text:
User talk:Thealphadog

This message is regarding the article User:Cool Cat. Please stop removing content from Wikipedia that people have worked hard to create. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. [ contribs • block • [ block log ] ] -- GraemeL (talk) 18:29, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- pgk( talk ) 18:30, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

 * You have been indefinitely blocked for vandalising Wikipedia through mass editing. --HC 18:49, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Thealphadog


text:
Lord Lieutenant of Cumberland

This is a list of people who have served as Lord Lieutenant of Cumberland. From 1765 to 1974, all Lord Lieutenants were also Custos Rotulorum of Cumberland.

The county became part of Cumbria on 31 March 1974. See Lord Lieutenant of Cumbria.
 * Henry Hastings, 3rd Earl of Huntingdon 20 August 1586 – 14 December 1595
 * vacant?
 * George Clifford, 3rd Earl of Cumberland 1603–1605
 * vacant?
 * Francis Clifford, 4th Earl of Cumberland 27 October 1607 – 31 August 1639 jointly with
 * George Home, 1st Earl of Dunbar 27 October 1607 – 20 January 1611 and
 * Theophilus Howard, 2nd Earl of Suffolk 27 October 1607 – 31 August 1639 and
 * Henry Clifford, 1st Baron Clifford 27 October 1607 – 31 August 1639 and
 * Algernon Percy, 10th Earl of Northumberland 13 November 1626 – 31 August 1639 and
 * Thomas Howard, 21st Earl of Arundel 23 July 1632 – 1642 and
 * Henry Howard, Lord Maltravers 23 July 1632 – 1642
 * Interregnum
 * Charles Howard, 1st Earl of Carlisle 1 October 1660 – 24 February 1685
 * Thomas Tufton, 6th Earl of Thanet 3 March 1685 – 1687
 * Richard Graham, 1st Viscount Preston 29 August 1687 – 1688
 * Sir John Lowther, 2nd Baronet 8 April 1689 – 1694
 * Charles Howard, 3rd Earl of Carlisle 28 June 1694 – 1 May 1738
 * Henry Lowther, 3rd Viscount Lonsdale 1 June 1738 – 7 March 1751
 * Charles Wyndham, 2nd Earl of Egremont 23 April 1751 – 1759
 * James Lowther, 1st Earl of Lonsdale 13 December 1759 – 24 May 1802
 * William Lowther, 1st Earl of Lonsdale 26 June 1802 – 19 March 1844
 * William Lowther, 2nd Earl of Lonsdale 3 May 1844 – 1868
 * Henry Lowther, 3rd Earl of Lonsdale 14 December 1868 – 15 August 1876
 * Josslyn Francis Pennington, 5th Baron Muncaster 3 October 1876 – 30 March 1917
 * Hugh Lowther, 5th Earl of Lonsdale 22 May 1917 – 13 April 1944
 * Frescheville Hubert Ballantine-Dykes 5 April 1944 – 1949
 * Sir Robert Christopher Chance 19 April 1949 – 1958
 * Sir Frederick Fergus Graham, 5th Baronet 12 December 1958 – 1968
 * John Charles Wade 27 May 1968 – 31 March 1974

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Lord Lieutenant of Cumberland


text:
Chai Patel

Chaitanya Patel (born 14 September 1954) is a British doctor, businessman and philanthropist. Born in Uganda to Indian parents, he obtained medical qualifications at the University of Southampton in 1979 and previously worked in the National Health Service. He currently is Chairman of Elysian Capital an independent, private equity firm specialising in investing in the UK lower mid-market in deals of between £10m and £100m, and Chairman of HC-One, a nursing home management company. In August 2019, Chai announced his plans to retire from HC-One the following year.

Career in business
After working for some years at the Private Clients office of Lehman Brothers in London as part of a small team including Bruce Berkowitz, in 1988 he founded Court Cavendish, which was rapidly recognised as a high quality continuing care company. In 1996 he merged it with Takare to create Care First, the UK's largest continuing care company. He remained as Chief Executive until it was taken over by Bupa in 1997. In 1999 he acquired and became Chief Executive of Westminster Health Care plc, the largest publicly quoted healthcare services group in the UK, which acquired Priory Hospitals in 2000. After a management buyout of the Care Home division in 2002, Patel continued as Chief Executive of the Priory Group, the UK's largest independent specialist mental health and education services group. On 5 March 2007 Patel and his management team resigned from Priory Healthcare.

In 2011, following the collapse of Southern Cross Healthcare, he re-formed Court Cavendish as a consultancy and joined with the landlord company NHP (Nursing Home Properties) to form HC-One, managing 249 of Southern Cross' former homes. Patel is on the Advisory Council of The Front Row Group of Companies. In January 2013, Patel became a trustee at the Bright Future Trust.

Policy work and honours
For many years he has been involved in healthcare policy issues, working on numerous government task forces and action groups. He has received an honorary doctorate from the Open University. He is a keen supporter of Labour's private finance initiative and of private provision of NHS services. He was secretary to the Institute for Public Policy Research, a progressive think tank with close links to the Labour Party. In 1999 he was appointed a CBE for his services to the development of social care policies. In 2018, he joined a panel hosted by Knight Frank to discuss the future of the health and social care sector.

Westminster Health
Patel resigned as a trustee of Help the Aged in 2002 "to save it embarrassment" after a damning report into a nursing home owned by Westminster Health Care, which he headed.

Lynde House
In 2004, Patel was charged with serious professional misconduct and faced being "struck off" over complaints about poor care at Lynde House, one of his former care homes for the elderly. In June 2005, the case was dropped by the General Medical Council due to insufficient evidence.

Patel had been the subject of a sustained campaign against him and had maintained from day one that the charges against him were never supported by admissible evidence. This was supported when the High Court judge Mr Justice Collins stayed the case again Patel pending the judicial review hearing. He called the original charges laid against Patel a "rotten indictment".

On 15 June, with the consent of the group of residents' families, the High Court ordered that some of the charges should be struck out and that amendments intended to rectify deficiencies in other charges should be disallowed.

After the conclusion of the hearing, Patel said, "I am relieved that at last this terrible ordeal is over. My family and I have been through a great deal as a result of charges of serious professional misconduct which were never supported by any admissible evidence. I call today for the GMC to look at how it carries out its work".

In 2009, the NMC Professional Conduct Committee began its own investigation into whether the manager and deputy managers of Lynde House – Sarah Johnson and Lynette Maggs – were guilty of professional misconduct and negligence in relation to the earlier accusations of poor care at the residential home. In December 2011, the committee ruled that they were guilty of misconduct. While it decided not to take any formal sanctions such as registration penalties, in part due to the time elapsed since the original allegations were made, Johnson and Maggs were nevertheless left with a misconduct ruling against their names, and decided to appeal against the decision at the High Court by way of judicial review.

On 18 July 2013, at a judicial review, High Court judge Mr Justice Leggatt concluded "a decade after this misconceived and mismanaged case was brought against the registrants, their names are clear", referring to the NMC case against the manager and deputy manager of Lynde House. The judgment went on to criticise the NMC's handling of the procedure stating that it was a "case study for how a disciplinary case should not be conducted".

Later in 2013, the Health Select Committee expressed its concerns over the length of time the NMC's disciplinary process takes. Patel cited the NMC's handling of Lynde House, in an article by The Guardian newspaper, commenting, "the NMC must act to ensure the decade of trauma that Maggs and Johnson endured never happens again. They were good people, doing a good job, who had their careers and lives needlessly and unjustly blighted".

Cash for peerages
Patel is a donor to the British Labour Party, having given the party £100,000. In March 2006, it was revealed that Patel, a Labour nominee for a life peerage, had made a loan of £1.5m, at commercial rates, to the Labour Party in summer 2005. The House of Lords Appointments Commission, which vets nominations for peerages, was reported to be against Patel's candidacy. Patel said that he made the loan following a request, but never expected anything in return. The Labour Party defended the loan, asserting that no rules had been broken. Patel's name was submitted by Downing Street for a peerage two months after the loan.

The BBC quoted him as saying, "[I have] been angered by what [I see] as the leaking of [my] candidacy by the commission" and he has called for greater transparency. He also said that he would not have loaned the party the money if he had imagined that the financial support would create such criticism. Further concerned that his reputation was being traduced, he made a strenuous plea for clarity in the handling of his candidacy on BBC2's Newsnight on 10 March 2006 and in a letter to the HLAC stated that he was mystified and deeply distressed by the apparent rejection.

On 15 March 2006, it was revealed that Jack Dromey, the Treasurer of the Labour Party, had been unaware of the loans and called for an independent inquiry.

