Group items tagged

Again we see a classic case of our troops dying in a war that serves no justification other than simply lining the pockets of the elite fraudsters some of whom are connected to very senior MP's and Lords in the UK! You will recall that Gordon Bowden and I have been pulling our hair out for a few years now trying to force some sort of action against the massive fraudster that operate in this country from corporate executives to bank CEO's to very senior MP's and the elite in the House of Lords. Ever asked yourself why the Serious Fraud Officer, Police or even "clean" (if we have any!) Members of Parliament never raise such issues during Prime Minister's Question Time? I keep asking myself why is it that no one speaks out and brings these "Political Crooks" to justice? Why don't the Unions and their members take to the streets and hold a peaceful protest outside the House of Parliament, 10 Downing Street or even at one of the many "Boiler Rooms" in the City of London? Why is everyone so afraid to reveal the very thing that has and continues to ruin the economy of the United Kingdom? We have our Prime Minister telling us all that severe austerity measures have to be implemented in order to pay off this huge toxic debt that has been handed down to us from the previous government under Gordon Brown. It's an absolute joke…. When are you, the British public, going to open your eyes and understand that you will always be screwed and always remain the underdogs as long as our leaders get away with it. We now see a US congressional probe into such fraud and yet two of the companies are British and operate out of one of those "Boiler Rooms" right here in the City of London at 788-790 Finchley Road, NW11 7TJ. How come we the British are not investigating the massive fraud being carried out by those two companies at the above address that were privileged to share in some of the $1.069 billion that has been handed out in US contracts?

It was Friday night, May 22, 2009, and one of New York City's most storied music venues, the Fillmore at Irving Plaza, was sold out. The line stretched all the way down Irving Place, turned the corner onto East 16th, and kept going. People had come from as far away as Michigan, Toronto, and Ohio, but they weren't lined up for the latest indie darlings or house music sensation. They'd come to see an improbably successful Korean trio named Epik High, which as far as anyone could tell was the first Korean hip hop act to attract a mainstream American audience. The group was headed by a skinny 28-year-old named Dan Lee, and when he danced onto the stage that night the audience started dancing with him. Lee-whose nom de rap is Tablo-had a puckish charm, a sly grin, and a reputation as a genius. In South Korea, Lee was already a superstar. He had released four number one albums with Epik High and published a best-selling collection of short stories in both English and Korean. Talk show hosts almost always found a way to mention that he graduated from Stanford in three and a half years with both a bachelor's and master's degree in English. Though that would probably count against a rapper in the US, back home he was lionized as a symbol of success. Also in this issue The Man Who Makes the Future How to Spot the Future The Rise of the Robot Reporter Now the group was building a fan base in the States. In addition to its New York show, Epik High had sold out major venues in San Francisco and Los Angeles. The crossover success was visible on iTunes, where the trio was soaring up the hip hop charts and would soon hit number one in the US, topping Kanye West and Jay-Z. But then, at the height of the group's fame, the comments sections of articles about Epik High started filling up with anonymous messages accusing Lee of lying about his Stanford diploma. In May 2010 an antifan club formed and quickly attracted tens of thousands of members who accused him of s

Daniel Lee, whose nom de rap is Tablo, once headed successful Korean trio Epik High. Photo: Miko Lim It was Friday night, May 22, 2009, and one of New York City's most storied music venues, the Fillmore at Irving Plaza, was sold out.

