TAHCS: Why?

In a great example of illiteracy, TAHCS has sent out a recent email to people in the industry. It begins with this in the subject line: "NEWS FORM TAHCS 07-03-2012." FORM? You guys can't even get your message subject right. How is anyone supposed to trust you to get bigger things right? 

TAHCS wants you to know that they're giving you important "... News from Texas to Washing D.C. ..." Where the hell is Washing D.C.? 

So it seems that after months of wonderful silence, the stooges have decided to start yammering again. It's been a nice break and I am sorry it's over.

In this recent release we are told that Barry Johnson is now the Executive Director of that group. Is that a step up from Sean Schwinghammer (or whatever his name is)? No. The skill set has not improved, and the replacement is very likely far less qualified to do the job (not that I have a high regard for Sean so please don't read into this what definitely isn't here because I still think he did the job as terribly as Joan Cross does for FAMES but she is a topic for a later blog that is way past due and I think it's right to tackle only one failure at a time). 

But what else can anyone expect from the guys of TAHCS? It is common knowledge in the industry that they have very few members and are pretty much broke. For those who would consider joining TAHCS: A fool and his money are soon parted, right? What have they done for you lately? Nothing. And that is what they will always do.

These guys annoy me. No legitimate and useful organization in the industry wants anything to do with them. No legitimate and useful organization in the industry takes them seriously (I'm looking at you AAHomecare and at you VGM for very good reasons, but largely because you've publicly supported the TAHCS buffoons). 

Now it has been a long time since I have blogged, and I normally insert pertinent quotes into what I write. But there are only so many quotes about stupidity, and I have to use them sparingly if these TAHCS buffoons are going to try to stick around. 

Here is what Barry Johnson calls news:

1. "CMS has submitted a request to have RAC Auditors to perform prepayment revews. This request will adversely effect every provider and cost DME providers thousands of dollars in unnecessary paperwork. The request may exceed the congressional authority of CMS."

The first two sentences are obvious and we didn't need Johnson to tell us that. But where do you suppose they got the idea that CMS has congressional authority? Oh, wait. The TAHCS Johnson thinks that CMS may have exceeded the authority that Congress granted to the agency. On what facts does the TAHCS Johnson base that statement? Oh, wait. That gang is notorious for getting things wrong and making things up, so they don't need facts.

2. "ACA has been upheld by the Supreme Court and this ruling signals no positive changes for DME providers." 

DUH. We could never have figured that out without the TAHCS Johnson.

"In the strange set of circumstances, Justice Roberts was known to change his mind (at the last minute) in favor of the ACA. Conservitative justices were unable to return his opinion back and thus the 5-4 ruling in favor of the mandate."

A strange set of circumstances? No. He sold us all out to the Obama administration who no doubt applied political pressure to make Roberts turn his coat. He is said to have changed his mind at the last minute.

"This ruling by the court will surely polarize [C]ongress and make any legislation to change Competitive Bidding dif[f]icult." 

Barry, Congress has no intention of changing competitive bidding. The village idiot can figure that one out. Why is that lost on you and how did you escape your village? And is it that hard for you to make the effort to spell correctly?

3. "GAO is known to be skeptical of auditors and is concerned about the financial and the necessary effectiveness of this process. They are requesting detailed audit information and said to be reviewing it for changes. It seems that auditing just for the sake of auditing, when their is no fraud intended or committed, is not the the intent nor is it good use of taxpayers dollars."

The GAO can give its opinion all it wants to. If Congress included audits, like RACs, in Obamacare, then the GAO is basically screwed. 

4. "According to the IRS, the Medical Tax Exemption has not been extended to all DME equipment and supplies. The IRS is willing to discuss the application of the exemptions, but refuses to make futher comments at this time.  DME providers can look forward to paying more for equipment and supplies until this matter is resolved."

And we can count on you heroes at TAHCS to resolve the matter, right? I didn't think so. You yahoos formed because you were going to accomplish what you alleged others were not doing. As near as I can tell you've accomplished less than the others. Garbage in, garbage out.

5. "The 5 Year replacement rule issued by the Medical Directors has been found to have no specific guidelines for the process.There are no identified HCPCS codes, therefore DME providers are essentially in the dark with the five year replacement process. DME providers may need to take their complaints to CMS."

Then again, DME providers may not need to. A meteor may hit the earth, too. But thanks for giving so much information and firm guidance, TAHCS.

 6. "HHSC is changing in Texas, and as of July 1, 2012, requiring all beneficiaries over 21 and recieve [I before E except after C] SSI to be enrolled in a Star Plan if available in their area. If providers service beneficiaries in an area served by Star Plans and are not a provider of these plans, providers cannot contiune [continue] to service these beneficiaries. The only exception is if the beneficiary is on recieving [I before E except after C] Medicare. TAHCS recommends providers check every beneficiary and their eligiability [eligibility] before providing further medical equipment and supplies."

There's so much wrong with this that I can't begin to tackle it, and I'm not talking solely about the horrific spelling. Because SCOTUS struck down the mandate to states about Medicaid, it is unclear what any state agency is going to do. But before I'd take any advice from TAHCS, I'd contact MESA to get the facts.

And then we get this:

Barry Johnson, has been named by TAHCS President Kevin Hill to fulfill the position of Executive Director. Johnson is the immediate Past President of TAHCS and also serves as the Legislative Director.  Johnson is expected to continue his position as Legislative Director while serving asTAHCS Executive Director. He is a founding member of TAHCS and serves an at large member of the Board of Directors.

Wasn't Johnson supposed to be the president of AMEPA? Can these incestuous little organizations not find any new blood? TACHS, do the industry a favor and disband but failing that (because you are not smart enough to stay away) please keep your Johnson to yourselves. He should not be allowed out in public and is as qualified to represent and work for the industry as Rob Brant (who is such a failure that he lost his business, which of course makes him qualified to tell the rest of you how to run your businesses). 

TAHCS goes on to say that "It[']s time for membership renewal for many TAHCS providers."

When did two or three become many?

TAHCS calls itself "your proactive association," yet the group has been dead silent for months (except now, when they want money). How can anyone call that approach proactive? Are they serious? Kevin Hill and Barry Johnson need to stop deluding themselves. They are still, along with Rob Brant, an industry joke. TACHS is an embarrassment. 

Where was TAHCS when its own Vice President, the ever-boastful industry-savior wannabe known as Dean Cheney, had to close his doors because of competitive bidding? Weren't Brant and his cronies supposed to succeed where all others had failed and make that go away?

PROactive? You guys can't even REact effectively. 

Join your organization? Give you money? Not on your lives. I don't fund ineffective windbags. You say "united we stand?" When is that, when you need money to bankroll your ineffectiveness? No thanks. I'll support the legitimate organizations that don't disappear for months at a time and who actually get things done.