so let's start there so this is a time of the legislative session when things get busy crazy contentious  and as many bills are being tried to get finished up so all the bill to came over from the senate you know seem to pile up likewise the bills that we send over there are piled up and you know you you want to get them done before the german which is no magic day because it's only the day the speaker and the president pro tem sort of decide that we're going to to finish the budget first of course they are sort of they worked very hard to get that done but on the flip side if there's too many bills that have yet to pass there's sort of you know that the brakes are sort of put on that committee so that the budget doesn't get done too much too fast because as soon as you pass a budget then everyone's ready to go home and that's typically the times so that's that's where we are and that could make for some very short days on the in session and some very long drawn out days so he also makes for some very very hard bills because you know at the very end people start tacking those two were never really considered on to other bills that are going back to the other from their body find something that the other party really wants you can passing keep as a vehicle for putting every last thing that they think on before it goes to the floor and goes back so yeah it doesn't have to you know if you try to amend it on the floor it has to be germane but if you do it your committee on abil of your committee anything goes so they're saying you obviously if you have a bill that you want passed by the senate and they are not being real quick about getting a pastor or taking extra testimony or looking like they're going to make changes to it that really doesn't need to be made you know the trick here is that you find a corresponding bill that's in the house you know there's all kinds of funny little things that happened then as somebody told me it was they said it sounds like too much politics go on the pill here and it's like well yup that's what that's what it's all about so so yesterday there was a education bill which was the one to put a moratorium on school districts from closing their local school and it to a private school the next year which has happened twice in vermont now and last year in north bennington and it has some some people very upset obviously so it didn't pass but there was an agreement to do a study on it but this moratorium was supported in the senate the senate passed the bill came to the house and the house education committee passed it and it was on the floor yesterday and it was quite an interesting discussion about the pros and cons of doing this and why and why not and you know all the other stuff and the house minority leader got up and move that we strike section one of the bill so he was going to amend the bill by striking section one was section one was the so this so there's all the scrambling now about all of it if you know if this is going to pass you know basically if you pass pass it it meant but you know you're killing the bill i mean that that's the whole purpose of it and so after cheese i don't know forty minutes or so off the education committee who couldn't come to an agreement it was it was moved to have the bill why and which is you know basically it just it just sits on the calendar without any special date to take up so  this will come back up in the house i would guess i mean that they don't have an agreement in the education committee on this i mean they're very divided over over this and so the you know the still is one of these things that the senate well added on to another bill before they send it back to the house you know that's another thing as george said is you know you you add things on the bills before they come over to the other side and see if you can get it done that way and you know the trick the trick is is that you have to add it to the right bill because you don't add it to a bill that's not important to house members you add it to a bill that is important to house members so then you're you know this is this will whether that happens or not i don't know it all depends on how much the senators that really want it and i think it probably also the principle that on the party part of the reason they stopped the battle when they start to back me clearly the house leadership had wanted this to go through it would have gone through with the vote you know it would have been a party line vote or something along those lines but they have another education bill pending which is much more to even more contentious and that is the governance bill about school district school districts making all the districts k twelve districts getting rid of the silly arrangement we have with the supervisor unions  d that one is also very contentious and you know really kind of pits some of the rural small schools of people who represent those communities against other folks and  think they really want to deal with that first they just you know rather than push a bill they thought on education which was less important let's stop the bleeding on that one and  put it on the table for a while and there's now whether it gets taken back up after the other education bill or whether the other education bill he merges from it it's where it's going and he came out of the education committee one way went to the ways and means committee because you know property taxes are involved in the education they struck the whole bill and started over and wrote something entirely new then had to go to the appropriations committee who's talking about striking the whole thing as it was written by the ways and means committee and something new so who knows and this is a house bill this is not even started in the sen who knows where that's where it's going to end up it would it would in some ways help what's going on here because it you know the essence of this