On 29 March 2006, Patel withdrew his name from the list of nominees for a peerage. He said that at no time did he have any expectation of a reward nor had he been offered anything in return, yet on BBC Radio 4's Today programme he expressed the view that he wanted to serve in the upper house as he felt that his life experience ensured that he could make a valuable contribution there.

title: Chai Patel


text:
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Errors in Wikipedia that have been corrected in the Encyclopædia Britannica (2nd nomination)

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Radiant_ >|< 23:47, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Errors in Wikipedia that have been corrected in the Encyclopædia Britannica
Not encyclopedic; puts us in a bad light. Opus33 18:30, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep . BJAODN. 1) Opus33, you say it's "not encyclopedic". OK, sure, but that's not a very fair criticism for something that's not claiming to be an encyclopedia article — it's in the "Wikipedia:" mainspace rather than the main article space. 2) You also say it "puts us in a bad light"? How? The point of the page is part-humour, and part to illustrate how the idea of a public "list of mistakes" is very natural for Britannica, but almost nonsensical for Wikipedia. The aim is to put Wikipedia in a good light. 3) This survived a vote for deletion a couple of months ago: Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Wikipedia:Errors in Wikipedia that have been corrected in the Encyclopædia Britannica. — Matt Crypto 18:51, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now (on WP:MD, where it should have been in the first place).  No opinion. —Cryptic (talk) 07:41, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * weak keep Changed my mind. WP is filled with jokes; this seems to be part of WP's culture.  Sometimes they are so numerous that they annoy me, but this is hardly the worst of them. :) Xoloz 15:07, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Previous AfD was three months ago, so renomination is fine. An eternally empty page is not useful.  I support deletion on a rationale of "no content; never will have content". Xoloz 15:47, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete if anyone finds an error in wikipedia, sofixit!Borisblue 20:20, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, indeed, that's actually the half-serious point the page is trying to make — it prompts the realisation that Wikipedia is a better model than Britannica because you can fix mistakes yourself instantly (well, depending on the servers...); Britannica has a huge list of mistakes, but such a list doesn't even make sense for Wikipedia. I wouldn't mind so much if this page ends up deleted on the grounds that it's crappy humour or an inappropriate way to make this point, but to get deleted because people miss the point would be disappointing ;-) — Matt Crypto 21:05, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - although it does smack vaguely of WP:POINT. Grutness...  wha?  00:32, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - Cute, but ineffective. Article claims to have been created "out of a spirit of fairness", when in reality, according to Matt Crypto, it's a subtle attempt at self-praise and pro-Wikipedia propaganda. If it's to be kept, the description should certainly be changed to minimize the page's blatant dishonesty, and to cause less confusion (most peole looking at the page will just think it's depopulated because we're too lazy to populate it, not because there's nothing to populate it with; thus not only its stated agenda, but also its hidden agenda, fails, as it makes us look incompetent or boorish more than anything). However, the easiest thing to do would probably be to simply explain on Errors in the Encyclopædia Britannica that have been corrected in Wikipedia why we don't have an article for the reverse topic: because any well-known error on Wikipedia is almost always immediately fixed. Simply stating that clearly on the "Errors in Encyclopedia Britannica" page is much more honest and clear, and less confusing and circuitous, than creating a whole project page just to make a point. If this page is intended purely as humor, it should be made a more explicit parody so that it will actually be amusing, and it should be moved to Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense (assuming it's even worthy of that section), just as has been done to other joke pages on the Wikipedia namespace. But I'm really doubting whether it's amusing or interesting enough for that.. Not only is it useless, misleading, and redundant, but, worst of all, it's also not funny. It's sort of like a somewhat clever pun that needs to be explained to be gotten: it might make you nod your head in gratified understanding when you're told or figure out the meaning, but you've still just wasted minutes of your life hearing a cheap pun. -Silence 22:57, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm getting the vibe that you don't like the page ;-) Ah well, I can't really defend the page against charges of bad humour. — Matt Crypto 05:55, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh, no, I don't really mind the page one way or the other. I'd be perfectly fine with it staying where it is on a personal level (though I would like the dishonest "out of a spirit of fairness" stuff corrected, if it's not to be an obvious humor article). But as a Wikipedia editor, I feel obligated to vote for the method that will confuse and annoy the least people with a rather pointless page, and that seems consistent with how similar pages have been treated. That's how I see it, anyway. -Silence 06:23, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. This page is empty, and ought to remain so except for periods of a few seconds. It can serve no purpose for this project. NatusRoma 22:50, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Expand or else Delete. Hell's bells, I never heard of an article, namespace or not, that was empty and meant to stay that way. Unless someone is willing to make the article much lengthier, including many errors in wikipedia that have been corrected in the EB, I suggest its movement to Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense. That's where it would belong, eh? D. G. 02:17, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Expand or Delete. I agree, an article that is meant to stay empty doesn't seem useful at all, unless it records all past changes.  Perhaps having dates and how quickly errors were corrected would be informative, but otherwise this doesn't even seem too entertaining, nonetheless informative. Comic 02:51, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I think you and D.G. miss the point; the article can't be expanded because its title is Errors in Wikipedia that have been corrected in the Encyclopædia Britannica and Britannica has never corrected an error in Wikipedia; it's corrected errors period, but it's never said "this version of the Encyclopedia was corrected in X way even though Wikipedia got it wrong", like we do with the "Errors in Britannica corrected by Wikipedia" article. It sounds like you're proposing the creation of a whole new article, not suggesting that this article is salvagable just by adding stuff to it; its current title renders it inherently useless until Britannica itself starts to specifically direct its new edition's fixes at Wikipedia mistakes, like we do for them. Since it doesn't, we can't write about them doing it no matter what. What we could have is an article about past mistakes in Wikipedia that have been pointed out (rather than directly fixed) by various important external sources, like newspaper articles and such (though this would be kind of redundant with the many "Criticisms of Wikipedia" pages, unless we could find a lot of stuff to fill it with), or long-standing Wikipedia mistakes that were fixed by referencing an encyclopedia (though the latter would be just about impossible to fill in any meaningful way), but whether we make a new article like that or not has absolutely nothing to do with whether this article should be preserved or not. We can easily delete it and then make a different article that does the "comparing-Wikipedia-to-encyclopedias" idea much better, if this delete goes through. If it doesn't, we're back at square one. -Silence 03:09, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, gloating, not useful to any human being. silsor 03:14, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Not encyclopediac.prashanthns
 * To use a phrase that goes around AfD a lot, which I am attempting to use in a humorous manner, "Delete as unmaintainable listcruft." Because of the nature of Wikipedia, we always have quite a few articles around the edges that have not been updated/are not highly used/are therefore probably of dubious quality and verifiability. That doesn't mean we should abandon what Wikipedia is trying to do, and we should improve such articles we see so long as we think the subject is of encyclopedic merit, but this list, if properly updated, would be quite long. Jacqui  ★ 17:08, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Corn Exchange Bank

The Corn Exchange Bank was a retail bank founded in 1853 in New York state. Over the years, the company acquired many community banks.

History
In 1855, the Corn Exchange Bank moved into an existing building in New York City at the northwest corner of William and Beaver Streets in Manhattan. In 1894, the bank completed its new headquarters, an 11-story building designed by Robert Henderson Robertson located at 11-15 William Street. Between 1923 and 1925, together with a number of other New York banks, it held a small stake in the Connecticut-chartered Bank of Central and South America. In 1929, it was renamed the Corn Exchange Bank and Trust Company. In 1954, it merged with Chemical Bank and the combined entity took the name Chemical Corn Exchange Bank. After Chemical Corn merged with New York Trust Company in 1959, the words "Corn Exchange" were dropped, creating the Chemical Bank New York Trust Company.

As late as 1928, photographs show that the Corn Exchange Bank had a branch in a building on Grove Street, approximately 50 feet east of Seventh Avenue South in Greenwich Village. The building was likely expanded following the bank's merger with Chemical Bank in 1954. The enlarged building's exterior appearance is virtually unchanged since 1954, likely due to the creation of the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission in 1965 in response to the mounting losses of historically significant buildings in New York City, most notably the old Pennsylvania Station. The Grove Street building currently houses a Chase Bank branch. Chase Manhattan (now known as JPMorgan Chase) merged with Chemical Bank in 1995.

Acquisition history

 * 1899: Astor Place Bank (founded 1891), Hudson River Bank of the City of New York (founded 1888), and Queens County Bank (founded 1873 as Flushing and Queens County Bank).
 * 1900: Home Bank (founded 1883).
 * 1902: Mechanics & Traders' Bank of Brooklyn (founded 1867), Eleventh Ward Bank (founded 1867), and Union Square Bank of the City of New York (founded 1889).
 * 1905: First National Bank of Staten Island at New Brighton (founded 1886).
 * 1913: Mount Morris Bank (founded 1881).
 * 1914: Washington Trust Company of the City of New York (founded 1889).
 * 1928: Stapleton National Bank (founded in 1902).

title: Corn Exchange Bank


text:
Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs

The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) is a British statutory advisory non-departmental public body, which was established under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.

Mandate
Its terms of reference, according to the Act, are as follows:

to keep under review the situation in the United Kingdom with respect to drugs which are being or appear to them likely to be misused and of which the misuse is having or appears to them capable of having harmful effects sufficient to constitute a social problem, and to give to any one or more of the Ministers, where either Council consider it expedient to do so or they are consulted by the Minister or Ministers in question, advice on measures (whether or not involving alteration of the law) which in the opinion of the Council ought to be taken for preventing the misuse of such drugs or dealing with social problems connected with their misuse, and in particular on measures which in the opinion of the Council, ought to be taken

 * a) for restricting the availability of such drugs or supervising the arrangements for their supply;
 * b) for enabling persons affected by the misuse of such drugs to obtain proper advice, and for securing the provision of proper facilities and services for the treatment, rehabilitation and aftercare of such persons;
 * c) for promoting co-operation between the various professional and community services which in the opinion of the Council have a part to play in dealing with social problems connected with the misuse of drugs;
 * d) for educating the public (and in particular the young) in the dangers of misusing such drugs and for giving publicity to those dangers;
 * e) for promoting research into, or otherwise obtaining information about, any matter which in the opinion of the Council is of relevance for the purpose of preventing the misuse of such drugs or dealing with any social problem connected with their misuse.

Functioning
One of the key functions of the ACMD is to recommend classification of new or existing drugs, which may be misused.

The sources of evidence that the ACMD uses are

 * formal surveys undertaken for, or on behalf of, government including the British Crime Survey, the Forensic Science Service statistics, general population surveys, school surveys as well as international/European surveys such as European School Survey Project on Alcohol and other drugs;
 * the law enforcement agencies;
 * voluntary sector organisations with concerns and responsibilities for those who misuse drugs;
 * professional bodies;
 * published and unpublished scientific literature;
 * submissions from special interest groups and the general public.

In order to have a rough but quantitative measure of the harms of a drug, the ACMD uses a risk assessment matrix, where nine different aspects of harm for each drug are evaluated:

 * Physical harm
 * Acute
 * Chronic
 * Parenteral (i.e. intravenous harm)
 * Dependence
 * Intensity of pleasure
 * Psychological dependence
 * Physical dependence
 * Social harms
 * Intoxication
 * Other social harms
 * Healthcare costs

Criticism
In 2006, the Science and Technology Select Committee of the UK House of Commons conducted a series of case studies examining the government's handling of scientific advice, risk and evidence in policy making. The second of its case-studies focused on the relationship between scientific advice and evidence and the classification of illegal drugs. It examined the workings of the ACMD.