It was Friday night, May 22, 2009, and one of New York City's most storied music venues, the Fillmore at Irving Plaza, was sold out. The line stretched all the way down Irving Place, turned the corner onto East 16th, and kept going. People had come from as far away as Michigan, Toronto, and Ohio, but they weren't lined up for the latest indie darlings or house music sensation. They'd come to see an improbably successful Korean trio named Epik High, which as far as anyone could tell was the first Korean hip hop act to attract a mainstream American audience. The group was headed by a skinny 28-year-old named Dan Lee, and when he danced onto the stage that night the audience started dancing with him. Lee-whose nom de rap is Tablo-had a puckish charm, a sly grin, and a reputation as a genius. In South Korea, Lee was already a superstar. He had released four number one albums with Epik High and published a best-selling collection of short stories in both English and Korean. Talk show hosts almost always found a way to mention that he graduated from Stanford in three and a half years with both a bachelor's and master's degree in English. Though that would probably count against a rapper in the US, back home he was lionized as a symbol of success. Also in this issue The Man Who Makes the Future How to Spot the Future The Rise of the Robot Reporter Now the group was building a fan base in the States. In addition to its New York show, Epik High had sold out major venues in San Francisco and Los Angeles. The crossover success was visible on iTunes, where the trio was soaring up the hip hop charts and would soon hit number one in the US, topping Kanye West and Jay-Z. But then, at the height of the group's fame, the comments sections of articles about Epik High started filling up with anonymous messages accusing Lee of lying about his Stanford diploma. In May 2010 an antifan club formed and quickly attracted tens of thousands of members who accused him of s

Asian shares edged down in choppy trade on Monday, encouraged by a fresh report of a potential framework for the European Central Bank's new bond buying scheme, as well as hopes of a strong easing from the Federal Reserve. Central bank sources told Reuters on Friday that the ECB is considering setting yield band targets under the bond-buying program to shield its strategy from speculators, but the decision would not be made before its Sept. 6 policy meeting.

While Republicans lambast the cost of implementing health care reform, a new report shows that their efforts to repeal the law have come at a major cost to taxpayers -- to the tune of nearly $50 million. The House of Representatives again voted to repeal President Obama's signature health care law on Wednesday, marking the 33rd time Republicans have attempted to take down the legislation. The 32 previous repeal efforts faltered at the hands of the Democrat-controlled Senate; the latest attempt is unlikely to break that pattern. According to a report by CBS News, these efforts, widely viewed as symbolic political maneuvers, come with a high price tag. CBS' Nancy Cordes reported Wednesday that Republicans' many fruitless attempts at repealing the Affordable Care Act have taken up at least 80 hours of time on the House floor since 2010, amounting to two full work weeks. As the House, according to the Congressional Research Service, costs taxpayers $24 million a week to operate, those two weeks amounted to a total cost of approximately $48 million. The AP relays background on the GOP's repeal efforts: There was never any doubt that Republicans had the votes to pass the repeal in the House on Wednesday - or that it would die in the Senate, where Democrats possessed more than enough strength to block it. That's what happened in January 2011, when the newly installed Republican majority first voted to repeal the law a few days after taking office. In the months since, the GOP has taken repeated further swipes at the law, including votes to deny salaries to any government officials who enforce it, to abolish a board of officials charged with holding down Medicare costs in the future and to repeal a tax on medical devices. With the exception of a few relatively modest changes accepted by the White House, all the rest have died in the Senate. Although Republicans have remained vocal on repeal since the Supre

LOS ANGELES, Iowa - The fearsome guns of the USS Iowa protected FDR from torpedo attacks and helped destroy the Japanese military in World War II. They shelled North Korea in the 1950s and patrolled the Central American coast during the Cold War. On Saturday, with the grand opening of the country's newest battleship museum in the Los Angeles community of San Pedro, the artillery that struck so much fear in America's enemies got a new role: photo op. More than 3,000 people walked up the Iowa's gangplank on its inaugural day and nearly every one seemed to want a photo with its 16-inch guns. "I want them to be part of history," said retired Marine Brian Tisdale of his two children, whom he captured posing at the gun barrels. Whether a snapshot on the Iowa deck will become as mandatory to a southern California vacation as a picture in front of the Hollywood sign remains to be seen. Officials said they were pleased with the museum's first day, especially given the breakneck pace of the project. The opening came just a month after the Iowa, one of the largest battleships ever, arrived in Los Angeles' harbor and just 10 months after the Navy selected San Pedro as the site of the museum. "It's unheard of. It usually takes about three years," said battleship enthusiast Robert Kent, who led the campaign to bring the Iowa to L.A. and now serves as director of the non-profit that runs the museum, Pacific Battleship Center. Built in 1940, the Iowa was an important part of the Navy fleet for five decades. It ferried President Franklin Roosevelt to Casablanca during World War II and later fought in the Pacific, sailing victoriously into Tokyo Harbor. The Iowa served in the Korean conflict and plied the Persian Gulf in the 1980s. Only about 15 percent of the ship is open to the public so far. Visitors are funneled down a single route that passes through a wardroom where officers ate and relaxed, around the vessel's upper decks and through the captain