has been you can merge voluntarily but if you don't one state's going to impose  happen anyway probably changes the so done by may second second tuesday in may or something like that but just to shoot for but which i don't remember what he said was i think the first would be a thirty nine they they watch it like like we're talking about there are certain builds that that need to be that need to be passed and then there are certain bills that they want to pass and so the emphasis on happens is if you have another bill that you really want to to get passed and sent to the governor you need to make sure that that is getting taken up before those other major bills are done or else the chances are pretty slim that they will because once you vote on the budget there's very little left very little time left so any point between now and not want to bill that's coming out of a certain committee they can always ask for that bill to come to their their committee for review and then they can just not voted out and you know this is in the senate you hear about this more often because of the judiciary committee there which this is that committee where a lot a lot of  bills the senate doesn't want to get passed seem to end up because lots of bills could end up in judiciary i mean there's reasons to put a lot of bills that are but but basically what it is is that if you want i if you want to work on not getting a bill passed that is working its way through is you know you find its way into a committee that there's no support for that either just don't vote on it or they vote would even if it's been taken out it's still supposed to go to those committees so that's that's where i would say probably more bills go to the wall in the in the house than anywhere else so for example committee i'm on human services early in the session there was a lot of interest well there's still one interest and the the state has made mistakes  making food stamps for three squares for a month payments to people and since this is a federal program of the foot the feds come in and audit you and if you have so so much errors then the feds feds say you have to collect that money back so here we are from on those sort of calculations and gives you two hundred dollars in food stamps and a year later they say oh there was a mistake you should have only gotten one hundred dollars paid back the hundred dollars number one it's the people that need it the most and don't have the money number two it's money that went for food that you have to pay back and a whole bunch of other reasons so we have been we have had this problem now for the last three years of having enough errors that you have to collect it back and there has been a lot of legislatures legislators who spiel that it's not fair to ask the people who did not take that all they did was apply for food stamps they got the money they bought food and then they say oh we paid you too much spall so we worked very hard on coming up with a bill to pay to to have the state pay back that money well the number one thing is set that was it was a it was a humongous amount of money like seven million dollars or something completely for it you know you don't find that much money just in the budget but it's pretty tight and so the it obviously when it passed out of our committee it went to appropriations and it will that come out of appropriations because asia's don't have any money to pay for so  biggest aggravations i had this year and it's it seems much worse than it has been in the last five years and that's basically those committees of policy committee and they were you know a lot about this is gary and they've worked on a bill you know put a lot of effort into the fall about it and send it to the money committee and the money committee then makes a fundamental policy decision that this is not going to be the priority a priority and you do that with bills from everywhere to the money committees are really making almost all the policy decisions in the end and now in history it's much worse than it used to be no i don't know why that has that has happened but you know there  those that even hang on the wall that you can really don't have any money associated with it but they're not going to pass out and that's very frustrating because it gives basically twenty two people out of one hundred fifty of us you know well in the amount of money they get off of this tobacco settlement fund and not only that but for much is one of the few states that uses all the money that they get for some health related re they use it for a lot of medicaid payments it way there's also the baucus and social program there's all the programs for kids to stop smoking and for the  the tobacco but they'll look the part will look are the ones that go out make sure you're not selling tobacco to kids under eighteen and all this stuff so that's been a very successful thing but we also when this first started which ninety four so that may be sometime in that range we set up a trust fund to pay to take part of that settlement and put into this fund so that when the tobacco settlement fund stopped we would have this other fund to continue these programs and over the last years that fund has been used for other purposes mainly for medica payments and the fund is almost well it is either going to be empty at the end of this year or next year and then i'm not sure if there's anything left this is like three hundred thousand dollars something so and and i think there was good reasons to to use money in that fund in in those lean years when when we needed money for the medicaid payments however when when as a policy committee we agreed to use those funds instead of waiting you know using them at the after the back to settlement and that was we also put in that that this money basically had be paid back in this fun that was eight point seven million dollars that the state got and so our committee