A summary of the findings, vis-a-vis ACMD:

"In the course of this case study, we have looked in detail at the role played by, and workings of, the Government’s scientific advisory committee on drug classification and policy, the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD). We have identified a number of serious flaws in the way the Council conducts its business. Although the Council has produced useful reports explaining the rationale behind its recommendations on drug classification decisions, we found a lack of transparency in other areas of its work and a disconcerting degree of confusion over its remit. We also note that the ACMD has failed to adhere to key elements of the Government’s Code of Practice for Scientific Advisory Committees. In response to these and other concerns about the Council’s operations, we have called for the Home Office to ensure that there is, in future, independent oversight of the Council’s workings. We have also highlighted the need for the ACMD to play a far more a proactive role in supporting the work of the Department of Health and Department for Education and Skills: the Government’s approach to drug education and treatment must be informed by scientific advice and stronger cross-departmental coordination will be vital if the Public Service Agreement targets on drugs policy are to be met."

Some specific findings:

"69. Overall, our examination of the processes used by the ACMD and Home Office to make, respectively, recommendations and decisions regarding the classification of drugs has revealed a disconcertingly ad hoc approach to determining when reviews should be undertaken and a worrying lack of transparency in how classification decisions are made."

"73. .. It is extremely disappointing that the Council has not taken any steps to increase the transparency of its operations and, moreover, that the Chairman displayed so little interest in improving the Council’s approach in evidence to us. It is incumbent upon the Chairman to ensure that the ACMD follows the spirit of openness prescribed by the Code of Practice."

"85. .. If, as the ACMD Chairman indicated to us, the Council’s work has been seriously hindered by the lack of evidence, the ACMD should have been far more vocal in pressing Ministers to ensure that more research was commissioned to fill the key gaps in the evidence base."

"97. .. We understand that the ACMD operates within the framework set by the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 but, bearing in mind that the Council is the sole scientific advisory body on drugs policy, we consider the Council’s failure to alert the Home Secretary to the serious doubts about the basis and effectiveness of the classification system at an earlier stage a dereliction of its duty."

Findings
On the advice of the ACMD, Home Secretary David Blunkett downgraded cannabis from Class B to Class C in 2004. However, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith returned it to Class B in 2009, against the council's recommendation, and also declined to follow its recommendation to downgrade ecstasy from Class A to class B.

In March 2010, the ACMD published a report, Consideration of the cathinones, which recommended that mephedrone and other cathinones should be made illegal. On the same day it released a report titled Pathways to problems, detailing progress made on recommendations made in 2006. The report stated that not enough was being done about alcohol and tobacco usage and that the Misuse of Drugs Act should be reviewed. Because it was published on the same day as the report on cathinones, it received no media coverage, nor a response from the Home Office.

Members
The ACMD is required to have at least 20 members. All members are unpaid, although expenses are reimbursed.

January 2011 appointments
In January 2011, the government appointed nine new members to the Advisory Council, including a new chair. The new chairman, Les Iversen, is a retired Oxford University professor of pharmacology and neuropharmacology specialist. The appointment of Dr Hans-Christian Raabe, a prominent member of the Maranatha Community, which aims to "re-establish Christian values in society" received coverage in the British press. Raabe, a General Practitioner from Manchester, had previously stood as a Christian Peoples Alliance candidate for the North West of England in the European Parliament elections of 2009. As a candidate for the CPA, Raabe had made a number of controversial statements concerning homosexuality, one being; "there is a disproportionately greater number of homosexuals among paedophiles and an overlap between the gay movement and the movement to make paedophilia acceptable". Dr Raabe once argued that "it is futile to pursue discredited policies of so-called 'harm-reduction'", and had written that "The only way of stopping people from dying from drug-related deaths is to prevent drug use in the first place". On the 8th of February 2011, Dr Raabe was sacked before his first meeting.

Controversial resignations
Professor David Nutt of the University of Bristol was Chairman of the ACMD until being relieved of his post on 30 October 2009 after criticising politicians for "distorting" and "devaluing" research evidence in the debate over illicit drugs. David Nutt founded the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs on 15 January 2010. The goal of his new committee is to complement and eventually supersede the ACMD by providing independent advice that is untainted by government interference.

In February 2009, the government was accused by Professor Nutt of making a political decision with regard to drug classification in rejecting the scientific advice to downgrade ecstasy from a class A drug. The ACMD report on ecstasy, based on a 12-month study of 4,000 academic papers, concluded that it is not as dangerous as other class A drugs such as heroin and cocaine, and should be downgraded to class B. The advice was not followed. Jacqui Smith, then Home Secretary, was also widely criticised by the scientific community for bullying Professor David Nutt into apologising for his comments that, in the course of a normal year, more people die from falling off horses than from taking ecstasy. Professor Nutt was sacked by Jacqui Smith's successor as Home Secretary Alan Johnson; Johnson saying "It is important that the government's messages on drugs are clear and as an advisor you do nothing to undermine public understanding of them. I cannot have public confusion between scientific advice and policy and have therefore lost confidence in your ability to advise me as Chair of the ACMD."

In his October 2009 paper (based on a lecture given in July 2009) Nutt had repeated his familiar view that illicit drugs should be classified according to the actual evidence of the harm they cause and pointed out that alcohol and tobacco caused more harm than LSD, ecstasy and cannabis. Alcohol should come fifth behind cocaine, heroin, barbiturates and methadone, and tobacco should rank ninth, ahead of cannabis, LSD and ecstasy, he said. He also argued that smoking cannabis created only a "relatively small risk" of psychotic illness.

Explaining his sacking of Nutt, Alan Johnson wrote in a letter to The Guardian, that "He was asked to go because he cannot be both a government advisor and a campaigner against government policy. [...] As for his comments about horse riding being more dangerous than ecstasy, which you quote with such reverence, it is of course a political rather than a scientific point." Responding in The Times, Professor Nutt said:

I gave a lecture on the assessment of drug harms and how these relate to the legislation controlling drugs. According to Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, some contents of this lecture meant I had crossed the line from science to policy and so he sacked me. I do not know which comments were beyond the line or, indeed, where the line was [...]

In the wake of Nutt's dismissal, Dr Les King, a part-time advisor to the Department of Health, and the senior chemist on the ACMD, resigned from the body. His resignation was soon followed by that of Marion Walker, Clinical Director of Berkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust's substance misuse service, and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society's representative on the ACMD.

The Guardian revealed that Alan Johnson ordered what was described as a 'snap review' of the 40-strong ACMD in October 2009. This, it was said, would assess whether the body is "discharging the functions" that it was set up to deliver and decide if it still represented value for money for the public. The review was to be conducted by David Omand. Within hours of The Guardian revealing this, an article was published online by The Times arguing that Nutt's controversial lecture actually conformed to government guidelines throughout. The report of the review was published in February 2011.

On 10 November 2009 three further members of the Council resigned following a meeting with Alan Johnson. They were: Dr John Marsden, Dr Ian Ragan and Dr Simon Campbell. A sixth member, Dr Polly Taylor, resigned in March 2010, shortly before the decision to make substituted cathinones - including the legal high mephedrone - illegal. On 1 April 2010 Eric Carlin also resigned after the announcement of the ban, saying that the decision by the Home Secretary was "unduly based on media and political pressure". He also stated "We had little or no discussion about how our recommendation to classify this drug would be likely to impact on young people's behaviour. As well as being extremely unhappy with how the ACMD operates, I am not prepared to continue to be part of a body which, as its main activity, works to facilitate the potential criminalisation of increasing numbers of young people."

Potential reduction of scientists on the committee
The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 removed the legal requirement which meant the ACMD had to have scientists and experts on the panel.

Following the Act, the panel no longer has to have: someone who practices veterinary medicine; someone who practices medicine, other than veterinary medicine; someone who practices dentistry; someone who practices pharmacy; someone from the pharmaceutical industry; or a chemist, other than from the pharmaceutical chemistry.

Public opinion
Previous Home Secretaries, when responding to the advice of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, have all reiterated that the majority of public opinion is against reforming the current stance on prohibition. However, a poll commissioned by the Liberal Democrats found that when the definitions of three regulatory options were given to members of the public  instead of simply asking "Do you think drugs should be legalised?" the majority in fact supported new regulatory control.

title: Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs


text:
Edison High School (New Jersey)

Edison High School is a four-year comprehensive public high school located in Edison, in Middlesex County, in the U.S. state of New Jersey. The school serves students of many diverse cultures, and is part of the Edison Township Public Schools. The other high school in the district is J. P. Stevens High School. The school has been accredited by the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Elementary and Secondary Schools.

Most of the Edison High School students come from either Herbert Hoover Middle School or Thomas Jefferson Middle School, though some come from Woodrow Wilson Middle School.

As of the 2022–23 school year, the school had an enrollment of 2,280 students and 160.9 classroom teachers (on an FTE basis), for a student–teacher ratio of 14.2:1. There were 553 students (24.3% of enrollment) eligible for free lunch and 212 (9.3% of students) eligible for reduced-cost lunch.

History
Edison High School opened in 1956 as the district's first secondary school. By the start of the 1957–58 school year, the school was holding double sessions for students in grades seven through ten. J. P. Stevens High School opened in 1964, as part of an effort to alleviate overcrowding at Edison High School that made it the last school in the district that was still holding double sessions in order to accommodate the volume of students.

Awards, recognition and rankings
The school was the 135th-ranked public high school in New Jersey out of 339 schools statewide in New Jersey Monthly magazine's September 2014 cover story on the state's "Top Public High Schools", using a new ranking methodology. The school had been ranked 174th in the state of 328 schools in 2012, after being ranked 169th in 2010 out of 322 schools listed. The magazine ranked the school 177th in 2008 out of 316 schools. The school was ranked 155th in the magazine's September 2006 issue, which surveyed 316 schools across the state.

