturally and linguistically appropriate services" (Section 1222, p. 405)

16. Demonstration program for shared decision making using patient decision aids (Section 1236, p. 438)

17. Accountable Care Organization pilot program (Section 1301, p. 443)

18. Independent patient-centered medical home pilot program under Medicare (Section 1302, p. 462)

19. Community-based medical home pilot program under Medicare (Section1302(d), p. 468) 20.. Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research (Section 1401(a), p.502)

21. Comparative Effectiveness Research Commission (Section 1401(a), p.505)

22. Patient ombudsman for comparative effectiveness research (Section1401(a), p. 519)

23. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 1412(b)(1), p. 546)

24. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for nursing facilities (Section 1412 (b)(2), p. 548)

25. Special focus facility program for skilled nursing facilities(Section 1413(a)(3), p. 559)

26. Special focus facility program for nursing facilities (Section1413(b)(3), p. 565)

27. National independent monitor pilot program for skilled nursing facilities and nursing facilities (Section 1422, p. 607)

28. Demonstration program for approved teaching health centers with respect to Medicare GME (Section 1502(d), p. 674)

29. Pilot program to develop anti-fraud compliance systems for Medicare providers (Section 1635, p. 716)

30. Medical home pilot program under Medicaid (Section 1722, p. 780)

31. Comparative Effectiveness Research Trust Fund (Section 1802, p.824)

32. "Identifiable office or program" within CMS to "provide for improved coordination between Medicare and Medicaid in the case of dual eligibles" (Section 1905, p. 852)

33. Public Health Investment Fund (Section 2002, p. 859)

34. Scholarships for service in health professional needs areas(Section 2211, p. 870)

35. Loan repayment program for service in health professional needs areas (Section 2211, p. 873)

36. Program for training medical residents in community-based settings(Section 2214, p. 882)

37. Grant program for training in dentistry programs (Section 2215, p.887)

38. Public Health Workforce Corps (Section 2231, p. 898)

39. Public health workforce scholarship program (Section 2231, p. 900)

40. Public health workforce loan forgiveness program (Section 2231, p.904)

41. Grant program for innovations in interdisciplinary care (Section2252, p 917)

42. Advisory Committee on Health Workforce Evaluation and Assessment(Section 2261, p. 920) 43. Prevention and Wellness Trust (Section 2301, p. 932)

44. Clinical Prevention Stakeholders Board (Section 2301, p. 941)

45. Community Prevention Stakeholders Board (Section 2301, p. 947)

46. Grant program for community prevention and wellness research(Section 2301, p. 950)

47. Grant program for community prevention and wellness services(Section 2301, p. 951)

48. Grant program for public health infrastructure (Section 2301, p.955)

49. Center for Quality Improvement (Section 2401, p. 965)

50. Assistant Secretary for Health Information (Section 2402, p. 972)

51. Grant program to support the operation of school-based health clinics (Section 2511, p. 993)

52. National Medical Device Registry (Section 2521, p. 1001)

53. Grants for labor-management programs for nursing training (Section2531, p. 1008)