Liberal AssKicker
New member
...by a law, not a doctor? Quote from the bill:
‘(ii) EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN READMISSIONS.—For purposes of clause (i), with respect to a hospital, excess readmissions shall not include readmissions for an applicable condition for which there are fewer than a minimum number (as determined by the Secretary) of discharges for such applicable condition for the applicable period and such hospital."
Why would a law ever try to define "excess readmissions"?
Do you really want a politician deciding this?
What is a "readmission" according to the bill?
‘‘(E) READMISSION.—The term ‘readmission’ means, in the case of an individual who is discharged from an applicable hospital, the admission of the individual to the same or another applicable hospital within a time period specified by the Secretary from the date of such discharge."
(In other words, if a doctor doesn't cure you the first time, you're done. You're no longer covered.)
‘(ii) EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN READMISSIONS.—For purposes of clause (i), with respect to a hospital, excess readmissions shall not include readmissions for an applicable condition for which there are fewer than a minimum number (as determined by the Secretary) of discharges for such applicable condition for the applicable period and such hospital."
Why would a law ever try to define "excess readmissions"?
Do you really want a politician deciding this?
What is a "readmission" according to the bill?
‘‘(E) READMISSION.—The term ‘readmission’ means, in the case of an individual who is discharged from an applicable hospital, the admission of the individual to the same or another applicable hospital within a time period specified by the Secretary from the date of such discharge."
(In other words, if a doctor doesn't cure you the first time, you're done. You're no longer covered.)