made the recommendations that that eight point seven billion dollars which was unexpected one time money be used to be put into this fund to refurbish it it didn't wasn't going to come out of the general taxes or anything if i was looked access it was a one time thing however the governor had sort of thrown that and too that one into the whole the whole general pot and the money was used up in other ways and so this is another situation where the policy committee had good reason to take and use the money for that and yet it was it wasn't so this is some of the frustrations you get when you're the difference between money committees and policy committees and was it if you remember that at the beginning of the session we said we had how many million dollars hole i don't know seventy million dollars or something and this is one of the things that the governor used to plug that hole was was a seven million dollars some point eight million dollars so yeah it wasn't that he's against against the smoking programs or anything but but he use but but you know his suggestions are not immune to this same phenomenon either you know he suggested and there's a big discrepancy between between what private insurers pay the medical world and what medicaid pays in the medical world as we try to move towards a unified system that's that's going to get closer we made a commitment last year to try to bring those closer together last year we increased the medicaid payments by three percent which helped hold down the increases on the on your premiums on the private side and then he put in two percent more this year the health care committee looked at this all and we made three recommendations for the committee the cor with they would need they took one of our three suggestions and they didn't do not include in that was not the one that was in the governor's budget you know so it's really so but there financing for green mountain care which by the time it came out of the senate virtually had nothing about really the financing to freemount care that any more you know had some date by which reports were due in the financing plan should should be d all year and now it's off the ways and means committee and it's just write it all clear what's going to happen to it over there whether it's going to go any further whether it's going to die in that committee or  you know or if i just change everything that's in it it's that time of year when the second year of the bayani i'm we don't pass stuff that dies it's done we start from the beginning of the process again next year the first year by any of it rolls over but this is the second year and so there's a you know there's a certain feeling of desperation for things that you've spent a lot of effort time on and really think are important so that's not the that's not the case in all states still there are states where when you introduce a bill it just stays in the legislature until it's either taken up or somebody takes it down the you know there was a there was a thing and boston where some guy was on the subway taking a picture of the lady skirt with hers with a cellphone and the uproar over this and yet the court said that there were that he didn't violate any any laws and so immediately a legislator who has was in his second or third term pulled the bill off that he had said that he had submitted this first that like it the first month he was in it was just a short little bill that that took care of this and he found that on that the wall product down they passed it out of committee if he's in the house of the house you know it went through the senate and then you know is it less than a week that they passed that but that bill had been sitting there for things five years on the on the wall number month that doesn't happen because at the end of the by any m you you wipe the slate all the bill to just throw it away and you start over which is probably not a bad ideas probably not those so those that are good you know you think they big you know there are a lot of bills that just get reintroduced every year and hang on the walls i noticed that when i first got in i one of the things i was interested in this was expanding the bottle deposit law and then i noticed there was like six other bills introduced for doing that and so i thought well i don't need to do this you know look at this and then i found out that they kept telling me that there is funding for all that i never asked the question well how much was a funding all about the sixth year i was working down there i found out that the state had two hundred  question about stalling tactics or you know the way bills get passed through and things like that i guess you know i would say that i'm not i don't for party line you know i heard you guys talk party thing i vote basically i'm taking and i'm listening to on the radio as i understand the bill or as i understand the process that it went through it was voted and then voted unanimously with a roll call vote and then it didn't go from that this to that desk and dr chan got a hold of it and made it better he put in an amendment made it better and went up to the next floor i'm using my because he's got integrity and he's got a lot of courage because i've been my wife was you know i don't want to get into that whole story but just two weeks ago we drove down to new york for fourteen hours round trip so that she could get a nine dollars prescription because i don't prescribe it here and it's a simple antibiotic you know minder standing today is that i'm through something going on with the consent and friday fortunately i've got a bite of a soda and i coughed up in my pocket but i have a chronic cough and they can't figure out what it is friday next friday  board for a procedure and i'm going to get i have to sign off first on the procedure and then the consent me you know and go get me in an informed consent that during the procedure if