Curriculum
Edison High School students are required to take four years of English, three (formerly four) years of math, three years of science, three years of history (two of U.S. followed by one of World) and at least two years of a foreign language (selected from Latin, French, Spanish, Mandarin, Japanese, and starting in 2008, Italian). In addition, attendance at health and physical education classes are required every year. Starting with the Class of 2008, one year of "Career Education and Consumer, Family and Life Skills" such as Foods or Technology Fundamentals is required as well as a year from the "Visual Performing Arts" such as Chorus, Band, Visual Arts, Clothing for Fashion, and Architectural Drawing. EHS has an Honors college preparatory track that features several Advanced Placement (AP) courses.

Mr. EHS
Every year, the Student Council hosts Mr. EHS, a beauty pageant, talent show and fund raiser that also searches for the very special and outstanding male who attends Edison High. A month prior to the performance, contestants were required to individually raise money for the affiliated charity such as the Simpson-Baber Foundation for the Autistic (2006) or Buddy Ball (2005). Whichever contestant raises the most money was immediately awarded "Most Charitable." In addition, each year Mr. EHS finalizes with announcements of the winner, Mr. Congeniality, and the amount of money the show raised (approx. $3–5000 per show).

Choir
Edison High School is often recognized for its music department. The A cappella Choir and Chamber Singers, for example, have been awarded first place superior ratings in national competitions for over 40 years, 19 under its director, Kenneth Brown (Retired 2021), Now led by Joshua Lisner

EHS offers nine different choirs:

 * 1) Concert Choir is the entry-level choir. This choir is open to anyone, regardless of experience or talent level and no audition is required. Concert Choir performs at the annual winter and spring concerts, as well as various community performances throughout the school year.
 * 2) A Cappella Choir is an audition only mixed choir. The size of this choir usually ranges from about forty to eighty members. In addition to performing at many different events during the school year, the A Cappella Choir competes nationally each spring in Festivals of Music. The choir includes the Chambers Singers too.
 * 3) Jazz Choir is a smaller mixed choir whose members are taken from the best of the A Cappella Choir. Their repertoire comprises jazz music and they too compete each year in the spring. This choir meets one day per week after school.
 * 4) Treble Choir is an advanced all female audition only ensemble. This choir meets Wednesday after school and competes nationally each spring with the other competing choirs. Concert choir students are allowed to audition to be in this choir.
 * 5) Men's Ensemble is an advanced all-male, audition-only choir. The group meets after school one day a week and also competes nationally.
 * 6) Chambers Singers is the most advanced ensemble in the choral department. Members are accepted by audition only and the size of the group ranges from ten to twenty students. The group performs at many events throughout the school year and competes nationally each spring. The repertoire of this group includes a wide assortment of musical styles.
 * 7) The Barbershop Quartet is an all-male group composed of four of the best male singers in the choral program. They compete nationally each year. This group meets one day per week after school.
 * 8) The Beautyshop Quartet is an all-female group with four of the best female singers in the choral program. They compete nationally each year. This group meets one day per week after school.

Band
The band programs in Edison High School are outstanding and also ranked highly in their divisions, with the band placing first in many competitions. Also has different kinds of bands. Marching Band won two State Championships in the fall 2022 season. The current Director of Bands is Marc Deniculo accompanied by Assistant Director Derek Dillman.

Several bands exist at Edison High School:

Concert Band: All incoming freshmen are placed in the concert band to help them develop their skills and technique.

Symphonic Band: The Symphonic Band is open to all sophomores, juniors and seniors who wish to further develop their skills and musical knowledge. This band plays more difficult than the Concert Band and is directed by Derek Dillman.

Wind Ensemble: The Wind Ensemble, directed by Marc Denicuolo, is by audition only to all sophmores, juniors and seniors. The Wind Ensemble plays challenging music and competes in the Region II Concert Band Festival in March every year. In 2005 the Ensemble was ranked 2nd overall in the state for its performance of Yiddish dances. In 2006 the Wind Ensemble received 3rd place in region II and was invited to participate in the New Jersey Concert Band Gala. The Wind Ensemble performs at other festivals as well as on the band's annual spring trip.

Jazz Ensemble: The Jazz Ensemble is the bands' most selective group accepting 16-21 of the school's top jazz musicians. The ensemble plays difficult music and participates in various jazz competitions throughout New Jersey.

Jazz Band: The Jazz Band is open for students to learn how to play the style of jazz. This band rehearses once a week every Wednesday.

Indoor Percussion Ensemble: The Indoor Percussion Ensemble is comprised of drummers and pit percussionists. The ensemble participates in indoor competitions and goes to Wildwood every year for the final championships.

Marching Band: The Eagle Marching Band performs at all varsity football games. The Eagle Marching band took home two state titles in 2002 and 2003 for their shows the rise and fall of rome and medusa which they performed in group IV open. Now in USSBA Group III Open competitions. The Marching Band was undefeated and took home title of first place group III Open at state championships and Northern States Championships in 2006 with their show entitled: Breaking Boundaries: The Saga of the Berlin Wall. In 2007, the Eagle Marching Band took 2nd place at NJ States, 5th place at Northern States and 6th place at Nationals in Baltimore, Maryland. In 2013, they took first place in State as well as National Championships, with their program "Playback". In 2014, they took first place in State as well as National Championships, with their program "The Grind", and they became the first school in the Edison district to win National championships back to back. In 2018, Edison took home all three banners for USBands Group IV Open competition. They won 1st place in state, regional, and national competitions. In 2020, they took first place, once again becoming State and National champions as a USBands Division 3 Band. In 2022, their show "Chaos Order" made history by bringing them to Bands of America Mid-Atlantic Regional Finals for the first time, winning 7th place at Finals. They also won 1st place in USBands State, NJMBDA State, and USBands National championships.

Drama
In March 2005, the drama department performed its production of Crazy for You, a Gershwin musical based on the original Girl Crazy. Crazy for You was directed by Mr. Harris with Mr. McCaffery as the technical director and Anthony DiDia as music director.

In the Spring of 2006, the school presented a production of Barnum, a show that featured a sideshow before the actual musical began. The play was directed by Mr. Harris, with production by Mr. McCaffery and Music Direction by Anthony DiDIa. Tom Lombardi was the lighting designer for Barnum.

In March 2007, EHS Drama put on a production of Cabaret starring several new additions to the EHS Drama team. The show incorporated songs of both the original and the revival versions. The cast and crew did not receive any Rising Star Award nominations from the Paper Mill Playhouse despite the fantastic two-week run the show had. However, the Kit Kat Girls received honorable mention for their role. The show was directed by Mr. Harris and co-directed by Mrs. Troy, with production by Mr. McCaffery aided by Mr. Scarpa, and Music Direction by Anthony DiDia.

In March 2008, EHS Drama presented a production of Beauty and the Beast, was directed by Kathi Troy and Brian Harris, with production by John Scarpa aided by Mr. McCaffery, and Music Direction by Anthony DiDia.

In March 2009, EHS Drama presented the production of Bye Bye Birdie, a comedy musical. This production was directed by Staci Almquist with Music Direction by Nicholas Kaminski.

In March 2010, EHS Drama presented Little Shop of Horrors, directed by Kathi Tory and Music Directed by Nicholas Kaminski. The production also featured an original orchestration by Nicholas Kaminski.

In January 2011, the EHS Improv Troupe's Jordan Cohen and Michael Fernandes came in 4th place in the state in the STANJ Theater Competition at Rutgers University, marking the first official award for EHS Theater.

In March 2011, EHS Drama presented Hairspray as its spring musical, directed by Kathi Troy and choreographed by Danielle Andriano, with music direction by Nicholas Kaminski.

In December 2011, EHS Drama presented The Complete Works of William Shakespeare (Abridged) as its Fall play. This was EHS's first ever straight play.

In January 2012, the EHS Improv Troupe's Jordan Cohen and Michael Fernandes moved up from their position as 4th in the state in the STANJ Theater Competition and became first in the state. At the same competition the cast of The Complete Works of William Shakespeare (Abridged) competed in the "Scenes" category using their Romeo & Juliet scene and came in fourth in the state. These were both great achievements for the EHS Drama Club.

In April 2012, EHS Drama presented Wedding Singer as its Spring musical, directed by Kathi Troy.

In April 2013, EHS Drama presented Spamalot as its Spring musical, directed by Kathi Troy and Music Directed by Nicholas Kaminski.

In 2014, EHS Drama presented All Shook Up as its Spring musical, directed by Nicole Singer.

In March 2015, EHS Drama presented Urinetown as its Spring musical, directed by Nicole Singer, Music Directed by Chris Curcio, and choreographed by Lyle Dungee.

In December 2018, EHS Drama presented It's A Wonderful Life as its Winter play, directed by Maureen O'Connor.

In March 2019, EHS Drama presented Curtains as its Spring musical, directed by Maureen O'Connor.

In October 2021, EHS Drama presented Arsenic and Old Lace as its Fall play, directed by Maureen O'Connor.

In March 2022, EHS Drama presented Into the Woods as its Spring musical, directed by Maureen O'Connor.

Starting in the 2022-2023 School Year, the Edison High School Theater Club is now run and directed by Jessica Eckhoff and Gabriela Padilla, taking over after Maureen O'Connor left the position.

In March 2023, EHS Theater Department presented High School Musical as its Spring musical, directed by Jessica Eckhoff and Gabriela Padilla. This was also their first time as directors. This musical was also won 3 awards at the first annual Central Jersey Marquee Awards, held at the Carteret Performing Arts and Events Center in Carteret, NJ. The musical won the awards for Best Ensemble Member, Best Lighting, and Best Student Stage Manager.

In May 2023, a new event entitled Eagle Night Live, inspired by Saturday Night Live, was put on for the first time. It was a comedy show that allowed the students to perform comedic songs, scenes, and whatever else they wanted.

In October 2023, EHS Theater Department presented Clue as its Fall play, directed by Jessica Eckhoff and Gabriela Padilla.