LOS ANGELES, Iowa - The fearsome guns of the USS Iowa protected FDR from torpedo attacks and helped destroy the Japanese military in World War II. They shelled North Korea in the 1950s and patrolled the Central American coast during the Cold War. On Saturday, with the grand opening of the country's newest battleship museum in the Los Angeles community of San Pedro, the artillery that struck so much fear in America's enemies got a new role: photo op. More than 3,000 people walked up the Iowa's gangplank on its inaugural day and nearly every one seemed to want a photo with its 16-inch guns. "I want them to be part of history," said retired Marine Brian Tisdale of his two children, whom he captured posing at the gun barrels. Whether a snapshot on the Iowa deck will become as mandatory to a southern California vacation as a picture in front of the Hollywood sign remains to be seen. Officials said they were pleased with the museum's first day, especially given the breakneck pace of the project. The opening came just a month after the Iowa, one of the largest battleships ever, arrived in Los Angeles' harbor and just 10 months after the Navy selected San Pedro as the site of the museum. "It's unheard of. It usually takes about three years," said battleship enthusiast Robert Kent, who led the campaign to bring the Iowa to L.A. and now serves as director of the non-profit that runs the museum, Pacific Battleship Center. Built in 1940, the Iowa was an important part of the Navy fleet for five decades. It ferried President Franklin Roosevelt to Casablanca during World War II and later fought in the Pacific, sailing victoriously into Tokyo Harbor. The Iowa served in the Korean conflict and plied the Persian Gulf in the 1980s. Only about 15 percent of the ship is open to the public so far. Visitors are funneled down a single route that passes through a wardroom where officers ate and relaxed, around the vessel's upper decks and through the captain

WASHINGTON -- With the debate over the Affordable Care Act law morphing from a constitutional matter before the Supreme Court to an implementation matter beforestate houses, President Barack Obama and allied Democrats are refiguring their sales pitch. In response to criticisms that the law hamstrings governors, defenders of the president's health care law will be championing a states-rights amendment that already enjoys Republican support. Under current law, states are allowed to opt out of various requirements of the Affordable Care Act by 2017, provided that they meet minimal standards for coverage. The Empowering States to Innovate Act would move that date to 2014. For the Obama White House, the amendment has a number of politically appealing aspects. The most obvious is that it provides an avenue to the type of federalist approach that the Republican Party, and its standard-bearer Mitt Romney, has argued should have been adopted in the first place. More bluntly, the co-sponsor of the amendment, along with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), is Sen. Scott Brown, a Massachusetts Republican who happens to share a senior adviser with Romney. When top Obama administration officials were asked how they would go about selling the law in the immediate aftermath of the court's ruling, one of the three provisions they cited was the opt-out amendment. It was equally telling that the president made a point of emphasizing the idea in his post-SCOTUS remarks. "Each state will take the lead in designing their own menu of options, and if states can come up with even better ways of covering more people at the same quality and cost, this law allows them to do that, too," Obama said. "And I've asked Congress to help speed up that process, and give states this flexibility in year one." Perhaps the most obvious signal that the White House sees the amendment as a campaign instrument came in February 2011, when the president declared -- in a bit of prescience with respect to the GOP prim

While Republicans lambast the cost of implementing health care reform, a new report shows that their efforts to repeal the law have come at a major cost to taxpayers -- to the tune of nearly $50 million. The House of Representatives again voted to repeal President Obama's signature health care law on Wednesday, marking the 33rd time Republicans have attempted to take down the legislation. The 32 previous repeal efforts faltered at the hands of the Democrat-controlled Senate; the latest attempt is unlikely to break that pattern. see more http://springhillmedgroup.com/

