Guest guest Posted October 8, 1998 Report Share Posted October 8, 1998 Good Gawd, Gene! Where do you come up with this stuff! You are too entertaining! Brad Woodall [] Re: Licensure >Well put, . Thank you for your leadership. > >By the way, did you realize that Lee Harvey Oswald didn't really die in >Dallas but was switched with the body of a Deep Elm bum who died under >the Houston Street Viaduct, and that Oswald was then planted in TDH by >the KGB to sabotage our EMS rules? Think about it! Who at TDH looks like >Lee Harvey Oswald after plastic surgery? I'm sure you all know. > >And concerning Gene Weatherall: It's quite well known in intelligence >circles that Gene Weatherall is not his REAL name; instead it is Boris >Wrocz, a member of the KGB who arrived here in the 70's from Moscow by >way of Helinski and submarine to the Texas coast to infiltrate the >emerging EMS services and destroy our ability to respond to terrorist >attacks. > >And isn't it JUST TOO INTERESTING that Pam West went to California, near >San , which is Spanish for Saint Joe, and that Jeff Jarvis passed >through St. Joe, Texas on October 9, 1988 driving a Yugo??? Wouldn't >you like to know WHO ELSE was in St. Joe that very same day and what >they were driving? > >And why did Mark Huckaby disappear to Columbus, Ohio? Do you think >that's REALLY where he's going? Do you really think he's EVER going to >show up there? > >I suggest you research the dubious history of the Tri-lateral >Commission. Don't you think Nixon knew all this, and that's why >he was got rid of? And don't you see that Lewinski, (think about >the LAST NAME) once visited San , CA? (Where was Pam West, I ask >you?) What did she tell Bill Clinton about AMR and BaySTAR? What did >she have on STARR? Don't you see that's the reason the >Republicans (who have never liked EMS because it sometimes saves >Democrats) are out to do him in? He knows too much about EMS. > >Simple when it's all laid out! Now think about SB 102! > >Gene >-- > E. Gandy, JD, EMT-P >EMS Professions Program Director >Tyler Junior College >Tyler, TX >ggan@... > >Check out our website at: http://www.tyler.cc.tx.us/emmt/ > > " If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving's definitely not for >you. " > > Cheek wrote: >> >> Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. >> >> There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there >> is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of >> reality. >> >> EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any >> agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. >> >> I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for >> supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of >> relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO >> NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. >> >> I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above >> amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) >> >> The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. >> >> We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding >> licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the >> last minute. The process took more time than was >> anticipated. >> >> I advised the members of this list server of this situation on >> September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a >> great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be >> included because of time limitations. >> >> I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the >> recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. >> >> I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the >> proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. >> at the BOH Meeting. >> >> The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken >> rural and frontier areas into consideration. >> >> I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to >> lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your >> superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the >> funding. >> >> I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope >> whatever happens we can all move on. >> >> Hope you all have a good day. >> >> >> GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT >> EHCAC VICE-CHAIR >> gary911@... >> ______________________________________________________________________ >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 1998 Report Share Posted October 8, 1998 Well put, . Thank you for your leadership. By the way, did you realize that Lee Harvey Oswald didn't really die in Dallas but was switched with the body of a Deep Elm bum who died under the Houston Street Viaduct, and that Oswald was then planted in TDH by the KGB to sabotage our EMS rules? Think about it! Who at TDH looks like Lee Harvey Oswald after plastic surgery? I'm sure you all know. And concerning Gene Weatherall: It's quite well known in intelligence circles that Gene Weatherall is not his REAL name; instead it is Boris Wrocz, a member of the KGB who arrived here in the 70's from Moscow by way of Helinski and submarine to the Texas coast to infiltrate the emerging EMS services and destroy our ability to respond to terrorist attacks. And isn't it JUST TOO INTERESTING that Pam West went to California, near San , which is Spanish for Saint Joe, and that Jeff Jarvis passed through St. Joe, Texas on October 9, 1988 driving a Yugo??? Wouldn't you like to know WHO ELSE was in St. Joe that very same day and what they were driving? And why did Mark Huckaby disappear to Columbus, Ohio? Do you think that's REALLY where he's going? Do you really think he's EVER going to show up there? I suggest you research the dubious history of the Tri-lateral Commission. Don't you think Nixon knew all this, and that's why he was got rid of? And don't you see that Lewinski, (think about the LAST NAME) once visited San , CA? (Where was Pam West, I ask you?) What did she tell Bill Clinton about AMR and BaySTAR? What did she have on STARR? Don't you see that's the reason the Republicans (who have never liked EMS because it sometimes saves Democrats) are out to do him in? He knows too much about EMS. Simple when it's all laid out! Now think about SB 102! Gene -- E. Gandy, JD, EMT-P EMS Professions Program Director Tyler Junior College Tyler, TX ggan@... Check out our website at: http://www.tyler.cc.tx.us/emmt/ " If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving's definitely not for you. " Cheek wrote: > > Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > > There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there > is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of > reality. > > EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any > agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > > I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for > supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of > relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO > NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > > I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above > amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > > The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > > We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding > licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the > last minute. The process took more time than was > anticipated. > > I advised the members of this list server of this situation on > September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a > great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be > included because of time limitations. > > I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the > recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > > I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the > proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. > at the BOH Meeting. > > The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken > rural and frontier areas into consideration. > > I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to > lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your > superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the > funding. > > I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope > whatever happens we can all move on. > > Hope you all have a good day. > > > GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT > EHCAC VICE-CHAIR > gary911@... > ______________________________________________________________________ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 9, 1998 Report Share Posted October 9, 1998 Before I unsubscribe from this e-mail group, may I say that your bizarre, unprofessional, recurrent commentaries are detremintal to your profession and certainly not the intended purpose of this site. Please spare everyone a reply because I won't be hanging around to hear it. My best wishes to Gene Weatherall and Dr. Gordon. Respectively, Earnestine Victery RN, CEN Nurse Director/Trauma Coord Huntsville Memorial Hospital ---------- > > To: egroups > Subject: [] Re: Licensure > Date: Thursday, October 08, 1998 7:48 PM > > Good Gawd, Gene! Where do you come up with this stuff! You are too > entertaining! > > Brad Woodall > > [] Re: Licensure > > > >Well put, . Thank you for your leadership. > > > >By the way, did you realize that Lee Harvey Oswald didn't really die in > >Dallas but was switched with the body of a Deep Elm bum who died under > >the Houston Street Viaduct, and that Oswald was then planted in TDH by > >the KGB to sabotage our EMS rules? Think about it! Who at TDH looks like > >Lee Harvey Oswald after plastic surgery? I'm sure you all know. > > > >And concerning Gene Weatherall: It's quite well known in intelligence > >circles that Gene Weatherall is not his REAL name; instead it is Boris > >Wrocz, a member of the KGB who arrived here in the 70's from Moscow by > >way of Helinski and submarine to the Texas coast to infiltrate the > >emerging EMS services and destroy our ability to respond to terrorist > >attacks. > > > >And isn't it JUST TOO INTERESTING that Pam West went to California, near > >San , which is Spanish for Saint Joe, and that Jeff Jarvis passed > >through St. Joe, Texas on October 9, 1988 driving a Yugo??? Wouldn't > >you like to know WHO ELSE was in St. Joe that very same day and what > >they were driving? > > > >And why did Mark Huckaby disappear to Columbus, Ohio? Do you think > >that's REALLY where he's going? Do you really think he's EVER going to > >show up there? > > > >I suggest you research the dubious history of the Tri-lateral > >Commission. Don't you think Nixon knew all this, and that's why > >he was got rid of? And don't you see that Lewinski, (think about > >the LAST NAME) once visited San , CA? (Where was Pam West, I ask > >you?) What did she tell Bill Clinton about AMR and BaySTAR? What did > >she have on STARR? Don't you see that's the reason the > >Republicans (who have never liked EMS because it sometimes saves > >Democrats) are out to do him in? He knows too much about EMS. > > > >Simple when it's all laid out! Now think about SB 102! > > > >Gene > >-- > > E. Gandy, JD, EMT-P > >EMS Professions Program Director > >Tyler Junior College > >Tyler, TX > >ggan@... > > > >Check out our website at: http://www.tyler.cc.tx.us/emmt/ > > > > " If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving's definitely not for > >you. " > > > > Cheek wrote: > >> > >> Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > >> > >> There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there > >> is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of > >> reality. > >> > >> EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any > >> agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > >> > >> I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for > >> supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of > >> relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO > >> NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > >> > >> I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above > >> amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > >> > >> The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > >> > >> We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding > >> licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the > >> last minute. The process took more time than was > >> anticipated. > >> > >> I advised the members of this list server of this situation on > >> September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a > >> great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be > >> included because of time limitations. > >> > >> I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the > >> recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > >> > >> I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the > >> proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. > >> at the BOH Meeting. > >> > >> The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken > >> rural and frontier areas into consideration. > >> > >> I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to > >> lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your > >> superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the > >> funding. > >> > >> I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope > >> whatever happens we can all move on. > >> > >> Hope you all have a good day. > >> > >> > >> GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT > >> EHCAC VICE-CHAIR > >> gary911@... > >> ______________________________________________________________________ > >> > >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 9, 1998 Report Share Posted October 9, 1998 , Having just returned from the public comment meeting, I was more than disappointed in the turn out. Someone out there correct me if I am wrong, only 5 or 6 folks took the time out of their schedule to come to Austin to address their concerns about licensure. Some pro and some con. As in many other such meetings, empathy prevailed. Only a few that were concerned with the issue took the time to comment in person or in writing. So for those folks out there that think that a few are making decisions for the rest. Where were you today? Where were you for the subcommittee meetings? Where were you for the EHCAC meetings? Others will continue making decisions that affect EMS until we grow some legs and step to the plate. We continually gripe because the physicians, nurses or others are making decisions for us. Well at least they make an effort. But, your right, we need to move onward. In whatever form licensure is approved, it will be a step forward. Folks you can still send in your comments in writing, its not to late. Get involved. Thanks again for all the hard work you and the others on the various committees and subcommittees have done. Henry Barber Cheek wrote: > Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > > There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there > is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of > reality. > > EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any > agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > > I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for > supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of > relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO > NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > > I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above > amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > > The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > > We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding > licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the > last minute. The process took more time than was > anticipated. > > I advised the members of this list server of this situation on > September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a > great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be > included because of time limitations. > > I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the > recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > > I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the > proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. > at the BOH Meeting. > > The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken > rural and frontier areas into consideration. > > I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to > lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your > superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the > funding. > > I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope > whatever happens we can all move on. > > Hope you all have a good day. > > > GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT > EHCAC VICE-CHAIR > gary911@... > ______________________________________________________________________ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 9, 1998 Report Share Posted October 9, 1998 At 03:09 PM 09/10/1998 -0500, you wrote: >Before I unsubscribe from this e-mail group, may I say that your bizarre, >unprofessional, recurrent commentaries are detremintal to your profession >and certainly not the intended purpose of this site. Please spare everyone >a reply because I won't be hanging around to hear it. My best wishes to >Gene Weatherall and Dr. Gordon. >Respectively, >Earnestine Victery RN, CEN >Nurse Director/Trauma Coord >Huntsville Memorial Hospital Oh great; now that the roots of this evil conspiracy are finally being exposed you decide to up and split! Come back Earnestine! Right minded nurses like you are just who we need to straighten out some of these neer-do-wells! Norm ______________________________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 9, 1998 Report Share Posted October 9, 1998 Sorry! My comments were intended for those tho possess a sense of humor. Gene G. earnestine victery wrote: > > Before I unsubscribe from this e-mail group, may I say that your bizarre, > unprofessional, recurrent commentaries are detremintal to your profession > and certainly not the intended purpose of this site. Please spare everyone > a reply because I won't be hanging around to hear it. My best wishes to > Gene Weatherall and Dr. Gordon. > Respectively, > Earnestine Victery RN, CEN > Nurse Director/Trauma Coord > Huntsville Memorial Hospital > > ---------- > > > > To: egroups > > Subject: [] Re: Licensure > > Date: Thursday, October 08, 1998 7:48 PM > > > > Good Gawd, Gene! Where do you come up with this stuff! You are too > > entertaining! > > > > Brad Woodall > > > > [] Re: Licensure > > > > > > >Well put, . Thank you for your leadership. > > > > > >By the way, did you realize that Lee Harvey Oswald didn't really die in > > >Dallas but was switched with the body of a Deep Elm bum who died under > > >the Houston Street Viaduct, and that Oswald was then planted in TDH by > > >the KGB to sabotage our EMS rules? Think about it! Who at TDH looks like > > >Lee Harvey Oswald after plastic surgery? I'm sure you all know. > > > > > >And concerning Gene Weatherall: It's quite well known in intelligence > > >circles that Gene Weatherall is not his REAL name; instead it is Boris > > >Wrocz, a member of the KGB who arrived here in the 70's from Moscow by > > >way of Helinski and submarine to the Texas coast to infiltrate the > > >emerging EMS services and destroy our ability to respond to terrorist > > >attacks. > > > > > >And isn't it JUST TOO INTERESTING that Pam West went to California, near > > >San , which is Spanish for Saint Joe, and that Jeff Jarvis passed > > >through St. Joe, Texas on October 9, 1988 driving a Yugo??? Wouldn't > > >you like to know WHO ELSE was in St. Joe that very same day and what > > >they were driving? > > > > > >And why did Mark Huckaby disappear to Columbus, Ohio? Do you think > > >that's REALLY where he's going? Do you really think he's EVER going to > > >show up there? > > > > > >I suggest you research the dubious history of the Tri-lateral > > >Commission. Don't you think Nixon knew all this, and that's why > > >he was got rid of? And don't you see that Lewinski, (think about > > >the LAST NAME) once visited San , CA? (Where was Pam West, I ask > > >you?) What did she tell Bill Clinton about AMR and BaySTAR? What did > > >she have on STARR? Don't you see that's the reason the > > >Republicans (who have never liked EMS because it sometimes saves > > >Democrats) are out to do him in? He knows too much about EMS. > > > > > >Simple when it's all laid out! Now think about SB 102! > > > > > >Gene > > >-- > > > E. Gandy, JD, EMT-P > > >EMS Professions Program Director > > >Tyler Junior College > > >Tyler, TX > > >ggan@... > > > > > >Check out our website at: http://www.tyler.cc.tx.us/emmt/ > > > > > > " If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving's definitely not for > > >you. " > > > > > > Cheek wrote: > > >> > > >> Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > > >> > > >> There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there > > >> is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of > > >> reality. > > >> > > >> EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any > > >> agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > > >> > > >> I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for > > >> supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of > > >> relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO > > >> NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > > >> > > >> I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above > > >> amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > > >> > > >> The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > > >> > > >> We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding > > >> licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the > > >> last minute. The process took more time than was > > >> anticipated. > > >> > > >> I advised the members of this list server of this situation on > > >> September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a > > >> great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be > > >> included because of time limitations. > > >> > > >> I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the > > >> recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > > >> > > >> I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the > > >> proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. > > >> at the BOH Meeting. > > >> > > >> The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken > > >> rural and frontier areas into consideration. > > >> > > >> I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to > > >> lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your > > >> superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the > > >> funding. > > >> > > >> I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope > > >> whatever happens we can all move on. > > >> > > >> Hope you all have a good day. > > >> > > >> > > >> GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT > > >> EHCAC VICE-CHAIR > > >> gary911@... > > >> ______________________________________________________________________ > > >> > > >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 9, 1998 Report Share Posted October 9, 1998 Well, I thought that it was very amusing. It's just that some people have to be little children about life and get their feelings hurt!!!!! > [] Re: Licensure > > > > > > > > > >Well put, . Thank you for your leadership. > > > > > > > >By the way, did you realize that Lee Harvey Oswald didn't really > die in > > > >Dallas but was switched with the body of a Deep Elm bum who died > under > > > >the Houston Street Viaduct, and that Oswald was then planted in > TDH by > > > >the KGB to sabotage our EMS rules? Think about it! Who at TDH > looks like > > > >Lee Harvey Oswald after plastic surgery? I'm sure you all know. > > > > > > > >And concerning Gene Weatherall: It's quite well known in > intelligence > > > >circles that Gene Weatherall is not his REAL name; instead it is > Boris > > > >Wrocz, a member of the KGB who arrived here in the 70's from > Moscow by > > > >way of Helinski and submarine to the Texas coast to infiltrate > the > > > >emerging EMS services and destroy our ability to respond to > terrorist > > > >attacks. > > > > > > > >And isn't it JUST TOO INTERESTING that Pam West went to > California, near > > > >San , which is Spanish for Saint Joe, and that Jeff Jarvis > passed > > > >through St. Joe, Texas on October 9, 1988 driving a Yugo??? > Wouldn't > > > >you like to know WHO ELSE was in St. Joe that very same day and > what > > > >they were driving? > > > > > > > >And why did Mark Huckaby disappear to Columbus, Ohio? Do you > think > > > >that's REALLY where he's going? Do you really think he's EVER > going to > > > >show up there? > > > > > > > >I suggest you research the dubious history of the Tri-lateral > > > >Commission. Don't you think Nixon knew all this, and > that's why > > > >he was got rid of? And don't you see that Lewinski, > (think about > > > >the LAST NAME) once visited San , CA? (Where was Pam West, I > ask > > > >you?) What did she tell Bill Clinton about AMR and BaySTAR? > What did > > > >she have on STARR? Don't you see that's the reason the > > > >Republicans (who have never liked EMS because it sometimes saves > > > >Democrats) are out to do