In March 2024, EHS Theater Department presented Legally Blonde as its Spring musical, directed by Jessica Eckhoff and Gabriela Padilla. This musical also won 2 awards at the second annual Central Jersey Marquee Awards, held at the Carteret Performing Arts and Events Center in Carteret, NJ. The musical won the awards for Best Hair and Makeup and Best Music Direction.

In May 2024, EHS Theater Department presented the second annual Eagle Night Live.

For the 2024-2025 school year, the announced Fall Play is Almost, Maine.

For the 2024-2025 school year, the announced Spring Musical is The Addams Family.

The club Peacock Society, a South Asian club, also puts on a Bollywood themed drama play every year which features musical performances during the play as well. These musical performances include singing and dancing.

Athletics
The Edison High School Eagles compete in the Greater Middlesex Conference, which comprises public and private high schools located in the Middlesex County area and operating under the supervision of the New Jersey State Interscholastic Athletic Association (NJSIAA). With 1,490 students in grades 10–12, the school was classified by the NJSIAA for the 2019–20 school year as Group IV for most athletic competition purposes, which included schools with an enrollment of 1,060 to 5,049 students in that grade range. The football team competes in Division 5D of the Big Central Football Conference, which includes 60 public and private high schools in Hunterdon, Middlesex, Somerset, Union and Warren counties, which are broken down into 10 divisions by size and location. The school was classified by the NJSIAA as Group V South for football for 2022–2024, which included schools with 1,315 to 2,466 students.

The school participates as the host school / lead agency for a joint ice hockey team with Metuchen High School and J. P. Stevens High School. The co-op program operates under agreements scheduled to expire at the end of the 2023–24 school year.

The baseball team won the Central Jersey Group IV state sectional title in 1969 and won the Group IV championship in 1981 (defeating Hackensack High School in the tournament final), 1982 (vs. Hackensack), 1991 vs. (Morris Knolls High School) and 1993 (vs. West New York Memorial). The 1981 team won the Group IV title with a 4–0 win against Hackensack. The 1982 team defeated Hackensack by a score of 4–0 to win their second consecutive Group IV title and run their season record to 25–3. The Eagles won the GMC Red Division championship and won the 2007 Baseball - North II, Group IV state sectional championship with a 10–4 win versus Westfield High School. Edison High plays on a Red and Vegas Gold artificial turf baseball field, constructed in 2020 ata cost of $1.3 million.
 * Baseball

The football team won the Central Jersey Group IV state sectional championship in 1976 and 1991 and Group 5 Champion in 2022. The 1976 team won the Central Jersey Group IV state sectional title with a 19–0 win against Woodbridge High School in the championship game, avenging a 7–0 loss to Woodbridge in their Thanksgiving Day matchup. The team won its second (and most recent) sectional title in 1991 with a 20–16 win against Middletown High School North in the championship game; the 1991 team earned consideration from the Courier News as one of "the best in GMC history" During the 2022 Championship run the Eagles came back from 14 points down with less than four minutes left in the Fourth Quarter against archrival North Brunswick. The Eagles scored two touchdowns, one after an on side kick, then went for two but were denied. Now with less than a minute, North Brunswick waved flags and celebrated but Selbin Sabio kicked a second on side kick and Yasko's son Matt drove the team down the field for a game winning field goal by Sabio. That team was coached by EHS's all time winningest coach, Matt Fulham. Eagles won the sectional title avenging a playoff loss from three years earlier against Cherokee High School.
 * Football

The girls bowling team won the overall state championship in 1986–1988, 1992 and 2000. The program's five state titles are the fifth-most of any school in the state.
 * Bowling

The softball team won the Group IV state championship in 1987 (defeating Belleville High School in the final round of the tournament), 1990 (vs. Clifton High School) and 1991 (vs. West Milford High School). The 1987 team finished the season with a record of 23-2 after defeating Belleville by a score of 7–0 to win the Group IV title. NJ.com / The Star-Ledger ranked Edison as their number-one softball team in the state in 1987.
 * Softball

The girls tennis team won championship of GMCS in 2021 season.
 * Tennis

Notable alumni

 * Gayleatha B. Brown (1947-2013), United States Ambassador to the Republic of Benin.
 * Michael Campbell (born 1989), wide receiver who played in the NFL for the New York Jets.
 * Rich Gaspari (born 1963), three-time IFBB Mr. Olympia Runner-up (1986, 1987 and 1988) who was inducted into the IFBB Hall of Fame in 2004.
 * Omar Maskati (class of 2007), actor known for his roles in Better Call Saul, Unbelievable, and the 2020 movie Evil Eye.
 * Patrick McDonnell (born 1956, class of 1974), creator of the daily comic strip Mutts.
 * Robert Pastorelli (1954–2004, class of 1972), actor best known for the seven years he played the portly painter Eldin Bernecky on the television series Murphy Brown.
 * Walter Perez, weekend morning co-anchor, journalist and weekday reporter for WPVI-TV, the ABC network affiliate in Philadelphia.
 * Zach Perez (born 1996), professional soccer player who plays as a defender for USL League One club Richmond Kickers.
 * Susan Sarandon (born 1946, class of 1964), Academy Award-winning actress.
 * Rick Stromoski (born 1959, class of 1977), artist and creator of the Mullets and Soup to Nutz comic strips.

Administration
The school's principal is Charles K. Ross Sr. Core members of the school's administration team include the three assistant principals.

title: Edison High School (New Jersey)


text:
Fine Line (Paul McCartney song)

"Fine Line" is a song from Paul McCartney's 2005 album, Chaos and Creation in the Backyard. McCartney plays a majority of the instruments on the song including drums, bass, and piano. It was released 29 August 2005 as the first single from the album in the UK (see 2005 in British music). It reached number 20 on the UK Singles Chart, McCartney's last top 20 solo single in the UK as of 2019, and number 31 on the US Adult Contemporary chart. The cover art is a drawing by British artist and frequent McCartney collaborator Brian Clarke.

A live version is also featured on The Space Within US concert DVD from 2006.

Track listings

 * 7" R6673
 * 1) "Fine Line" – 3:05
 * 2) "Growing Up Falling Down" – 3:27
 * CD CDR6673
 * 1) "Fine Line" – 3:05
 * 2) "Comfort of Love" – 3:08
 * CD
 * 1) "Fine Line" – 3:06
 * 2) "Comfort of Love" – 3:09
 * 3) "Growing Up Falling Down" – 3:27

Personnel
Personnel per booklet.
 * Paul McCartney – vocals, Bösendorfer grand piano, Baldwin spinet, Höfner bass guitar, Epiphone Casino electric guitar, Martin D28 acoustic guitar, Ludwig drums, shakers, tambourine
 * Millennia Ensemble – strings
 * Joby Talbot – conducting, arrangement

title: Fine Line (Paul McCartney song)


text:
Johnny Lewis

Jonathan Kendrick Lewis (October 29, 1983 – September 26, 2012), also credited as Johnny K. Lewis, was an American film and television actor. He was best known for playing Kip "Half-Sack" Epps in the first two seasons of the FX series Sons of Anarchy, and for other television roles such as Gilby in The Sausage Factory (2001–2002), Pearce Chase in Quintuplets (2004–2005) and Dennis "Chili" Childress in The O.C. (2005–2006). Lewis also appeared in supporting roles in the films Underclassman (2005), Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem (2007), Felon (2008) and The Runaways (2010).

After sustaining head trauma from a motorcycle accident in 2011, Lewis was arrested three times between 2011 and 2012. In September 2012, he bludgeoned his landlady and her cat to death before falling off the roof of her house where he had been renting accommodation, falling to his death in the process.

Early life
Johnny Lewis grew up in the Los Angeles neighborhoods of North Hollywood and Sherman Oaks. He was the middle child of Michael and Divona Lewis. Both parents were practicing Scientologists, and Lewis himself was a Scientologist for most of his life. After finishing school, Lewis left home at the age of 18 to pursue an acting career.

Career
Lewis began making television appearances while in his late teens, with guest starring roles in Boston Public (2000), The Guardian (2001) and American Dreams (2002), among others. He made his feature film debut in 2004, in New Line Cinema's Raise Your Voice, and followed that up with Miramax Films' Underclassman in 2005. He co-starred as Pearce Chase, one of five siblings on the Fox series Quintuplets, and appeared in the movie Raise Your Voice (2004) alongside Hilary Duff. Lewis also guest starred in four episodes of the Nickelodeon television series Drake & Josh as Scottie, one of Drake's bandmates, and from 2005 to 2006 he played Dennis "Chili" Childress on The O.C., another Fox series. He had a guest spot during the fifth season of Smallville.

Lewis also starred in the film Magic Valley (2011), which premiered at the Tribeca Film Festival. He became well known for his role as prospect biker Kip "Half-Sack" Epps in the first two seasons of the FX series Sons of Anarchy.

Personal life
Lewis dated American singer Katy Perry from 2005 to 2006. In mid-2009 he learned that he and his then-girlfriend, actress Diane Gaeta, were expecting their first child. The couple had split up by April 6, 2010, when the couple's daughter, Culla May, was born, but briefly attempted sharing a residence. Lewis eventually moved out, after which the couple engaged in a "long and painful" custody battle that Lewis ultimately lost.

Religion
Although Lewis was raised in a "Jewish-oriented household", his family also practiced Scientology; his parents attained the highest available level within the Church of Scientology, called "Operating Thetan Level VIII", or OT VIII. Lewis starred in Scientology training films and endorsed the Scientology drug rehabilitation group Narconon. However, Lewis left Scientology in his early 20s.

Legal troubles
Lewis was arrested three times between 2011 and 2012. In January 2012, he struck two men in the head with a bottle while engaged in a fight. He pleaded no contest to charges of assault with a deadly weapon in the case. The second arrest came about six weeks after the first, with Lewis accused of attempting to break into a woman's home. He pleaded no contest in that case as well. Considering the cases, a probation official expressed that he was "very concerned for the well-being of not only the community but that of the defendant", stating Lewis suffered from mental health issues as well as chemical dependency and that he would "continue to be a threat to any community he may reside in". Lewis was released from a Los Angeles County jail on September 21, 2012, five days before his death.