WASHINGTON -- With the debate over the Affordable Care Act law morphing from a constitutional matter before the Supreme Court to an implementation matter before state houses, President Barack Obama and allied Democrats are refiguring their sales pitch. In response to criticisms that the law hamstrings governors, defenders of the president's health care law will be championing a states-rights amendment that already enjoys Republican support. Under current law, states are allowed to opt out of various requirements of the Affordable Care Act by 2017, provided that they meet minimal standards for coverage. The Empowering States to Innovate Act would move that date to 2014. For the Obama White House, the amendment has a number of politically appealing aspects. The most obvious is that it provides an avenue to the type of federalist approach that the Republican Party, and its standard-bearer Mitt Romney, has argued should have been adopted in the first place. More bluntly, the co-sponsor of the amendment, along with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), is Sen. Scott Brown, a Massachusetts Republican who happens to share a senior adviser with Romney. When top Obama administration officials were asked how they would go about selling the law in the immediate aftermath of the court's ruling, one of the three provisions they cited was the opt-out amendment. It was equally telling that the president made a point of emphasizing the idea in his post-SCOTUS remarks. "Each state will take the lead in designing their own menu of options, and if states can come up with even better ways of covering more people at the same quality and cost, this law allows them to do that, too," Obama said. "And I've asked Congress to help speed up that process, and give states this flexibility in year one." Perhaps the most obvious signal that the White House sees the amendment as a campaign instrument came in February 2011, when the president declared -- in a bit of prescience with respect to

Firms that are paid tens of millions of dollars to root out Medicare fraud are bidding on contracts to investigate companies they are doing business with _ sometimes their own parent companies, according to a government report released Tuesday. Two-thirds of the companies that bid on contracts during a nearly year-and-a-half time period beginning in October of 2010 had financial ties to claims processors _ and in some cases also processed Medicare claims themselves, according to the study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' inspector-general. The report blames what it calls a flawed bidding system and an inadequate conflict-of-interest policy. The study looked into bids from about 100 potential contractors and subcontractors and found nearly 2,000 relationships that posed potential conflicts. For example, one company submitted a bid to investigate Medicare fraud even though its parent company provided two types of Medicare coverage in all 50 states. Medicare fraud contractors are often tied to a large number of providers, but the report doesn't break the numbers down by each contractor. The federal government requires Medicare fraud contractors to identify their potential conflicts and their financial interests in other companies when submitting bids, but the report found they often failed to provide all the information. Even when they did, it was sometimes inconsistent or unclear, according to the study, which urged federal health officials to adopt formal, clear guidelines for companies to follow when submitting bids. Tuesday's report examined only companies bidding on springhill group Medicare-fraud contracts, not those with existing contracts. But a 2011 congressional survey of companies providing Medicare reimbursements revealed that some had financial relationships with the contractors investigating them. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the federal agency overseeing Medicare, said in a statement that it

Firms that are paid tens of millions of dollars to root out Medicare fraud are bidding on contracts to investigate companies they are doing business with _ sometimes their own parent companies, according to a government report released Tuesday. Two-thirds of the companies that bid on contracts during a nearly year-and-a-half time period beginning in October of 2010 had financial ties to claims processors _ and in some cases also processed Medicare claims themselves, according to the study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' inspector-general. The report blames what it calls a flawed bidding system and an inadequate conflict-of-interest policy. The study looked into bids from about 100 potential contractors and subcontractors and found nearly 2,000 relationships that posed potential conflicts. For example, one company submitted a bid to investigate Medicare fraud even though its parent company provided two types of Medicare coverage in all 50 states. Medicare fraud contractors are often tied to a large number of providers, but the report doesn't break the numbers down by each contractor. The federal government requires Medicare fraud contractors to identify their potential conflicts and their financial interests in other companies when submitting bids, but the report found they often failed to provide all the information. Even when they did, it was sometimes inconsistent or unclear, according to the study, which urged federal health officials to adopt formal, clear guidelines for companies to follow when submitting bids. Tuesday's report examined only companies bidding on springhill group Medicare-fraud contracts, not those with existing contracts. But a 2011 congressional survey of companies providing Medicare reimbursements revealed that some had financial relationships with the contractors investigating them. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the federal agency overseeing Medicare, said in a statement that it