things go wrong i could not wake up again and that's just sort of like protocol i mean it's a medical protocol minder standing is there's an disease or whether fifteen twenty percent of people who don't get results from their first course of antibiotics whether there's something else going on that's not infectio whether it's trigger some immunological response or that's really used to be in most of the established medical community thinks that it's something else going on not an ongoing infection but there there are groups and international groups who believe it's an ongoing infection so there's this bill has there's been a bill about lyme disease six years i've been there every year and what  we hear and then although i'm a little skeptical of it explain why how explain why but we here is docs in vermont won't treat long term lyme disease with antibiotics because the infectious disease side of america the big infectious disease society doesn't recommend that tree and what we hear all the time is that if if a doctor does do that that the  practice will investigate to the doctor you know prosecute the doctor with this bill does is to say the board of medical practice will issue a policy statement which they don't do very often they have only to they will issue a policy statement saying that they will not do that that they will not prosecute a doctor purely for treating long term blind lyme disease by any of the published informed consent that when you treat somebody with long term an abortion if you get written can consent from them understanding that there are potential risks you know and in one of the national student health studies twenty five percent of people with long term antibodies had a serious complication so the this is just saying you know you can do this just got to get to warn people that there may be some some bad effects there and so that that passed against all lies i mean this we were so far apart when we started this bill but it passed out of our committee the health care to me eleven zero and then passed unanimously on the house floor and went to the senate the senate then made a couple of changes to a couple  ns i should say and one thing that they put in there was that the doctors had to inform patients about about  disease test being inaccurate now there's no agreement about it in our committee we heard from lyme advocate doctors we never took any testimony about testing from the center for disease they said we succeeded with that train deal getting there but then we turn around in the senate puts that stuff it ok and so when you have a process that comes back to the house if they didn't somebody from argument it was a sacrament amendment and then so the process is when the senate amend something it comes back to the house and then it typically goes on what we call the notice calendar means could be talked about tomorrow and at that time somebody from the committee stands up and says you know we want this bill back to the in the healthcare committee that should have happened yesterday right right when it was on notice counter if that doesn't happen it is on the actually calendar and that's where is not often there but everybody on the committee knew we had to do this we missed it yesterday because yesterday was and was a circus that the thing bill was describing earlier about this education bill which caused incredible kerfuffle and then you know suddenly gets order to lie and you know just stuff that doesn't usually happen that's what was going on on the floor yesterday so we never nobody for mark may notice that the notice calendar so it was just it was just an oversight by us yesterday that it didn't get sent up there then we saw it on the actually calendar today so it will it will come out the question is will come out with or i thought that provision which which i really dislike i've got to tell you or can we find new wording for that provision that actually makes actually is more accurate as far as i'm concerned you know so one way or the other it's coming back out and with that level of vote in both chambers it's going to pass ok is this purely just a question of that little bit that that that one where you know right through to another legal area where it gets hung up on the it's not you know it's got you know there's a lot of us on the committee it's right it's got to satisfy the majority of folks i think it's possible that we will the senate the senate takes it up and they make changes to it so now we have two versions of the same bill so it comes back to the house to the to the other body i mean this could could also start the other way or same way so it comes back to the the originating body in this case the house and they have three options i think they're sure they can it they could say yeah we agree with this and send it off to the governor they can say no we well we concur but with further amendment and that's what they will be doing now they will say ok we have kirk but here's the further member which is basically get take your stuff out but i mean that's what it is or they can say no we don't concur and we want a conference committee to be formed where there's three members of each body and they just they just duke it out or come to the agreement and that each the service in good shape when i was addicted and i was on if any of you seen that movie the dallas buyers club i was on the streets the point and then sign my name have all these consent stuff that will go to i was living in new york that would go to orbit then that would come back and it say ok test them then they test me and they still weren't too sure about the positive you know what was negative positive positive negative and so i understand that part of the consent where baffles me is that dr chan did say he testified to this disease this lyme's disease is an epidemic in vermont and that man you know the money that primark could make by research and had