Psychiatric diagnosis
On October 30, 2011, Lewis suffered head injuries from a high-speed motorcycle accident. Though an MRI was recommended, and Lewis' father scheduled MRI tests twice, Lewis refused to take them. His father later stated that he "pursued and encouraged psychiatric treatment for his son. It was Johnny who refused to comply." Lewis started manifesting bizarre and illogical behavior from that point on and concurrent to his ensuing legal troubles.

Bill Jensen reported in Los Angeles magazine that Lewis' family and attorneys pushed for rehab for marijuana addiction to avoid trial. When counselors observing Lewis rejected this, they pursued rehab for alcoholism instead. In early August 2012, Lewis was well enough to be granted provisional out-patient status after agreeing to be detained for "time served". He was assured that he would likely just spend a couple more days in jail; however, this turned into nearly two more months of detention, during which he suffered a severe downturn in health and spirits. Lewis was released from jail on September 21, 2012.

Death
On September 26, 2012, at the age of 28, Lewis and his 81-year-old landlady, Catherine Davis, were both found dead at Davis' home inside of Lewis’s apartment in Los Angeles, California. Davis was known in Hollywood circles for operating the Writers' Villa, a bed-and-breakfast for up-and-coming performers, directors and writers in her home. Lewis, who had previously lived there in 2009, had recently moved back in. Police were called by neighbors after Lewis violently attacked two people at the property next door, and Davis was heard screaming. Officers from the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) found Lewis' body on the home's driveway. Davis was found dead inside the house with severe head injuries; her pet cat was also found dead in the bathroom.

Neighbors reported that Lewis had jumped over a fence to the next-door property, assaulted a house painter and the homeowner (to whom Lewis had earlier introduced himself as "John, your new neighbor") and then jumped back over the fence onto Davis' property. According to the LAPD, Lewis then either fell or jumped from the roof, garage or patio of Davis' house. His death was investigated as a homicide, and it was later determined that he had killed Davis by manual strangulation and blunt force trauma to her head.

An autopsy report released on November 29, 2012, stated that Lewis did not have any drugs or alcohol in his system when he died. Toxicology reports came back negative for alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, psychedelic drugs or anti-psychotic medication. The autopsy indicated he had suffered partial strangulation and had fingernail marks on his neck when he died. There was no indication that Lewis had been pushed or that he jumped from the roof in an act of suicide. His death was ruled accidental.

Lewis' family has spoken out about his history of untreated head trauma, leading some to speculate that he developed a psychological disorder, which led to his sudden spurts of violence. Sons of Anarchy creator Kurt Sutter tweeted about his death: "It was a tragic end for an extremely talented guy, who unfortunately had lost his way. I wish I could say that I was shocked by the events last night, but I was not. I am deeply sorry that an innocent life had to be thrown into his destructive path. Yes, it's a day of mourning, but it's also a day of awareness and gratitude. Sadly, some of us carry the message by dying."

title: Johnny Lewis


text:
Process costing

Process costing is an accounting methodology that traces and accumulates direct costs, and allocates indirect costs of a manufacturing process. Costs are assigned to products, usually in a large batch, which might include an entire month's production. Eventually, costs have to be allocated to individual units of product. It assigns average costs to each unit, and is the opposite extreme of Job costing which attempts to measure individual costs of production of each unit. Process costing is usually a significant chapter. It is a method of assigning costs to units of production in companies producing large quantities of homogeneous products.

Process costing is a type of operation costing which is used to ascertain the cost of a product at each process or stage of manufacture. CIMA defines process costing as "The costing method applicable where goods or services result from a sequence of continuous or repetitive operations or processes. Costs are averaged over the units produced during the period". Process costing is suitable for industries producing homogeneous products and where production is a continuous flow. A process can be referred to as the sub-unit of an organization specifically defined for cost collection purpose.

The importance of process costing
Costing is an important process that many companies engage in to keep track of where their money is being spent in the production and distribution processes. Understanding these costs is the first step in being able to control them. It is very important that a company chooses the appropriate type of costing system for their product type and industry. One type of costing system that is used in certain industries is process costing that varies from other types of costing (such as job costing) in some ways. In process costing unit costs are more like averages, the process-costing system requires less bookkeeping than does a job-order costing system. Thus, some companies often prefer to use the process-costing system.

When is process costing applied?
Process costing is appropriate for companies that produce a continuous mass of like units through series of operations or process. Also, when one order does not affect the production process and a standardization of the process and product exists. However, if there are significant differences among the costs of various products, a process costing system would not provide adequate product-cost information. Costing is generally used in such industries such as petroleum, coal mining, chemicals, textiles, paper, plastic, glass, food, banks, courier, cement, and soap.

Reasons for use
Company units of product in a given period of time.
 * Products are manufactured in large quantities, but products may be sold in small quantities, sometimes one at a time (automobiles, loaves of bread), a dozen or two at a time (eggs, cookies), etc.
 * Product costs must be transferred from Finished Goods to Cost of Goods Sold as sales are made. This requires a correct and accurate accounting of product costs per unit, to have a proper matching of product costs against related sales revenue.
 * Managers need to maintain cost control over the manufacturing process. Process costing provides managers with feedback that can be used to compare similar product costs from one month to the next, keeping costs in line with projected manufacturing budgets.
 * A fraction-of-a-cent cost change can represent a large dollar change in overall profitability, when selling millions of units of product a month. Managers must carefully watch per unit costs on a daily basis through the production process, while at the same time dealing with materials and output in huge quantities.
 * Materials part way through a process (e.g. chemicals) might need to be given a value, process costing allows for this. By determining what cost the part processed material has incurred such as labor or overhead an "equivalent unit" relative to the value of a finished process can be calculated.''

Process cost procedures
There are four basic steps in accounting for Process cost:
 * Summarize the flow of physical units of output.
 * Compute output in terms of equivalent units.
 * Summarize total costs to account for and Compute equivalent unit costs.
 * Assign total costs to units completed and to units in ending work in process inventory.

The journal entries for process costing are the same as those for job-order costing with one exception. The entry to transfer cost from one work-in-process account to another is:

Work-in-process inventory-second department         Debit (Left)

Work-in-process-first department                                     Credit (Right)

e.g.(1) Micro Labs Company produces house paint in two processing departments: the Mixing Department which mixes the paint colors and the Finishing Department which puts the paint in containers and labels them. The following information related to the company’s operation for October follows:

A) Raw materials were issued for use in production: Mixing department, $551,000, and the Finishing department, $629,000. B) Direct labor costs incurred: Mixing department $230,000, and Finishing department $270,000. C) Manufacturing overhead cost applied: Mixing department $665,000, and Finishing department, $405,000. D) The cost of the mixed paint transferred from the Mixing department to the Finishing department was $1,850,000. E) Paint that had been prepared for shipping was transferred from the Finishing department to Finished Goods. Cost of the transferred paint was $3,200,000.

Required: Prepare journal entries to record items A) through E) above.

Solution(1):

–Work in Process – Mixing          551,000 –Work in Process – Finishing       629,000 –Raw Materials                                1,180,000 –Work in Process – Mixing          230,000 –Work in Process – Finishing       270,000 –Wages and Salaries Payable                   500,000 –Work in Process – Mixing          665,000 –Work in Process – Finishing       405,000 –Manufacturing Overhead                       1,070,000 –Work in Process – Finishing       1,850,000 –Work in Process – Mixing                     1,850,000 –Finished Goods                    3,200,000 –Work in Process – Finishing                  3,200,000

e.g.(2) Larney Corporation uses process costing. A number of transactions that occurred in June are listed below. As follows:

A) Raw materials that cost $38,200 are withdrawn from the storeroom for use in the Mixing Department. B) Direct labor costs incurred $36,500,in the Mixing Department. C) Manufacturing overhead of $42,100 is applied in the Mixing Department. D) Units with a carrying cost of $112,400 finish processing in the Mixing Department and are transferred to the Drying Department for further processing. E) Units with a carrying cost of $143,800 finish processing in the Drying Department, the final step in the production process, and are transferred to the finished goods warehouse. F) Finished goods with a carrying cost of $138,500

Required: Prepare journal entries to record items A) through F).

Solution (2):

–work in process-mixing department      $38,200 —raw materials                                    $38,200 –work in process                        $36,500 –salaries/wages payable                           $36,500 –work in process-mixing department      $42,100 –manufacturing overhead                           $42,100 –work in process-drying department. $112,400 –work in process mixing department                $112,400 –finished goods                         $143,800 –work in process-drying department                $143,800 -costs of goods sold                    $138,500 –finished goods                                   $138,500

Operation cost in batch manufacturing
Batch costing is a modification of job costing. When production is repetitive nature and consists of a definite number of articles, batch is used. In batch costing, the most important problem is to determine the optimum size of the batch that follows the fact that production of two elements of costs:
 * Set up costs which are generally fixed per batch.
 * Carrying costs which determination of batch quantity requires considerations of some factors:
 * setting up costs per batch.
 * cost of manufacturing such as (direct materials cost + direct wages + direct overhead) per piece.
 * cost of storage.
 * rate of interest on the capital invested in product and rate of demand for product.

title: Process costing


text:
AC Pavia 1911 SSD

Associazione Calcio Pavia 1911 Società Sportiva Dilettantistica, or more simply Pavia, is an Italian football club, based in Pavia, Lombardy. Pavia plays in Eccellenza, informally called Serie E.

History
The club was founded in 2016. Benny Carbone played for the club from 2008 to 2010, before becoming the coach at the end of the 2010–11 season, saving the team from relegation.

Colors and badge
The team's colors are blue and white-black.