This piece originally appeared at TomDispatch. It's a policy fierce enough to cause great suffering among Iranians-and possibly in the long run among Americans, too. It might, in the end, even deeply harm the global economy and yet, history tells us, it will fail on its own. Economic war led by Washington (and encouraged by Israel) will not take down the Iranian government or bring it to the bargaining table on its knees ready to surrender its nuclear program. It might, however, lead to actual armed conflict with incalculable consequences. The United States is already effectively embroiled in an economic war against Iran. The Obama administration has subjected the Islamic Republic to the most crippling economic sanctions applied to any country since Iraq was reduced to fourth-world status in the 1990s. And worse is on the horizon. A financial blockade is being imposed that seeks to prevent Tehran from selling petroleum, its most valuable commodity, as a way of dissuading the regime from pursuing its nuclear enrichment program. Historical memory has never been an American strong point and so few today remember that a global embargo on Iranian petroleum is hardly a new tactic in Western geopolitics; nor do many recall that the last time it was applied with such stringency, in the 1950s, it led to the overthrow of the government with disastrous long-term blowback on the United States. The tactic is just as dangerous today. Iran's supreme theocrat, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has repeatedly condemned the atom bomb and nuclear weapons of all sorts as tools of the devil, weaponry that cannot be used without killing massive numbers of civilian noncombatants. In the most emphatic terms, he has, in fact, pronounced them forbidden according to Islamic law. Based on the latest U.S. intelligence, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has affirmed that Iran has not made a decision to pursue a nuclear warhead. In contrast, hawks in Israel and the United States insist

This piece originally appeared atTomDispatch. It's a policy fierce enough to cause great suffering among Iranians-and possibly in the long run among Americans, too. It might, in the end, even deeply harm the global economy and yet, history tells us, it will fail on its own. Economic war led by Washington (and encouraged by Israel) will not take down the Iranian government or bring it to the bargaining table on its knees ready to surrender its nuclear program. It might, however, lead to actual armed conflict with incalculable consequences. The United States is already effectively embroiled in an economic war against Iran. The Obama administration has subjected the Islamic Republic to the most crippling economic sanctions applied to any country since Iraq was reduced to fourth-world status in the 1990s. And worse is on the horizon. A financial blockade is being imposed that seeks to prevent Tehran from selling petroleum, its most valuable commodity, as a way of dissuading the regime from pursuing its nuclear enrichment program. Historical memory has never been an American strong point and so few today remember that a global embargo on Iranian petroleum is hardly a new tactic in Western geopolitics; nor do many recall that the last time it was applied with such stringency, in the 1950s, it led to the overthrow of the government with disastrous long-term blowback on the United States. The tactic is just as dangerous today. Iran's supreme theocrat, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has repeatedly condemned the atom bomb and nuclear weapons of all sorts as tools of the devil, weaponry that cannot be used without killing massive numbers of civilian noncombatants. In the most emphatic terms, he has, in fact, pronounced them forbidden according to Islamic law. Based on the latest U.S. intelligence, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta hasaffirmed that Iran has not made a decision to pursue a nuclear warhead. In contrast, hawks in Israel and the United States insist t