him in? He knows too much about EMS. > > > > > > > >Simple when it's all laid out! Now think about SB 102! > > > > > > > >Gene > > > >-- > > > > E. Gandy, JD, EMT-P > > > >EMS Professions Program Director > > > >Tyler Junior College > > > >Tyler, TX > > > >ggan@... > > > > > > > >Check out our website at: http://www.tyler.cc.tx.us/emmt/ > > > > > > > > " If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving's definitely not > for > > > >you. " > > > > > > > > Cheek wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > > > >> > > > >> There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think > there > > > >> is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of > > > >> reality. > > > >> > > > >> EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any > > > >> agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > > > >> > > > >> I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and > EHCAC for > > > >> supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and > eliminating of > > > >> relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that > DO > > > >> NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > > > >> > > > >> I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above > > > >> amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > > > >> > > > >> The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > > > >> > > > >> We knew there were time constraints from the beginning > regarding > > > >> licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the > > > >> last minute. The process took more time than was > > > >> anticipated. > > > >> > > > >> I advised the members of this list server of this situation on > > > >> September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a > > > >> great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be > > > >> included because of time limitations. > > > >> > > > >> I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the > > > >> recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > > > >> > > > >> I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the > > > >> proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public > comment. > > > >> at the BOH Meeting. > > > >> > > > >> The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken > > > >> rural and frontier areas into consideration. > > > >> > > > >> I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the > first to > > > >> lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope > your > > > >> superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost > the > > > >> funding. > > > >> > > > >> I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope > > > >> whatever happens we can all move on. > > > >> > > > >> Hope you all have a good day. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT > > > >> EHCAC VICE-CHAIR > > > >> gary911@... > > > >> > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > >> > > > >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 9, 1998 Report Share Posted October 9, 1998 LET ME JUST SAY, Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa! HOW BOUT SOME CHEESE WITH THAT Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine? [] Re: Licensure >> > >> > >> > >Well put, . Thank you for your leadership. >> > > >> > >By the way, did you realize that Lee Harvey Oswald didn't really die in >> > >Dallas but was switched with the body of a Deep Elm bum who died under >> > >the Houston Street Viaduct, and that Oswald was then planted in TDH by >> > >the KGB to sabotage our EMS rules? Think about it! Who at TDH looks like >> > >Lee Harvey Oswald after plastic surgery? I'm sure you all know. >> > > >> > >And concerning Gene Weatherall: It's quite well known in intelligence >> > >circles that Gene Weatherall is not his REAL name; instead it is Boris >> > >Wrocz, a member of the KGB who arrived here in the 70's from Moscow by >> > >way of Helinski and submarine to the Texas coast to infiltrate the >> > >emerging EMS services and destroy our ability to respond to terrorist >> > >attacks. >> > > >> > >And isn't it JUST TOO INTERESTING that Pam West went to California, near >> > >San , which is Spanish for Saint Joe, and that Jeff Jarvis passed >> > >through St. Joe, Texas on October 9, 1988 driving a Yugo??? Wouldn't >> > >you like to know WHO ELSE was in St. Joe that very same day and what >> > >they were driving? >> > > >> > >And why did Mark Huckaby disappear to Columbus, Ohio? Do you think >> > >that's REALLY where he's going? Do you really think he's EVER going to >> > >show up there? >> > > >> > >I suggest you research the dubious history of the Tri-lateral >> > >Commission. Don't you think Nixon knew all this, and that's why >> > >he was got rid of? And don't you see that Lewinski, (think about >> > >the LAST NAME) once visited San , CA? (Where was Pam West, I ask >> > >you?) What did she tell Bill Clinton about AMR and BaySTAR? What did >> > >she have on STARR? Don't you see that's the reason the >> > >Republicans (who have never liked EMS because it sometimes saves >> > >Democrats) are out to do him in? He knows too much about EMS. >> > > >> > >Simple when it's all laid out! Now think about SB 102! >> > > >> > >Gene >> > >-- >> > > E. Gandy, JD, EMT-P >> > >EMS Professions Program Director >> > >Tyler Junior College >> > >Tyler, TX >> > >ggan@... >> > > >> > >Check out our website at: http://www.tyler.cc.tx.us/emmt/ >> > > >> > > " If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving's definitely not for >> > >you. " >> > > >> > > Cheek wrote: >> > >> >> > >> Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. >> > >> >> > >> There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there >> > >> is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of >> > >> reality. >> > >> >> > >> EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any >> > >> agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. >> > >> >> > >> I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for >> > >> supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of >> > >> relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO >> > >> NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. >> > >> >> > >> I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above >> > >> amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) >> > >> >> > >> The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. >> > >> >> > >> We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding >> > >> licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the >> > >> last minute. The process took more time than was >> > >> anticipated. >> > >> >> > >> I advised the members of this list server of this situation on >> > >> September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a >> > >> great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be >> > >> included because of time limitations. >> > >> >> > >> I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the >> > >> recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. >> > >> >> > >> I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the >> > >> proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. >> > >> at the BOH Meeting. >> > >> >> > >> The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken >> > >> rural and frontier areas into consideration. >> > >> >> > >> I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to >> > >> lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your >> > >> superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the >> > >> funding. >> > >> >> > >> I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope >> > >> whatever happens we can all move on. >> > >> >> > >> Hope you all have a good day. >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT >> > >> EHCAC VICE-CHAIR >> > >> gary911@... >> > >> ______________________________________________________________________ >> > >> >> > >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 9, 1998 Report Share Posted October 9, 1998 , Well put and thanks to all EHCAC as well as sub committe members for taking the time out of their schedule to make an effort to better EMS and its members. Brent ,NREMT-P, EMS Coordinator, ville Fire Dept, At 10:16 PM 10/8/98 +0000, you wrote: >Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > >There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there >is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of >reality. > >EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any >agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > >I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for >supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of >relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO >NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > >I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above >amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > >The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > >We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding >licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the >last minute. The process took more time than was >anticipated. > >I advised the members of this list server of this situation on >September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a >great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be >included because of time limitations. > > I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the >recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > >I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the >proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. >at the BOH Meeting. > >The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken >rural and frontier areas into consideration. > >I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to >lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your >superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the >funding. > >I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope >whatever happens we can all move on. > >Hope you all have a good day. > > > >GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT >EHCAC VICE-CHAIR >gary911@... >______________________________________________________________________ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 1998 Report Share Posted October 10, 1998 I agree completely with 's statements in regard to the non political or hiden agendas in EHCAC. We have given of our time , money and energy to try to improve EMS in Texas. If some of you can't understand that everyone will not always get what he or she wants, then maybe you need to find another area to invest your time and efforts in. Ron Redus Chair, EHCAC ______________________________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 11, 1998 Report Share Posted October 11, 1998 " E. Gandy " wrote: > Well put, . Thank you for your leadership. (...snip...snip...snip...snip... there that ought to do it) Truly, you have a dizzying intellect! EMT-B ______________________________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 12, 1998 Report Share Posted October 12, 1998 Mr. Barber, Due to teaching, work schedules, and a general lack of knowledge to some of these things, I was unable to attend the meeting. But the idea of being able to write a letter to the board has some possibilities. If you could send me a physical address to send a letter, It would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for the kick in the rear! Gates BARBER wrote: > , > > Having just returned from the public comment meeting, I was more than > disappointed in the turn out. Someone out there correct me if I am wrong, > only 5 or 6 folks took the time out of their schedule to come to Austin to > address their concerns about licensure. Some pro and some con. As in many > other such meetings, empathy prevailed. Only a few that were concerned > with the issue took the time to comment in person or in writing. > > So for those folks out there that think that a few are making > decisions for the rest. Where were you today? Where were you for the > subcommittee meetings? Where were you for the EHCAC meetings? Others will > continue making decisions that affect EMS until we grow some legs and step > to the plate. > > We continually gripe because the physicians, nurses or others are > making decisions for us. Well at least they make an effort. > > But, your right, we need to move onward. In whatever form licensure is > approved, it will be a step forward. Folks you can still send in your > comments in writing, its not to late. Get involved. > > Thanks again for all the hard work you and the others on the various > committees and subcommittees have done. > > Henry Barber > > Cheek