you know like i hear you know this is there's a small amount of people that complain about it there's a small voice well it's like me going up and down the river and giving you account of how many brown trout there are in there you know if i'm the only one catching them you know around the only one reporting how can doctors possibly give an accurate report if they're not treating the lines disease well i think i think the argument is not about treating line this it's about fifteen twenty percent of people need any testing or anything else if somebody comes in with the appropriate history or the appropriate rash you just treat people right then and there with antibiotics you don't wait for any tests to come back because they are going to be positive yet you know he just treat people so we're really just talking about the fifteen twenty percent with the long term symptoms and you know the the argument is is that infection or is it another illogical response you know right ahead but when we do we know you know they can be interested in something maybe not on the subject you mentioned bill going back and forth wow where does the minimum wage you know that the minimum wage bill passed in the house and it is in the senate right now being taken up it is still in committee has gone it hasn't made it to the floor so they would presumably have a different bill and then it would go to announce well no they have the bill that we sent over so ok so that you know two relatively narrow range of opinions about what is going to be you know we passed an increase to tend ten dollars ten cents for the minimum wage starting in january the governor has suggested an increase to ten ten but spread out over three years  where the center is going to fall is somewhere between those two if they support the governor they will go to a conference committee i mean there's an obvious answer obvious middle ground there you know to do it over two years i mean that's the obvious his his signature my bet would be the third one but has to really have this money yes it is hard to say that this people have as many thoughts on best what the senate might do because there certainly is the part of the set there are parts of the senator that agree with the governor that come out and stated that there are parts of the senate although not as many as in the house that agree with what we did in the house to you know make it effective in january and those are really the only two things that are ever talked about there's no talk about doing it over two years and most everybody as george said thinks that what will happen is that it will go to a conference committee and the compromise will be over two years now you know what that's just as likely to happen is anything else to it you know this is it's just not clear but it it will it will visit at least two committees in the senate and you know they will discuss it this is a bill this is one of those bills that will go down to the end and be one of those bills that dictate one weekend you know it will have to come out of conference committee because they they won't  don't think they will just let it die in conference committee now there have been a bill to have died in conference committee just because it goes a conference committee doesn't mean that they're going to be passed because there there's a couple things that can happen one is that the first thing that happens is the conference committee greets to something but then it has to be approved by both houses after that and that's that's not always a given the second thing is the conference committees can say we just can't come to an agreement and typically what they say is is appoint the new conference committee but at this time of the year there's not time for that to happen and the third thing is that the conference committee just doesn't come to an agreement and they just let it die in the well it resonated with a lot of people that this was not this was not an easy vote and it was not a real lopsided vote either this was fairly close it was ten votes said really clearly that going to ten dollars would have negligible negative economic impacts  you know i offer a lot of the the businesses that this affects in a big way are businesses that will benefit from people having more money you know because this is really largely in the food service industries the retail industries that's where the vast majority are there's a couple places where that is not necessarily the case mugs maybe one of them cars trucks enters another we have now a couple here where you know there could be more people getting their their their trucks fix because somebody's getting ten ten an hour instead of a seventy three you know so yeah sometimes i think the opponents can can drag out the discussion too long and actually lose some votes and this is the feeling i had anyway on it that you know that there's only so much you can say you know to to point out you know actual the actual effect of it and then you have to start making up new ways of trying to say it and you know this a little more ridiculous and stuff you're going to consider the so not one of the things about the bill is that the people who if you're just looking at percentage increase that get the the largest is people who work for tips because the the the bill says that they will make half of what the minimum wages are you know they have to you have to make at least that with your tips or else your employer has to make up the difference like this and that is a larger percent increase than what non typical ploys and that that little point just never seemed to resonate also had people on that committee that we're not in favor of the ten ten rate you know we're we're actually going for a higher rate than that and so you know you get to this point about well you know ten ten let's let's settle in at that point but you know what as as you were as people were you know one thing