Honours

 * Serie C
 * Winners: 1932–33, 1952–53

 * Serie C2
 * Winners: 1983–84, 2002–03

title: AC Pavia 1911 SSD


text: Category:Wikipedians by alma mater: University of New Mexico


text:
Talk:International Save the Children Union

Untitled 9 October 2005
I have made a number of changes to this page: Firstly, although Eglantyne Jebb was certainly the leading figure behind the creation of the organisation, she was not the only one. Her sister Dorothy was also involved, although she dropped out of active involvement shortly after. I have also added a link to the International Committee of the Red Cross, which played an important part, and whose patronage certainly contributed to the success of the organisation.

Secondly, I have added information about the closure of the organisation and the location of its archives. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rbreen (talk • contribs) 18:34, 9 October 2005 (UTC)


text: User talk:80.178.211.158

title: User talk:80.178.211.158


text: User talk:70.108.4.186

title: User talk:70.108.4.186


text:
User talk:Pope Electric Fish

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Gamaliel 18:35, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Gamaliel 18:41, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Pope Electric Fish


text:
Medicare Part D

Medicare Part D, also called the Medicare prescription drug benefit, is an optional United States federal-government program to help Medicare beneficiaries pay for self-administered prescription drugs. Part D was enacted as part of the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 and went into effect on January 1, 2006. Under the program, drug benefits are provided by private insurance plans that receive premiums from both enrollees and the government. Part D plans typically pay most of the cost for prescriptions filled by their enrollees. However, plans are later reimbursed for much of this cost through rebates paid by manufacturers and pharmacies.

Part D enrollees cover a portion of their own drug expenses by paying cost-sharing. The amount of cost-sharing an enrollee pays depends on the retail cost of the filled drug, the rules of their plan, and whether they are eligible for additional Federal income-based subsidies. Prior to 2010, enrollees were required to pay 100% of their retail drug costs during the coverage gap phase, commonly referred to as the "doughnut hole.” Subsequent legislation, including the Affordable Care Act, “closed” the doughnut hole from the perspective of beneficiaries, largely through the creation of a manufacturer discount program.

In 2019, about three-quarters of Medicare enrollees obtained drug coverage through Part D. Program expenditures were $102 billion, which accounted for 12% of Medicare spending. Through the Part D program, Medicare finances more than one-third of retail prescription drug spending in the United States.

Eligibility and enrollment
To enroll in Part D, Medicare beneficiaries must also be enrolled in either Part A or Part B. Beneficiaries can participate in Part D through a stand-alone prescription drug plan or through a Medicare Advantage plan that includes prescription drug benefits. Beneficiaries can enroll directly through the plan's sponsor or through an intermediary. Medicare beneficiaries who delay enrollment into Part D may be required to pay a late-enrollment penalty. In 2019, 47 million beneficiaries were enrolled in Part D, which represents three-quarters of Medicare beneficiaries.

Plans offered
Part D benefits are provided through private plans approved by the federal government. The number of offered plans varies geographically, but a typical enrollee will have dozens of options to choose from. Although plans are restricted by numerous program requirements, plans vary in many ways. Among other factors, enrollees often compare premiums, covered drugs, and cost-sharing policies when selecting a plan.

Medicare offers an interactive online tool that allows for comparison of coverage and costs for all plans in a geographic area. The tool lets users input their own list of medications and then calculates personalized projections of the enrollee's annual costs under each plan option. Plans are required to submit biweekly data updates that Medicare uses to keep this tool updated throughout the year.

Beneficiary cost sharing
Part D includes a statutorily defined "standard benefit" that is updated on an annual basis. All Part D sponsors must offer a plan that follows the standard benefit. The standard benefit is defined in terms of the benefit structure and without mandating the drugs that must be covered. For example, under the 2020 standard benefit, beneficiaries first pay a 100% coinsurance amount up to a $435 deductible. Second, beneficiaries pay a 25% coinsurance amount up to an Out-of-Pocket Threshold of $6,350. In the final benefit phase, beneficiaries pay the greater of a 5% coinsurance amount or a nominal co-payment amount. These three benefit phases are referred to as the Deductible, Initial Coverage Limit, and the Catastrophic phase.

The "Out-of-Pocket Threshold" is not a cap on out-of-pocket spending, as beneficiaries continue to accrue cost-sharing expenses in the Catastrophic phase. In 2020, beneficiaries would typically reach this threshold as their retail drug spending approached $10,000. When patients enter the Catastrophic phase, the amount they have paid in cost-sharing is typically much less than the Out-of-Pocket Threshold. This is because the standard benefit requires plans to include additional amounts, such as manufacturer discounts, when determining if the Out-of-Pocket Threshold has been met.

Part D sponsors may also offer plans that differ from the standard benefit, provided that these alternative benefit structures do not result in higher average cost-sharing. In practice, most enrollees do not elect for standard benefit plans, instead opting for plans without deductibles and with tiered drug co-payments rather than coinsurance. Enrollees must pay an additional premium amount to be enrolled in a plan with cost-sharing that is lower than the standard benefit, and this additional amount is not Federally-subsidized.

Prior to 2010, the standard benefit included a Coverage Gap phase in which, after accruing significant spending, relatively-high cost enrollees were required to pay a 100% coinsurance amount until they entered the Catastrophic phase. This Coverage Gap phase is commonly referred to as "the Donut Hole." Beginning with the Affordable Care Act, cost-sharing in the Coverage Gap phase has been gradually reduced. Despite no longer triggering elevated cost-sharing, the Coverage Gap phase continues to exist for other administrative purposes.

Beneficiary premiums
In 2020, the average monthly Part D premium across all plans was $27. Premiums for stand-alone PDPs are 3 times higher than premiums for MA-PDs, as Medicare Advantage plans often use federal rebates to reduce premiums for drug coverage. Enrollees typically pay their premiums directly to plans, though they may opt to have their premiums automatically deducted from their Social Security checks.

Plans offer competitive premiums to attract enrollees. Premiums must cover the cost of both plan liability and the reinsurance subsidy. From 2017 to 2020, despite rising per capita drug spending, premiums decreased by 16%. Plans have been able to lower premiums by negotiating larger rebates from manufacturers and pharmacies. Between 2017 and 2020, the percentage of drug costs rebated back to plans increased from 22% to 28%. In addition, the standard benefit was changed in 2019 to increase mandatory manufacturer discounts in the Coverage Gap.

Part D practices community rating, with all enrollees in a plan being assigned the same premium. Enrollees do pay more in premiums if they enroll in higher-than-average-cost plans or in plans that offer enhanced benefits. Like in Part B, higher-income enrollees are required to pay an additional premium amount. Low-income enrollees may have their premium reduced or eliminated if they qualify for the low-income premium subsidy.

For 2022, costs for stand-alone Part D plans in the 10 major U.S. markets ranged from a low of $6.90-per-month (Dallas and Houston) to as much as $160.20-per-month (San Francisco). A study by the American Association for Medicare Supplement Insurance reported the lowest and highest 2022 Medicare Plan D costs for the top-10 markets.

Retiree drug subsidy (RDS)
Retiree Drug Subsidy (RDS) is a program that provides financial assistance to employers who offer prescription drug coverage to their retirees. The subsidy is a feature of Medicare Part D, designed to help retirees access affordable prescription medications.

Low-income subsidies
Beneficiaries with income below 150% of the poverty line are eligible for the low-income subsidy, which helps pay for premiums and cost-sharing. Depending on income-level and assets, some beneficiaries qualify for the full low-income subsidy, while others are eligible for a partial subsidy. All low-income subsidy enrollees still pay small copayment amounts.

Low-income enrollees tend to have more chronic conditions than other enrollees. Low-income subsidy enrollees represent about one-quarter of enrollment, but about half of the program's retail drug spending. Nearly 30% of Federal spending on Part D goes towards paying for the low-income subsidy.

In addition to receiving premium and cost-sharing subsidies, certain program rules apply differently for low-income subsidy enrollees. Beneficiaries of the low-income subsidy are exempt from the Coverage Gap Manufacturer Discount Program. Low-income subsidy enrollees are also allowed to change plans more frequently than other enrollees.

Excluded drugs
While Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) does not have an established formulary, Part D drug coverage excludes drugs not approved by the Food and Drug Administration, drugs not available by prescription for purchase in the United States, and drugs for which payments would be available under Part B.

Part D coverage excludes drugs or classes of drugs that may be excluded from Medicaid coverage. These may include:
 * Drugs used for anorexia, weight loss, or weight gain
 * Drugs used to promote fertility
 * Drugs used for erectile dysfunction
 * Drugs used for cosmetic purposes (hair growth, etc.)
 * Drugs used for the symptomatic relief of cough and colds
 * Prescription vitamin and mineral products, except prenatal vitamins and fluoride preparations
 * Drugs where the manufacturer requires as a condition of sale any associated tests or monitoring services to be purchased exclusively from that manufacturer or its designee

While these drugs are excluded from basic Part D coverage, drug plans can include them as a supplemental benefit, provided they otherwise meet the definition of a Part D drug. However plans that cover excluded drugs are not allowed to pass on those costs to Medicare, and plans are required to repay CMS if they are found to have billed Medicare in these cases.

Plan formularies
Part D plans are not required to pay for all covered Part D drugs. They establish their own formularies, or list of covered drugs for which they will make payment, as long as the formulary and benefit structure are not found by CMS to discourage enrollment by certain Medicare beneficiaries. Part D plans that follow the formulary classes and categories established by the United States Pharmacopoeia will pass the first discrimination test. Plans can change the drugs on their formulary during the course of the year with 60 days' notice to affected parties.

The primary differences between the formularies of different Part D plans relate to the coverage of brand-name drugs. Typically, each Plan's formulary is organized into tiers, and each tier is associated with a set co-pay amount. Most formularies have between 3 and 5 tiers. The lower the tier, the lower the co-pay. For example, Tier 1 might include all of the Plan's preferred generic drugs, and each drug within this tier might have a co-pay of $5 to $10 per prescription. Tier 2 might include the Plan's preferred brand drugs with a co-pay of $40 to $50, while Tier 3 may be reserved for non-preferred brand drugs which are covered by the plan at a higher co-pay, perhaps $70 to $100. Tiers 4 and higher typically contain specialty drugs, which have the highest co-pays because they are generally more expensive. By 2011 in the United States a growing number of Medicare Part D health insurance plans had added the specialty tier.