wrote: > > > Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > > > > There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there > > is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of > > reality. > > > > EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any > > agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > > > > I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for > > supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of > > relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO > > NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > > > > I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above > > amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > > > > The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > > > > We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding > > licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the > > last minute. The process took more time than was > > anticipated. > > > > I advised the members of this list server of this situation on > > September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a > > great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be > > included because of time limitations. > > > > I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the > > recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > > > > I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the > > proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. > > at the BOH Meeting. > > > > The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken > > rural and frontier areas into consideration. > > > > I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to > > lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your > > superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the > > funding. > > > > I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope > > whatever happens we can all move on. > > > > Hope you all have a good day. > > > > > > GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT > > EHCAC VICE-CHAIR > > gary911@... > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 12, 1998 Report Share Posted October 12, 1998 , I am reading this at home and not near my rolodex. However you can send it to Gene Weatherall at TDH. You can get his address off the TDH page. Make sure and reference the rule 157.40. I don't know the date the comment period will close. I suppose you can E-Mail your comment to him also. His E-Mail address is also on the TDH web page. Another resource you have is TDH Board of Health commissioners. You can go to the TDH Health Department page and download their addresses. If all else fails, Email me again tomorrow and I will fax you a copy of the Board of Health Commissioners addresses. Henry Gates wrote: > Mr. Barber, > > Due to teaching, work schedules, and a general > lack of knowledge to some of these things, I was > unable to attend the meeting. But the idea of being > able to write a letter to the board has some > possibilities. If you could send me a physical address > to send a letter, It would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks for the kick in the rear! > > Gates > > BARBER wrote: > > > , > > > > Having just returned from the public comment meeting, I was more than > > disappointed in the turn out. Someone out there correct me if I am wrong, > > only 5 or 6 folks took the time out of their schedule to come to Austin to > > address their concerns about licensure. Some pro and some con. As in many > > other such meetings, empathy prevailed. Only a few that were concerned > > with the issue took the time to comment in person or in writing. > > > > So for those folks out there that think that a few are making > > decisions for the rest. Where were you today? Where were you for the > > subcommittee meetings? Where were you for the EHCAC meetings? Others will > > continue making decisions that affect EMS until we grow some legs and step > > to the plate. > > > > We continually gripe because the physicians, nurses or others are > > making decisions for us. Well at least they make an effort. > > > > But, your right, we need to move onward. In whatever form licensure is > > approved, it will be a step forward. Folks you can still send in your > > comments in writing, its not to late. Get involved. > > > > Thanks again for all the hard work you and the others on the various > > committees and subcommittees have done. > > > > Henry Barber > > > > Cheek wrote: > > > > > Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > > > > > > There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there > > > is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of > > > reality. > > > > > > EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any > > > agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > > > > > > I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for > > > supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of > > > relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO > > > NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > > > > > > I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above > > > amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > > > > > > The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > > > > > > We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding > > > licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the > > > last minute. The process took more time than was > > > anticipated. > > > > > > I advised the members of this list server of this situation on > > > September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a > > > great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be > > > included because of time limitations. > > > > > > I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the > > > recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > > > > > > I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the > > > proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. > > > at the BOH Meeting. > > > > > > The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken > > > rural and frontier areas into consideration. > > > > > > I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to > > > lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your > > > superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the > > > funding. > > > > > > I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope > > > whatever happens we can all move on. > > > > > > Hope you all have a good day. > > > > > > > > > GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT > > > EHCAC VICE-CHAIR > > > gary911@... > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 12, 1998 Report Share Posted October 12, 1998 I believe the the comment period ends October 26. The most effective weapon is to write personal letters to each member of the Board of Health. Their names and addresses are on their web page. I would also cc Gene W. Yes, it's cumbersome, but with computers it shouldn't be a great chore. Address and print each one individually; don't xerox. This gets their attention. Gene Gandy Henry J. Barber wrote: > , > > I am reading this at home and not near my rolodex. However you can send it to Gene Weatherall at TDH. You can get his > address off the TDH page. Make sure and reference the rule 157.40. I don't know the date the comment period will close. I > suppose you can E-Mail your comment to him also. His E-Mail address is also on the TDH web page. Another resource you have is > TDH Board of Health commissioners. You can go to the TDH Health Department page and download their addresses. If all else fails, > Email me again tomorrow and I will fax you a copy of the Board of Health Commissioners addresses. > > Henry > > Gates wrote: > > > Mr. Barber, > > > > Due to teaching, work schedules, and a general > > lack of knowledge to some of these things, I was > > unable to attend the meeting. But the idea of being > > able to write a letter to the board has some > > possibilities. If you could send me a physical address > > to send a letter, It would be greatly appreciated. > > > > Thanks for the kick in the rear! > > > > Gates > > > > BARBER wrote: > > > > > , > > > > > > Having just returned from the public comment meeting, I was more than > > > disappointed in the turn out. Someone out there correct me if I am wrong, > > > only 5 or 6 folks took the time out of their schedule to come to Austin to > > > address their concerns about licensure. Some pro and some con. As in many > > > other such meetings, empathy prevailed. Only a few that were concerned > > > with the issue took the time to comment in person or in writing. > > > > > > So for those folks out there that think that a few are making > > > decisions for the rest. Where were you today? Where were you for the > > > subcommittee meetings? Where were you for the EHCAC meetings? Others will > > > continue making decisions that affect EMS until we grow some legs and step > > > to the plate. > > > > > > We continually gripe because the physicians, nurses or others are > > > making decisions for us. Well at least they make an effort. > > > > > > But, your right, we need to move onward. In whatever form licensure is > > > approved, it will be a step forward. Folks you can still send in your > > > comments in writing, its not to late. Get involved. > > > > > > Thanks again for all the hard work you and the others on the various > > > committees and subcommittees have done. > > > > > > Henry Barber > > > > > > Cheek wrote: > > > > > > > Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > > > > > > > > There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there > > > > is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of > > > > reality. > > > > > > > > EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any > > > > agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > > > > > > > > I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for > > > > supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of > > > > relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO > > > > NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > > > > > > > > I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above > > > > amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > > > > > > > > The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > > > > > > > > We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding > > > > licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the > > > > last minute. The process took more time than was > > > > anticipated. > > > > > > > > I advised the members of this list server of this situation on > > > > September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a > > > > great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be > > > > included because of time limitations. > > > > > > > > I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the > > > > recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > > > > > > > > I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the > > > > proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. > > > > at the BOH Meeting. > > > > > > > > The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken > > > > rural and frontier areas into consideration. > > > > > > > > I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to > > > > lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your > > > > superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the > > > > funding. > > > > > > > > I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope > > > > whatever happens we can all move on. > > > > > > > > Hope you all have a good day. > > > > > > > > > > > > GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT > > > > EHCAC VICE-CHAIR > > > > gary911@... > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 1998 Report Share Posted October 13, 1998 The public comment period for licensed paramedic does end Oct 26. Send your written comments to Gene Weatherall at the following address: Texas Department of Health Bureau of Emergency Management 1100 West 49th Street Austin, Texas 78756 > Reply-to: egroups > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 16:04:28 -0500 > > To: " egroups " <egroups> > Subject: [] Re: Licensure > Mr. Barber, > > Due to teaching, work schedules, and a general > lack of knowledge to some of these things, I was > unable to attend the meeting. But the idea of being > able to write a letter to the board has some > possibilities. If you could send me a physical address > to send a letter, It would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks for the kick in the rear! > > Gates > > > > BARBER wrote: > > > , > > > > Having just returned from the public comment meeting, I was more than > > disappointed in the turn out. Someone out there correct me if I am wrong, > > only 5 or 6 folks took the time out of their schedule to come to Austin to > > address their concerns about licensure. Some pro and some con. As in many > > other such meetings, empathy prevailed. Only a few that were concerned > > with the issue took the time to comment in person or in writing. > > > > So for those folks out there that think that a few are making > > decisions for the rest. Where were you today? Where were you for the > > subcommittee meetings? Where were you for the EHCAC meetings? Others will > > continue making decisions that affect EMS until we grow some legs and step > > to the plate. > > > > We continually gripe because the physicians, nurses or others are > > making decisions for us. Well at least they make an effort. > > > > But, your right, we need to move onward. In whatever form licensure is > > approved, it will be a step forward. Folks you can still send in your > > comments in writing, its not to late. Get involved. > > > > Thanks again for all the hard work you and the others on the various > > committees and subcommittees have done. > > > > Henry Barber > > > > Cheek wrote: > > > > > Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > > > > > > There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there > > > is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of > > > reality. > > > > > > EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any > > > agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > > > > > > I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for > > > supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of > > > relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO > > > NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > > > > > > I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above > > > amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > > > > > > The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > > > > > > We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding > > > licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the > > > last minute. The process took more time than was > > > anticipated. > > > > > > I advised the members of this list server of this situation on > > > September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a > > > great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be > > > included because of time limitations. > > > > > > I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the > > > recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > > > > > > I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the > > > proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. > > > at the BOH Meeting. > > > > > > The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken > > > rural and frontier areas into consideration. > > > > > > I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to > > > lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your > > > superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the > > > funding. > > > > > > I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope > > > whatever happens we can all move on. > > > > > > Hope you all have a good day. > > > > > > > > > GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT > > > EHCAC VICE-CHAIR > > > gary911@... > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 1998 Report Share Posted October 13, 1998 Gene: I think you are a little off on this one. You are right in that letters can be written to individual members of the Texas Board of Health and you are also right in that it gets their attention. However, it might not be the kind of attention you want. The proper procedure for submitting comments on proposed rules is through the program that submitted the rules. Those comments are submitted to the Board when the rule or rules go back for final adoption. EMS currently has a reputation as being controversial and fighting on each and every issue that comes up. In fact when these rules were initially proposed by the Board they commented that they wondered if they would be controversial. This brought a chuckle from the rest of the Board members. Individual letters to the Board members will only confirm their earlier assumption. Thanks, Gene Reply-to: egroups Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:01:52 -0500 To: egroups Subject: [] Re: Licensure I believe the the comment period ends October 26. The most effective weapon is to write personal letters to each member of the Board of Health. Their names and addresses are on their web page. I would also cc Gene W. Yes, it's cumbersome, but with computers it shouldn't be a great chore. Address and print each one individually; don't xerox. This gets their attention. Gene Gandy Henry J. Barber wrote: > , > > I am reading this at home and not near my rolodex. However you can send it to Gene Weatherall at TDH. You can get his > address off the TDH page. Make sure and reference the rule 157.40. I don't know the date the comment period will close. I > suppose you can E-Mail your comment to him also. His E-Mail address is also on the TDH web page. Another resource you have is > TDH Board of Health commissioners. You can go to the TDH Health Department page and download their addresses. If all else fails, > Email me again tomorrow and I will fax you a copy of the Board of Health Commissioners addresses. > > Henry > > Gates wrote: > > > Mr. Barber, > > > > Due to teaching, work schedules, and a general > > lack of knowledge to some of these things, I was > > unable to attend the meeting. But the idea of being > > able to write a letter to the board has some > > possibilities. If you could send me a physical address > > to send a letter, It would be greatly appreciated. > > > > Thanks for the kick in the rear! > > > > Gates > > > > BARBER wrote: > > > > > , > > > > > > Having just returned from the public comment meeting, I was more than > > > disappointed in the turn out. Someone out there correct me if I am wrong, > > > only 5 or 6 folks took the time out of their schedule to come to Austin to > > > address their concerns about licensure. Some pro and some con. As in many > > > other such meetings, empathy prevailed. Only a few that were concerned > > > with the issue took the time to comment in person or in writing. > > > > > > So for those folks out there that think that a few are making > > > decisions for the rest. Where were you today? Where were you for the > > > subcommittee meetings? Where were you for the EHCAC meetings? Others will > > > continue making decisions that affect EMS until we grow some legs and step > > > to the plate. > > > > > > We continually gripe because the physicians, nurses or others are > > > making decisions for us. Well at least they make an effort. > > > > > > But, your right, we need to move onward. In whatever form licensure is > > > approved, it will be a step forward. Folks you can still send in your > > > comments in writing, its not to late. Get involved. > > > > > > Thanks again for all the hard work you and the others on the various > > > committees and subcommittees have done. > > > > > > Henry Barber > > > > > > Cheek wrote: > > > > > > > Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > > > > > > > > There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there > > > > is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of > > > > reality. > > > > > > > > EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any > > > > agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > > > > > > > > I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for > > > > supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of > > > > relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO > > > > NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > > > > > > > > I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above > > > > amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > > > > > > > > The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > > > > > > > > We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding > > > > licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the > > > > last minute. The process took more time than was > > > > anticipated. > > > > > > > > I advised the members of this list server of this situation on > > > > September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a > > > > great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be > > > > included because of time limitations. > > > > > > > > I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the > > > > recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > > > > > > > > I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the > > > > proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. > > > > at the BOH Meeting. > > > > > > > > The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken > > > > rural and frontier areas into consideration. > > > > > > > > I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to > > > > lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your > > > > superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the > > > > funding. > > > > > > > > I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope > > > > whatever happens we can all move on. > > > > > > > > Hope you all have a good day. > > > > > > > > > > > > GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT > > > > EHCAC VICE-CHAIR > > > > gary911@... > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 1998 Report Share Posted October 13, 1998 Gene; I have a question for you if you didn't get my e-mail. My e-mail address is dannylisaj@.... Please e-mail with your address so that I may ask. Danny L. Paramedic ______________________________________________________________________ 2X 2X 2X DOUBLE REWARDS POINTS! 2X 2X 2X Open a new NextCard Internet Visa account with a qualifying balance transfer and you'll earn DOUBLE Rewards points. Earn free airline tickets in half the time! Intro rates as low as 2.9% APR and NO annual fee! Apply Online NOW! http://ads./click/63/0/nextcard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 1998 Report Share Posted October 13, 1998 I stand corrected. Appreciate the advice. Seems strange, though, that they wouldn't want to hear from the public they serve. Gene Gandy E. Gandy, JD, EMT-P EMS Professions Program Director Tyler Junior College Tyler, TX ggan@... Check out our website at: http://www.tyler.cc.tx.us/emmt/ GENE WEATHERALL wrote: > Gene: > I think you are a little off on this one. You are right in that > letters can be written to individual members of the Texas Board of > Health and you are also right in that it gets their attention. > However, it might not be the kind of attention you want. > > The proper procedure for submitting comments on proposed rules is > through the program that submitted the rules. Those comments are > submitted to the Board when the rule or rules go back for final > adoption. > > EMS currently has a reputation as being controversial and fighting > on each and every issue that comes up. In fact when these rules were > initially proposed by the Board they commented that they wondered if > they would be controversial. This brought a chuckle from the rest of > the Board members. Individual letters to the Board members will only > confirm their earlier assumption. > > Thanks, Gene > > Reply-to: egroups > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:01:52 -0500 > > To: egroups > Subject: [] Re: Licensure > > I believe the the comment period ends October 26. The most effective weapon is to write personal letters to each member of the > Board of Health. Their names and addresses are on their web page. I would also cc Gene W. Yes, it's cumbersome, but with > computers it shouldn't be a great chore. Address and print each one individually; don't xerox. This gets their attention. > > Gene Gandy > > Henry J. Barber wrote: > > > , > > > > I am reading this at home and not near my rolodex. However you can send it to Gene Weatherall at TDH. You can get his > > address off the TDH page. Make sure and reference the rule 157.40. I don't know the date the comment period will close. I > > suppose you can E-Mail your comment to him also. His E-Mail address is also on the TDH web page. Another resource you have is > > TDH Board of Health commissioners. You can go to the TDH Health Department page and download their addresses. If all else fails, > > Email me again tomorrow and I will fax you a copy of the Board of Health Commissioners addresses. > > > > Henry > > > > Gates wrote: > > > > > Mr. Barber, > > > > > > Due to teaching, work schedules, and a general > > > lack of knowledge to some of these things, I was > > > unable to attend the meeting. But the idea of being > > > able to write a letter to the board has some > > > possibilities. If you could send me a physical address > > > to send a letter, It would be greatly appreciated. > > > > > > Thanks for the kick in the rear! > > > > > > Gates > > > > > > BARBER wrote: > > > > > > > , > > > > > > > > Having just returned from the public comment meeting, I was more than > > > > disappointed in the turn out. Someone out there correct me if I am wrong, > > > > only 5 or 6 folks took the time out of their schedule to come to Austin to > > > > address their concerns about licensure. Some pro and some con. As in many > > > > other such meetings, empathy prevailed. Only a few that were concerned > > > > with the issue took the time to comment in person or in writing. > > > > > > > > So for those folks out there that think that a few are making > > > > decisions for the rest. Where were you today? Where were you for the > > > > subcommittee meetings? Where were you for the EHCAC meetings? Others will > > > > continue making decisions that affect EMS until we grow some legs and step > > > > to the plate. > > > > > > > > We continually gripe because the physicians, nurses or others are > > > > making decisions for us. Well at least they make an effort. > > > > > > > > But, your right, we need to move onward. In whatever form licensure is > > > > approved, it will be a step forward. Folks you can still send in your > > > > comments in writing, its not to late. Get involved. > > > > > > > > Thanks again for all the hard work you and the others on the various > > > > committees and subcommittees have done. > > > > > > > > Henry Barber > > > > > > > > Cheek wrote: > > > > > > > > > Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > > > > > > > > > > There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there > > > > > is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of > > > > > reality. > > > > > > > > > > EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any > > > > > agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > > > > > > > > > > I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for > > > > > supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of > > > > > relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO > > > > > NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > > > > > > > > > > I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above > > > > > amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > > > > > > > > > > The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > > > > > > > > > > We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding > > > > > licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the > > > > > last minute. The process took more time than was > > > > > anticipated. > > > > > > > > > > I advised the members of this list server of this situation on > > > > > September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a > > > > > great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be > > > > > included because of time limitations. > > > > > > > > > > I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the > > > > > recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > > > > > > > > > > I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the > > > > > proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. > > > > > at the BOH Meeting. > > > > > > > > > > The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken > > > > > rural and frontier areas into consideration. > > > > > > > > > > I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to > > > > > lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your > > > > > superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the > > > > > funding. > > > > > > > > > > I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope > > > > > whatever happens we can all move on. > > > > > > > > > > Hope you all have a good day. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT > > > > > EHCAC VICE-CHAIR > > > > > gary911@... > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 1998 Report Share Posted October 13, 1998 They do want to hear from the public they serve. That is why we had a public hearing. That is why there is a public comment period. You and the 42,000 EMS folks are more than welcome to write them individual letters. I'm just telling you that you may do more to harm your cause than to help it, when you get outside of the published process. Suit yourself on this issue. Reply-to: egroups Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:52:48 -0500 To: egroups Subject: [] Re: Licensure I stand corrected. Appreciate the advice. Seems strange, though, that they wouldn't want to hear from the public they serve. Gene Gandy E. Gandy, JD, EMT-P EMS Professions Program Director Tyler Junior College Tyler, TX ggan@... Check out our website at: http://www.tyler.cc.tx.us/emmt/ GENE WEATHERALL wrote: > Gene: > I think you are a little off on this one. You are right in that > letters can be written to individual members of the Texas Board of > Health and you are also right in that it gets their attention. > However, it might not be the kind of attention you want. > > The proper procedure for submitting comments on proposed rules is > through the program that submitted the rules. Those comments are > submitted to the Board when the rule or rules go back for final > adoption. > > EMS currently has a reputation as being controversial and fighting > on each and every issue that comes up. In fact when these rules were > initially proposed by the Board they commented that they wondered if > they would be controversial. This brought a chuckle from the rest of > the Board members. Individual letters to the Board members will only > confirm their earlier assumption. > > Thanks, Gene > > Reply-to: egroups > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:01:52 -0500 > > To: egroups > Subject: [] Re: Licensure > > I believe the the comment period ends October 26. The most effective weapon is to write personal letters to each member of the > Board of Health. Their names and addresses are on their web page. I would also cc Gene W. Yes, it's cumbersome, but with > computers it shouldn't be a great chore. Address and print each one individually; don't xerox. This gets their attention. > > Gene Gandy > > Henry J. Barber wrote: > > > , > > > > I am reading this at home and not near my rolodex. However you can send it to Gene Weatherall at TDH. You can get his > > address off the TDH page. Make sure and reference the rule 157.40. I don't know the date the comment period will close. I > > suppose you can E-Mail your comment to him also. His E-Mail address is also on the TDH web page. Another resource you have is > > TDH Board of Health commissioners. You can go to the TDH Health Department page and download their addresses. If all else fails, > > Email me again tomorrow and I will fax you a copy of the Board of Health Commissioners addresses. > > > > Henry > > > > Gates wrote: > > > > > Mr. Barber, > > > > > > Due to teaching, work schedules, and a general > > > lack of knowledge to some of these things, I was > > > unable to attend the meeting. But the idea of being > > > able to write a letter to the board has some > > > possibilities. If you could send me a physical address > > > to send a letter, It would be greatly appreciated. > > > > > > Thanks for the kick in the rear! > > > > > > Gates > > > > > > BARBER wrote: > > > > > > > , > > > > > > > > Having just returned from the public comment meeting, I was more than > > > > disappointed in the turn out. Someone out there correct me if I am wrong, > > > > only 5 or 6 folks took the time out of their schedule to come to Austin to > > > > address their concerns about licensure. Some pro and some con. As in many > > > > other such meetings, empathy prevailed. Only a few that were concerned > > > > with the issue took the time to comment in person or in writing. > > > > > > > > So for those folks out there that think that a few are making > > > > decisions for the rest. Where were you today? Where were you for the > > > > subcommittee meetings? Where were you for the EHCAC meetings? Others will > > > > continue making decisions that affect EMS until we grow some legs and step > > > > to the plate. > > > > > > > > We continually gripe because the physicians, nurses or others are > > > > making decisions for us. Well at least they make an effort. > > > > > > > > But, your right, we need to move onward. In whatever form licensure is > > > > approved, it will be a step forward. Folks you can still send in your > > > > comments in writing, its not to late. Get involved. > > > > > > > > Thanks again for all the hard work you and the others on the various > > > > committees and subcommittees have done. > > > > > > > > Henry Barber > > > > > > > > Cheek wrote: > > > > > > > > > Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > > > > > > > > > > There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there > > > > > is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of > > > > > reality. > > > > > > > > > > EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any > > > > > agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > > > > > > > > > > I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for > > > > > supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of > > > > > relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO > > > > > NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > > > > > > > > > > I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above > > > > > amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > > > > > > > > > > The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > > > > > > > > > > We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding > > > > > licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the > > > > > last minute. The process took more time than was > > > > > anticipated. > > > > > > > > > > I advised the members of this list server of this situation on > > > > > September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a > > > > > great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be > > > > > included because of time limitations. > > > > > > > > > > I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the > > > > > recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > > > > > > > > > > I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the > > > > > proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. > > > > > at the BOH Meeting. > > > > > > > > > > The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken > > > > > rural and frontier areas into consideration. > > > > > > > > > > I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to > > > > > lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your > > > > > superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the > > > > > funding. > > > > > > > > > > I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope > > > > > whatever happens we can all move on. > > > > > > > > > > Hope you all have a good day. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT > > > > > EHCAC VICE-CHAIR > > > > > gary911@... > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 1998 Report Share Posted October 13, 1998 Gene, I submitted letter to each Board Member. I certainly didn't think that was inappropriate at all. I felt that they were the folks that would be making the decision, so my comments were made to each of them individually. As long as the letters are respectfully tendered, they should be accepted the same way. Henry Barber GENE WEATHERALL wrote: > Gene: > I think you are a little off on this one. You are right in that > letters can be written to individual members of the Texas Board of > Health and you are also right in that it gets their attention. > However, it might not be the kind of attention you want. > > The proper procedure for submitting comments on proposed rules is > through the program that submitted the rules. Those comments are > submitted to the Board when the rule or rules go back for final > adoption. > > EMS currently has a reputation as being controversial and fighting > on each and every issue that comes up. In fact when these rules were > initially proposed by the Board they commented that they wondered if > they would be controversial. This brought a chuckle from the rest of > the Board members. Individual letters to the Board members will only > confirm their earlier assumption. > > Thanks, Gene > > Reply-to: egroups > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:01:52 -0500 > > To: egroups > Subject: [] Re: Licensure > > I believe the the comment period ends October 26. The most effective weapon is to write personal letters to each member of the > Board of Health. Their names and addresses are on their web page. I would also cc Gene W. Yes, it's cumbersome, but with > computers it shouldn't be a great chore. Address and print each one individually; don't xerox. This gets their attention. > > Gene Gandy > > Henry J. Barber wrote: > > > , > > > > I am reading this at home and not near my rolodex. However you can send it to Gene Weatherall at TDH. You can get his > > address off the TDH page. Make sure and reference the rule 157.40. I don't know the date the comment period will close. I > > suppose you can E-Mail your comment to him also. His E-Mail address is also on the TDH web page. Another resource you have is > > TDH Board of Health commissioners. You can go to the TDH Health Department page and download their addresses. If all else fails, > > Email me again tomorrow and I will fax you a copy of the Board of Health Commissioners addresses. > > > > Henry > > > > Gates wrote: > > > > > Mr. Barber, > > > > > > Due to teaching, work schedules, and a general > > > lack of knowledge to some of these things, I was > > > unable to attend the meeting. But the idea of being > > > able to write a letter to the board has some > > > possibilities. If you could send me a physical address > > > to send a letter, It would be greatly appreciated. > > > > > > Thanks for the kick in the rear! > > > > > > Gates > > > > > > BARBER wrote: > > > > > > > , > > > > > > > > Having just returned from the public comment meeting, I was more than > > > > disappointed in the turn out. Someone out there correct me if I am wrong, > > > > only 5 or 6 folks took the time out of their schedule to come to Austin to > > > > address their concerns about licensure. Some pro and some con. As in many > > > > other such meetings, empathy prevailed. Only a few that were concerned > > > > with the issue took the time to comment in person or in writing. > > > > > > > > So for those folks out there that think that a few are making > > > > decisions for the rest. Where were you today? Where were you for the > > > > subcommittee meetings? Where were you for the EHCAC meetings? Others will > > > > continue making decisions that affect EMS until we grow some legs and step > > > > to the plate. > > > > > > > > We continually gripe because the physicians, nurses or others are > > > > making decisions for us. Well at least they make an effort. > > > > > > > > But, your right, we need to move onward. In whatever form licensure is > > > > approved, it will be a step forward. Folks you can still send in your > > > > comments in writing, its not to late. Get involved. > > > > > > > > Thanks again for all the hard work you and the others on the various > > > > committees and subcommittees have done. > > > > > > > > Henry Barber > > > > > > > > Cheek wrote: > > > > > > > > > Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > > > > > > > > > > There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there > > > > > is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of > > > > > reality. > > > > > > > > > > EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any > > > > > agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > > > > > > > > > > I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for > > > > > supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of > > > > > relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO > > > > > NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > > > > > > > > > > I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above > > > > > amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > > > > > > > > > > The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > > > > > > > > > > We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding > > > > > licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the > > > > > last minute. The process took more time than was > > > > > anticipated. > > > > > > > > > > I advised the members of this list server of this situation on > > > > > September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a > > > > > great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be > > > > > included because of time limitations. > > > > > > > > > > I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the > > > > > recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > > > > > > > > > > I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the > > > > > proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. > > > > > at the BOH Meeting. > > > > > > > > > > The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken > > > > > rural and frontier areas into consideration. > > > > > > > > > > I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to > > > > > lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your > > > > > superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the > > > > > funding. > > > > > > > > > > I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope > > > > > whatever happens we can all move on. > > > > > > > > > > Hope you all have a good day. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT > > > > > EHCAC VICE-CHAIR > > > > > gary911@... > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 1998 Report Share Posted October 13, 1998 I'm a new subscriber to this egroup and am lost on what the talk is about concerning conspiracy of licensure. Could you fill me in? Thanks Musick emt-p [] Re: Licensure >> >> I believe the the comment period ends October 26. The most effective weapon is to write personal letters to each member of the >> Board of Health. Their names and addresses are on their web page. I would also cc Gene W. Yes, it's cumbersome, but with >> computers it shouldn't be a great chore. Address and print each one individually; don't xerox. This gets their attention. >> >> Gene Gandy >> >> Henry J. Barber wrote: >> >> > , >> > >> > I am reading this at home and not near my rolodex. However you can send it to Gene Weatherall at TDH. You can get his >> > address off the TDH page. Make sure and reference the rule 157.40. I don't know the date the comment period will close. I >> > suppose you can E-Mail your comment to him also. His E-Mail address is also on the TDH web page. Another resource you have is >> > TDH Board of Health commissioners. You can go to the TDH Health Department page and download their addresses. If all else fails, >> > Email me again tomorrow and I will fax you a copy of the Board of Health Commissioners addresses. >> > >> > Henry >> > >> > Gates wrote: >> > >> > > Mr. Barber, >> > > >> > > Due to teaching, work schedules, and a general >> > > lack of knowledge to some of these things, I was >> > > unable to attend the meeting. But the idea of being >> > > able to write a letter to the board has some >> > > possibilities. If you could send me a physical address >> > > to send a letter, It would be greatly appreciated. >> > > >> > > Thanks for the kick in the rear! >> > > >> > > Gates >> > > >> > > BARBER wrote: >> > > >> > > > , >> > > > >> > > > Having just returned from the public comment meeting, I was more than >> > > > disappointed in the turn out. Someone out there correct me if I am wrong, >> > > > only 5 or 6 folks took the time out of their schedule to come to Austin to >> > > > address their concerns about licensure. Some pro and some con. As in many >> > > > other such meetings, empathy prevailed. Only a few that were concerned >> > > > with the issue took the time to comment in person or in writing. >> > > > >> > > > So for those folks out there that think that a few are making >> > > > decisions for the rest. Where were you today? Where were you for the >> > > > subcommittee meetings? Where were you for the EHCAC meetings? Others will >> > > > continue making decisions that affect EMS until we grow some legs and step >> > > > to the plate. >> > > > >> > > > We continually gripe because the physicians, nurses or others are >> > > > making decisions for us. Well at least they make an effort. >> > > > >> > > > But, your right, we need to move onward. In whatever form licensure is >> > > > approved, it will be a step forward. Folks you can still send in your >> > > > comments in writing, its not to late. Get involved. >> > > > >> > > > Thanks again for all the hard work you and the others on the various >> > > > committees and subcommittees have done. >> > > > >> > > > Henry Barber >> > > > >> > > > Cheek wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. >> > > > > >> > > > > There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there >> > > > > is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of >> > > > > reality. >> > > > > >> > > > > EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any >> > > > > agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. >> > > > > >> > > > > I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC for >> > > > > supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating of >> > > > > relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO >> > > > > NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. >> > > > > >> > > > > I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above >> > > > > amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) >> > > > > >> > > > > The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. >> > > > > >> > > > > We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding >> > > > > licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the >> > > > > last minute. The process took more time than was >> > > > > anticipated. >> > > > > >> > > > > I advised the members of this list server of this situation on >> > > > > September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a >> > > > > great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be >> > > > > included because of time limitations. >> > > > > >> > > > > I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the >> > > > > recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. >> > > > > >> > > > > I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the >> > > > > proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. >> > > > > at the BOH Meeting. >> > > > > >> > > > > The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken >> > > > > rural and frontier areas into consideration. >> > > > > >> > > > > I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to >> > > > > lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your >> > > > > superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the >> > > > > funding. >> > > > > >> > > > > I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope >> > > > > whatever happens we can all move on. >> > > > > >> > > > > Hope you all have a good day. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT >> > > > > EHCAC VICE-CHAIR >> > > > > gary911@... >> > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ >> > > > > >> > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 1998 Report Share Posted October 13, 1998 It's a long story. Some people brought up the idea that there's some vast conspiracy underway at the Bureau of Emergency Management to circumvent the process. I attempted to inject humor into the situation by writing a satirical response in which I outlined a perfectly outrageous scenario which was responded to by Jeff Jarvis, Ernie and others. All in fun. Gene Gandy E. Gandy, JD, EMT-P EMS Professions Program Director Tyler Junior College Tyler, TX ggan@... Check out our website at: http://www.tyler.cc.tx.us/emmt/ Musick wrote: > I'm a new subscriber to this egroup and am lost on what the talk is about > concerning conspiracy of licensure. Could you fill me in? > Thanks > Musick emt-p > [] Re: Licensure > >> > >> I believe the the comment period ends October 26. The most effective > weapon is to write personal letters to each member of the > >> Board of Health. Their names and addresses are on their web page. I > would also cc Gene W. Yes, it's cumbersome, but with > >> computers it shouldn't be a great chore. Address and print each one > individually; don't xerox. This gets their attention. > >> > >> Gene Gandy > >> > >> Henry J. Barber wrote: > >> > >> > , > >> > > >> > I am reading this at home and not near my rolodex. However you can > send it to Gene Weatherall at TDH. You can get his > >> > address off the TDH page. Make sure and reference the rule 157.40. I > don't know the date the comment period will close. I > >> > suppose you can E-Mail your comment to him also. His E-Mail address is > also on the TDH web page. Another resource you have is > >> > TDH Board of Health commissioners. You can go to the TDH Health > Department page and download their addresses. If all else fails, > >> > Email me again tomorrow and I will fax you a copy of the Board of > Health Commissioners addresses. > >> > > >> > Henry > >> > > >> > Gates wrote: > >> > > >> > > Mr. Barber, > >> > > > >> > > Due to teaching, work schedules, and a general > >> > > lack of knowledge to some of these things, I was > >> > > unable to attend the meeting. But the idea of being > >> > > able to write a letter to the board has some > >> > > possibilities. If you could send me a physical address > >> > > to send a letter, It would be greatly appreciated. > >> > > > >> > > Thanks for the kick in the rear! > >> > > > >> > > Gates > >> > > > >> > > BARBER wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > , > >> > > > > >> > > > Having just returned from the public comment meeting, I was > more than > >> > > > disappointed in the turn out. Someone out there correct me if I am > wrong, > >> > > > only 5 or 6 folks took the time out of their schedule to come to > Austin to > >> > > > address their concerns about licensure. Some pro and some con. As > in many > >> > > > other such meetings, empathy prevailed. Only a few that were > concerned > >> > > > with the issue took the time to comment in person or in writing. > >> > > > > >> > > > So for those folks out there that think that a few are making > >> > > > decisions for the rest. Where were you today? Where were you for > the > >> > > > subcommittee meetings? Where were you for the EHCAC meetings? > Others will > >> > > > continue making decisions that affect EMS until we grow some legs > and step > >> > > > to the plate. > >> > > > > >> > > > We continually gripe because the physicians, nurses or others > are > >> > > > making decisions for us. Well at least they make an effort. > >> > > > > >> > > > But, your right, we need to move onward. In whatever form > licensure is > >> > > > approved, it will be a step forward. Folks you can still send in > your > >> > > > comments in writing, its not to late. Get involved. > >> > > > > >> > > > Thanks again for all the hard work you and the others on the > various > >> > > > committees and subcommittees have done. > >> > > > > >> > > > Henry Barber > >> > > > > >> > > > Cheek wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there > >> > > > > is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of > >> > > > > reality. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any > >> > > > > agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC > for > >> > > > > supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and > eliminating of > >> > > > > relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO > >> > > > > NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above > >> > > > > amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > >> > > > > > >> > > > > The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding > >> > > > > licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the > >> > > > > last minute. The process took more time than was > >> > > > > anticipated. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I advised the members of this list server of this situation on > >> > > > > September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a > >> > > > > great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be > >> > > > > included because of time limitations. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the > >> > > > > recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the > >> > > > > proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. > >> > > > > at the BOH Meeting. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken > >> > > > > rural and frontier areas into consideration. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first > to > >> > > > > lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope > your > >> > > > > superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the > >> > > > > funding. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope > >> > > > > whatever happens we can all move on. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Hope you all have a good day. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT > >> > > > > EHCAC VICE-CHAIR > >> > > > > gary911@... > >> > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 1998 Report Share Posted October 15, 1998 Do I detect a bit of the rumored TDH arrogance in this post. J. , just an old EMT-P ---------- > > They do want to hear from the public they serve. That is why we had > a public hearing. That is why there is a public comment period. > You and the 42,000 EMS folks are more than welcome to write them > individual letters. I'm just telling you that you may do more to > harm your cause than to help it, when you get outside of the > published process. > > Suit yourself on this issue. > > Reply-to: egroups > Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:52:48 -0500 > > To: egroups > Subject: [] Re: Licensure > > I stand corrected. Appreciate the advice. Seems strange, though, that they > wouldn't want to hear from the public they serve. > > Gene Gandy > E. Gandy, JD, EMT-P > EMS Professions Program Director > Tyler Junior College > Tyler, TX > ggan@... > > Check out our website at: http://www.tyler.cc.tx.us/emmt/ > > > > GENE WEATHERALL wrote: > > > Gene: > > I think you are a little off on this one. You are right in that > > letters can be written to individual members of the Texas Board of > > Health and you are also right in that it gets their attention. > > However, it might not be the kind of attention you want. > > > > The proper procedure for submitting comments on proposed rules is > > through the program that submitted the rules. Those comments are > > submitted to the Board when the rule or rules go back for final > > adoption. > > > > EMS currently has a reputation as being controversial and fighting > > on each and every issue that comes up. In fact when these rules were > > initially proposed by the Board they commented that they wondered if > > they would be controversial. This brought a chuckle from the rest of > > the Board members. Individual letters to the Board members will only > > confirm their earlier assumption. > > > > Thanks, Gene > > > > Reply-to: egroups > > Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 23:01:52 -0500 > > > > To: egroups > > Subject: [] Re: Licensure > > > > I believe the the comment period ends October 26. The most effective weapon > is to write personal letters to each member of the > > Board of Health. Their names and addresses are on their web page. I would > also cc Gene W. Yes, it's cumbersome, but with > > computers it shouldn't be a great chore. Address and print each one > individually; don't xerox. This gets their attention. > > > > Gene Gandy > > > > Henry J. Barber wrote: > > > > > , > > > > > > I am reading this at home and not near my rolodex. However you can > send it to Gene Weatherall at TDH. You can get his > > > address off the TDH page. Make sure and reference the rule 157.40. I don't > know the date the comment period will close. I > > > suppose you can E-Mail your comment to him also. His E-Mail address is > also on the TDH web page. Another resource you have is > > > TDH Board of Health commissioners. You can go to the TDH Health Department > page and download their addresses. If all else fails, > > > Email me again tomorrow and I will fax you a copy of the Board of Health > Commissioners addresses. > > > > > > Henry > > > > > > Gates wrote: > > > > > > > Mr. Barber, > > > > > > > > Due to teaching, work schedules, and a general > > > > lack of knowledge to some of these things, I was > > > > unable to attend the meeting. But the idea of being > > > > able to write a letter to the board has some > > > > possibilities. If you could send me a physical address > > > > to send a letter, It would be greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > Thanks for the kick in the rear! > > > > > > > > Gates > > > > > > > > BARBER wrote: > > > > > > > > > , > > > > > > > > > > Having just returned from the public comment meeting, I was more > than > > > > > disappointed in the turn out. Someone out there correct me if I am > wrong, > > > > > only 5 or 6 folks took the time out of their schedule to come to > Austin to > > > > > address their concerns about licensure. Some pro and some con. As in > many > > > > > other such meetings, empathy prevailed. Only a few that were concerned > > > > > with the issue took the time to comment in person or in writing. > > > > > > > > > > So for those folks out there that think that a few are making > > > > > decisions for the rest. Where were you today? Where were you for the > > > > > subcommittee meetings? Where were you for the EHCAC meetings? Others > will > > > > > continue making decisions that affect EMS until we grow some legs and > step > > > > > to the plate. > > > > > > > > > > We continually gripe because the physicians, nurses or others are > > > > > making decisions for us. Well at least they make an effort. > > > > > > > > > > But, your right, we need to move onward. In whatever form > licensure is > > > > > approved, it will be a step forward. Folks you can still send in your > > > > > comments in writing, its not to late. Get involved. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again for all the hard work you and the others on the various > > > > > committees and subcommittees have done. > > > > > > > > > > Henry Barber > > > > > > > > > > Cheek wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Just a few comments on the issue(s) at hand. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no conspiracy on EHCAC or the Bureau. If you think there > > > > > > is a conspiracy then you're paranoid and have a false sense of > > > > > > reality. > > > > > > > > > > > > EHCAC has always been above board and we have never had any > > > > > > agenda other than trying to improve the system as a whole. > > > > > > > > > > > > I applaud the medical directors on the EMS Subcommittee and EHCAC > for > > > > > > supporting The eliminating of the ACLS requirement and eliminating > of > > > > > > relicensure testing. I know there are many more out there that DO > > > > > > NOT agree with the Rule as published in the Texas Register. > > > > > > > > > > > > I also respect the medical directors who opposed the above > > > > > > amendments. ( I am also glad they are men of prayer) > > > > > > > > > > > > The amendments passed the EMS Subcommittee as well as EHCAC. > > > > > > > > > > > > We knew there were time constraints from the beginning regarding > > > > > > licensure. This is not something TDH BEM thought up at the > > > > > > last minute. The process took more time than was > > > > > > anticipated. > > > > > > > > > > > > I advised the members of this list server of this situation on > > > > > > September 18, 1998 through a post. It has been known for a > > > > > > great while that the EHCAC recommendation could not be > > > > > > included because of time limitations. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure the Bureau will present to the Board of Health the > > > > > > recommendation of EHCAC and the EMS subcommittee. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am sure there will be those in favor and those against the > > > > > > proposed and amended draft rule in attendance for public comment. > > > > > > at the BOH Meeting. > > > > > > > > > > > > The draft rules presented to BOH by EHCAC have always taken > > > > > > rural and frontier areas into consideration. > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope the ones crying about " how SB102 was passed " are the first to > > > > > > lose their funding when the legislators remove it, and I hope your > > > > > > superiors realize its because of your efforts that they lost the > > > > > > funding. > > > > > > > > > > > > I will not be able to attend the public comment period. I hope > > > > > > whatever happens we can all move on. > > > > > > > > > > > > Hope you all have a good day. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > GARY D. CHEEK, RN, EMT > > > > > > EHCAC VICE-CHAIR > > > > > > gary911@... > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 16, 2006 Report Share Posted August 16, 2006 Congratulations to Michigan!!! Massachusetts worked really hard to get there as well. The more states recognize licensing for dietitans, the more influence we have!!! Sincerely, Raphaela MS, RD, LDN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.