is that before you take a bill to the floor you want to have an idea that it can pass if you don't want to there's nothing worse than having bring a bill to the floor and having it to feed it so you do talk to your to members to see how they feel about it to see if there is enough support to get it to pass and can they had three options this week and this one we had three options of of the three different wages for was ten ten fifteen of the ten ten over three years or twelve fifty now ten ten his very slightly above where would be other anyway you know it really doesn't represent a substantial increase in the third year or so one year and i think in this case in over three years you would find that yeah put i'm saying is it's not to do a whole lot of good over three years to just go to ten ten in terms of of where it would be relative if we didn't do anything and the other piece is if you look back you know thousand nine hundred sixty eight you know i show that that graph whole time about how the people doing well are doing very well and you know the others not so well i mean it's always be more helpful if we can get  is right on the money so but that's but i think the fact that ten ten zero three years isn't really going to take us substantially beyond i think it was fifteen cents twenty cents beyond where we would have been state the state of ministers the whole thing the federal government is the one that just gives you the money so they just calculate it and send you your monthly allotment for food stamps so since it's a federal program it needs to be audited that you know federal come and if they determine that the state has made many too many errors in their calculations they make the state letter comes like twelve months afterwards or nine votes how would you know if you're a long time afterwards saying that we sent you too much money you know nine months ago and now you have to pay it back  this was this has been going on in vermont for three years that are the partment that does this have been making these errors and so the legislature there's a there's a lot of people legislation and and specially in my committee human services that wanted to come up with a way of having the state pay this back and we  finally came up with a bill wasn't the best bill it wasn't what i wanted but it was one of the sayings that you know one of the compromises and it is hanging on the wall  appropriations for lack of funding to get in the budget so in other words as they were building the budget this did not have a high priority so much money we're talking about well it depends on how but you're going to pay back and who you're going to pay back but the bottom line was three four million dollars four million you know but the you know the other thing is is that what we're doing was looking at the last three years when we were like in sanctions but there were people that had to pay back for previous years because of it is just that that the state wasn't sanctioned for doing this for having this so anyway it it's just you know it's one of these things that just makes absolutely no sense so what do you do one of the things you do is you ask the question why is this continuing to happen and i can understand it if you're doing this you can make a mistake sometime i mean sometimes it's just entering the wrong data you look up you know  take the wrong number off the piece of paper they did or something but we also found out that like eighty five percent of the errors were made by one small group of employees this just hear and so you know it's like the state employees you know they were given more training and everything but they're still making a and for people who work in business it's like why the hell they have to still have a job basically or they still are why are they still on the same job as more of the question so anyway that is what that was an example of bill did not get passed for different reasons this one being lack of funding but you know on the flip side i must tell you the appropriations committee did look at this and they had all kinds of questions how did you decide to to to do to pay back only for three years instead of for the previous eight errors why did you do this why do you do that that is you know it's just not all that stuff you know that we had taken testimony on but one of the things that did come out of this there was there was one positive thing that came out of this is that the apartment did negotiate with the federal government that they that they only had to collect half of the money back now before a individual person could request that were taking this up in committee but so you can so a person well you know there are some people that just don't do it you know just don't pay it back and then they're in a rears and this and that and and then eventually i think that they hold money out of future food stamp payments to pay for it but people who who get this letter and say ok you know i owe them money and they contact about it and they set up a payment plan and we heard of people who are paying five dollars a month to pay off like a two hundred dollars bill and i'm thinking so so for all these months they're writing a check for five dollars and sending it in vermont is april fourteenth which was twenty fifth in the country that monday yeah april fifteenth was the day in new hampshire so their tax freedom day comes after hours despite all what we hear about all federal state and local taxes for the year something like number ten most of the well in this were twenty five ok in tax freedom day so now in terms of state and local tax burden this is fiscal year and that was actually tax freedom day it was last year per capita is four thousand three hundred fifty one dollars national average is four thousand two hundred seventeen dollars so we pay an extra one hundred what thirty dollars thirty dollars or something well mathematically that can't