History
Upon enactment in 1965, Medicare included coverage for physician-administered drugs, but not self-administered prescription drugs. While some earlier drafts of the Medicare legislation included an outpatient drug benefit, those provisions were dropped due to budgetary concerns. In response to criticism regarding this omission, President Lyndon Johnson ordered the formation of the Task Force on Prescription Drugs. The Task Force conducted a comprehensive review of the American prescription drug market and reported that many elderly Americans struggled to afford their medications.

Despite the findings and recommendations of the Task Force, initial efforts to create a Medicare outpatient drug benefit were unsuccessful. In 1988, the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act temporarily expanded program benefits to include self-administered drugs. However, this legislation was repealed just one year later, partially due to concerns regarding premium increases. The 1993 Clinton Health Reform Plan also included an outpatient drug benefit, but that reform effort ultimately failed due to a lack of public support.

In the decades following Medicare's passage, prescription drug spending grew and became increasingly financed through third-party payment. Following an era of modest growth, per capita drug spending began growing rapidly in the 1980s. This growth was partially spurred by the launch of many billion dollar “blockbuster drugs” like Lipitor, Celebrex, and Zoloft. At the time of Medicare's passage, more than 90% of drug spending was paid out-of-pocket. Over the following 35-years, third-party payment for prescription drugs became increasingly common. By the end of the century, less than one-third of drug spending was paid out-of-pocket. Despite the absence of a Medicare drug benefit, about 70% of Medicare enrollees obtained drug coverage through other means, often through an employer or Medicaid.

Medicare began offering subsidized outpatient drug coverage in the mid-2000s. In the 2000 presidential election, both the Democratic and Republican candidates campaigned on the promise of using the projected federal budget surplus to fund a new Medicare drug entitlement program. Following his electoral victory, President George W. Bush promoted a general vision of using private health plans to provide drug coverage to Medicare beneficiaries. Rather than demand that the plan be budget neutral, President Bush supported up to $400 billion in new spending for the program. In 2003, President Bush signed the Medicare Modernization Act, which authorized the creation of the Medicare Part D program. The program was implemented in 2006.

To keep the plan's cost projections below the $400 billion constraint set by leadership, policymakers devised the infamous “donut hole.” After exceeding a modest deductible, beneficiaries would pay 25% cost-sharing for covered drugs. However, once their spending reached an “initial coverage limit,” originally set at $2,250, their cost-sharing would return to 100% of the drug's cost. This loss in coverage would continue until the patient surpassed an out-of-pocket threshold Beneficiaries were often confused by this complicated design, and research consistently found that this coverage gap reduced medication adherence. The Affordable Care Act and subsequent legislation phased-out the coverage gap from the perspective of beneficiaries. As of 2020, beneficiary cost-sharing on covered drugs never exceeds 25% of the drug's cost after an enrollee meets their deductible.

Program costs
In 2019, total drug spending for Medicare Part D beneficiaries was about $180 billion. One-third of this amount, about $120 billion, was paid by prescription drug plans. This plan liability amount was partially offset by about $50 billion in discounts, mostly in the form of manufacturer and pharmacy rebates. This implied a net plan liability (i.e. net of discounts) of roughly $70 billion. To finance this cost, plans received roughly $50 billion in federal reinsurance subsidies, $10 billion in federal direct subsidies, and $10 billion in enrollee premiums.

In addition to the $60 billion paid in federal insurance subsidies, the federal government also paid about $30 billion in cost-sharing subsidies for low-income enrollees. The federal government also collected roughly 20 billion in offsetting receipts. These offsets included both state payments made on behalf of Medicare beneficiaries who also qualify for full Medicaid benefits and additional premiums paid by high-income enrollees. After accounting for these offsets, the net federal cost of Part D was about $70 billion.

Implementation issues

 * Plan and Health Care Provider goal alignment: PDP's and MA's are rewarded for focusing on low-cost drugs to all beneficiaries, while providers are rewarded for quality of care – sometimes involving expensive technologies.
 * Conflicting goals: Plans are required to have a tiered exemptions process for beneficiaries to get a higher-tier drug at a lower cost, but plans must grant medically necessary exceptions. However, the rule denies beneficiaries the right to request a tiering exception for certain high-cost drugs.
 * Lack of standardization: Because each plan can design their formulary and tier levels, drugs appearing on Tier 2 in one plan may be on Tier 3 in another plan. Co-pays may vary across plans. Some plans have no deductibles and the coinsurance for the most expensive drugs varies widely. Some plans may insist on step therapy, which means that the patient must use generics first before the company will pay for higher-priced drugs. Patients can appeal and insurers are required to respond within a short timeframe, so as to not further the burden on the patient.
 * Standards for electronic prescribing for Medicare Part D conflict with regulations in many U.S. states.

Impact on beneficiaries
A 2008 study found that the percentage of Medicare beneficiaries who reported forgoing medications due to cost dropped with Part D, from 15.2% in 2004 and 14.1% in 2005 to 11.5% in 2006. The percentage who reported skipping other basic necessities to pay for drugs also dropped, from 10.6% in 2004 and 11.1% in 2005 to 7.6% in 2006. The very sickest beneficiaries reported no reduction, but fewer reported forgoing other necessities to pay for medicine.

A parallel study found that Part D beneficiaries skip doses or switch to cheaper drugs and that many do not understand the program. Another study found that Part D resulted in modest increases in average drug utilization and decreases in average out-of-pocket expenditures. Further studies by the same group of researchers found that the net impact among beneficiaries was a decrease in the use of generic drugs.

A further study concludes that although a substantial reduction in out-of-pocket costs and a moderate increase in utilization among Medicare beneficiaries during the first year after Part D, there was no evidence of improvement in emergency department use, hospitalizations, or preference-based health utility for those eligible for Part D during its first year of implementation. It was also found that there were no significant changes in trends in the dual eligibles' out-of-pocket expenditures, total monthly expenditures, pill-days, or total number of prescriptions due to Part D.

A 2020 study found that Medicare Part D led to a sharp reduction in the number of people over the age of 65 who worked full-time. The authors say that this is evidence that before the change, people avoided retiring in order to maintain employer-based health insurance.

Criticisms
The federal government is not permitted to negotiate Part D drug prices with drug companies, as federal agencies do in other programs. Numerous critics view this as a mismanagement of taxpayer funds, whereas proponents contend that allowing price negotiation might inhibit innovation by reducing profits for pharmaceutical companies. The Department of Veterans Affairs, which is allowed to negotiate drug prices and establish a formulary, has been estimated to pay between 40% and 58% less for drugs, on average, than Part D. On the other hand, the VA only covers about half the brands that a typical Part D plan covers.

Part of the issue is that Medicare does not pay for Part D drugs, and so has no actual leverage. Part D drug providers are using the private insurer leverage, which is generally a larger block of consumers than the 40 million or so actually using Medicare parts A and B for medical care.

"Although generic versions of [frequently prescribed to the elderly] drugs are now available, plans offered by three of the five [exemplar Medicare Part D] insurers currently exclude some or all of these drugs from their formularies. ... Further, prices for the generic versions are not substantially lower than their brand-name equivalents. The lowest price for simvastatin (generic Zocor) 20 mg is 706 percent more expensive than the VA price for brand-name Zocor. The lowest price for sertraline HCl (generic Zoloft) is 47 percent more expensive than the VA price for brand-name Zoloft.'"

Estimating how much money could be saved if Medicare had been allowed to negotiate drug prices, economist Dean Baker gives a "most conservative high-cost scenario" of $332 billion between 2006 and 2013 (approximately $50 billion a year). Economist Joseph Stiglitz in his book entitled The Price of Inequality estimated a "middle-cost scenario" of $563 billion in savings "for the same budget window".

Former Congressman Billy Tauzin, R–La., who steered the bill through the House, retired soon after and took a $2 million a year job as president of Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the main industry lobbying group. Medicare boss Thomas Scully, who threatened to fire Medicare Chief Actuary Richard Foster if he reported how much the bill would actually cost, was negotiating for a new job as a pharmaceutical lobbyist as the bill was working through Congress. 14 congressional aides quit their jobs to work for related lobbies immediately after the bill's passage.

In response, free-market think tank Manhattan Institute issued a report by professor Frank Lichtenberg that said the VA National Formulary excludes many new drugs. Only 38% of drugs approved in the 1990s and 19% of the drugs approved since 2000 were on the formulary.

In 2012, the plan required Medicare beneficiaries whose total drug costs reach $2,930 to pay 100% of prescription costs until $4,700 is spent out of pocket. (The actual threshold amounts change year-to-year and plan-by-plan, and many plans offered limited coverage during this phase.) While this coverage gap does not affect the majority of program participants, about 25% of beneficiaries enrolled in standard plans find themselves in this gap.

As a candidate, Barack Obama proposed "closing the 'doughnut hole'" and subsequently proposed a plan to reduce costs for recipients from 100% to 50% of these expenses. The cost of the plan would be borne by drug manufacturers for name-brand drugs and by the government for generics.

title: Medicare Part D


text:
William Swinburne (locomotive builder)

William Swinburne (1805–1883) was a pioneering builder of steam locomotives in the United States.

Swinburne was born in Brooklyn, New York, in 1805. By 1833 he had moved to Paterson, New Jersey, where, in 1837 he was employed by Rogers, Ketchum and Grosvenor as a pattern maker. He left Rogers employ in 1845 to form his own company, Swinburne, Smith and Company, in a partnership with Samuel Smith. Swinburne's company did not survive the Panic of 1857 and was reorganized in 1858 as the New Jersey Locomotive and Machine Company.

After leaving the locomotive manufacturing trade, Swinburne held a number of public offices in Paterson until his death in 1883.

title: William Swinburne (locomotive builder)


text: User talk:Wikiuser 7

title: User talk:Wikiuser 7