be here i mean look at look at some of the places that see new york you know remember i said it was for three five one four thousand new york's average tax per we don't have that sense of albany or north of albany this is a heavy tech city i don't think anybody argues that it but i will argue that is often overstated but not big problem with this really helping people out and you know if you if you use the old term of welfare or reach up or whatever whatever the programs are one of the things that's always happen is that as you're helping people who who are financially strapped and giving them some assistance some temporary assistance one of the things you always try to do is to help them you know so they don't need the assistance we don't want this to be a long term systems in fact it's called temporary assistance to needy families as best the federal program and so what happens is you also work with them to help them find employment but what happens all too often is as if they find employment and start making money then they lose some benefits and they tend to lose more benefits than the money they make they fall off this cliff and they have to make a decision about do i not take the job do i not accept the promotion do i not accept the extra hours or do i stay on state support and this has been this i remember when i first going to human services committee this was brought up but when you talk about it in that it just was you know it is a complicated way of how to decide what i mean paying out benefits just deciding how much benefits the plan pays this but you know with how much should you let them make before you drop it down and the point is instead of having it be a cliff where you know you make a dollar more and you lose ten dollars it will be better if you make a dollar more and you lose fifty cents or something like that this kind of thing just to slope it down so we have wor committee on and off of how to do this and last summer one of the committee members took it upon himself to he said we're going to solve that this year and during the summer he constantly sent proposals to some of us to sort of talk about how we could do this and work with the department and everything from the bottom line is is he came up with a proposal that seemed to work there really it just seemed to work great but you know what the problem was it costs money because if if instead of you know if you are now calculating that you're going to not pay somebody ten dollars but now you're  only going to not pay them eight dollars will come in so in working this out we knew we knew that we were not going to to get any support you know to pay for this so what we did is we took and we said let's reduce the benefits at the other and just a little bit with everybody so that we can have to smooth this clip out and we and we did this and came up with a proposal that sounded pretty good there were two members of the committee who could not accept the fact that we would reduce the numbers at the front end but it did pass the house and it is under consideration in the senate that this is a major breakthrough if it can happen now is the best thing not to give the money at the front and where people need it most well one of the things we found is some some people if you didn't give them this money they were eligible for some other money from from the food more money from food stamp programs so what started out to be like a twenty dollar reduction was turned out to only be like a twelve dollars reduction five years because they didn't even know what it was they just treated me for depression and then they found out what it was and i wanted a trial that failed throughout my five right then and each time i you know i c consent right away that that that part in there that's been agreed to is are starting to get it this is about telling docs that they have to say these tests are unreliable when that's not necessarily the best stuff we not agreed on community believe that the reason some people are not treated is because the tests are in don't show they have lyme disease and so you know if you  look at that couple ways are they do they have lyme disease in the test just doesn't show it or do they not have lyme disease and because there's no gold standard there's no nothing to definitively compare it with you know you can argue both sides of that ok and in that test thing like any other testing is not perfect and it has to be done in the right sequence at the right time you know you can do it too early you can do it too late so you know there's it's it's more complicated that you know is is what i just you know this is my problem with it but other folks feel that whatever some of the medical stuff but even with the hep c once they get diagnosis and you know i get everything the results each time the first time i did it they said you're cleared and a year later i'm sick and i went back to the doctor and he said we were using the wrong blood test we were we were looking at the wrong numbers and the second time i went back and they said well it does have some psychological effects you know but it's in the medicine but they didn't explain it to me in the beginning i came to know and it up with a real bad diagnosis the fourth time last year when i was on it i was in bed for a year my wife had to shower me i had to have been a walker i used to weigh one hundred seventy pounds i used to work on a garbage truck worked in a prison and you know i had no problems in there i went down one hundred nineteen pounds and couldn't get out of bed for about eight months couldn't drive for eighteen months i found i was the medicine that was making me sick so i think in some ways when you say that this is what i believe i'm glad to hear that because you have integrity you're standing up for what you believe so if you're looking at that saying i don't know about this you know at least you say you don't go back and say