This piece originally appeared at TomDispatch. It's a policy fierce enough to cause great suffering among Iranians-and possibly in the long run among Americans, too. It might, in the end, even deeply harm the global economy and yet, history tells us, it will fail on its own. Economic war led by Washington (and encouraged by Israel) will not take down the Iranian government or bring it to the bargaining table on its knees ready to surrender its nuclear program. It might, however, lead to actual armed conflict with incalculable consequences. The United States is already effectively embroiled in an economic war against Iran. The Obama administration has subjected the Islamic Republic to the most crippling economic sanctions applied to any country since Iraq was reduced to fourth-world status in the 1990s. And worse is on the horizon. A financial blockade is being imposed that seeks to prevent Tehran from selling petroleum, its most valuable commodity, as a way of dissuading the regime from pursuing its nuclear enrichment program. Historical memory has never been an American strong point and so few today remember that a global embargo on Iranian petroleum is hardly a new tactic in Western geopolitics; nor do many recall that the last time it was applied with such stringency, in the 1950s, it led to the overthrow of the government with disastrous long-term blowback on the United States. The tactic is just as dangerous today. Iran's supreme theocrat, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has repeatedly condemned the atom bomb and nuclear weapons of all sorts as tools of the devil, weaponry that cannot be used without killing massive numbers of civilian noncombatants. In the most emphatic terms, he has, in fact, pronounced them forbidden according to Islamic law. Based on the latest U.S. intelligence, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has affirmed that Iran has not made a decision to pursue a nuclear warhead. In contrast, hawks in Israel and the United States insist

By Juan Cole, TomDispatch This piece originally appeared atTomDispatch. It's a policy fierce enough to cause great suffering among Iranians-and possibly in the long run among Americans, too. It might, in the end, even deeply harm the global economy and yet, history tells us, it will fail on its own. Economic war led by Washington (and encouraged by Israel) will not take down the Iranian government or bring it to the bargaining table on its knees ready to surrender its nuclear program. It might, however, lead to actual armed conflict with incalculable consequences. The United States is already effectively embroiled in an economic war against Iran. The Obama administration has subjected the Islamic Republic to the most crippling economic sanctions applied to any country since Iraq was reduced to fourth-world status in the 1990s. And worse is on the horizon. A financial blockade is being imposed that seeks to prevent Tehran from selling petroleum, its most valuable commodity, as a way of dissuading the regime from pursuing its nuclear enrichment program. Historical memory has never been an American strong point and so few today remember that a global embargo on Iranian petroleum is hardly a new tactic in Western geopolitics; nor do many recall that the last time it was applied with such stringency, in the 1950s, it led to the overthrow of the government with disastrous long-term blowback on the United States. The tactic is just as dangerous today. Iran's supreme theocrat, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has repeatedly condemned the atom bomb and nuclear weapons of all sorts as tools of the devil, weaponry that cannot be used without killing massive numbers of civilian noncombatants. In the most emphatic terms, he has, in fact, pronounced them forbidden according to Islamic law. Based on the latest U.S. intelligence, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta hasaffirmed that Iran has not made a decision to pursue a nuclear warhead. In contrast, hawks in Israel and

Scientists at Disney Research in Pennsylvania, Springhill Group and Carnegie Mellon University have developed a new touch-and-gesture recognition technology called Touche, envisioning a future where almost every item could be controlled with a touch sensor. Their project obviously aims to illustrate more applications of touch sensitivity in everyday items like water, tables and door handles using a person's body as the control. Touche could also have limitless applications in the workplace. One example is setting a door handle to various states just by grasping it in a different way. You could also activate touch sensitivity on the doorknob that would lock and unlock depending on the pressure you put on the handle. Another fancy example is the capability of the Touche system to give you control on your living room appliance. You can program the TV to automatically turn on once you sit down on the sofa and turn it off when you fall asleep. Disney's Touche uses Swept Frequency Capacitative Sensing (SFCS) in monitoring and responding data points from a user's Bluetooth wristband. But unlike touch screens that can only recognize whether it is being touched or not, SFCS recognizes the manner in which the object is being touched. A flat palm, two-finger touch or single-finger touch could be programmed with various responses. The system works when an electrical signal passes through the item changes once it touched a conductive material like the human finger. This capacitative sensing is already being used in smartphones, the only difference is that they use only one frequency of electrical signals compared to Touche's array of frequencies. Multiple frequencies enables the system to differentiate among various touch gestures and can determine if it's a full-hand grasp, multiple fingers or a single one. Moreover, it only takes one sensing electrode attached to the item at one end and a PC unit on the other, analyzing the alternating signals to determine

Scientists at Disney Research in Pennsylvania, Springhill Group and Carnegie Mellon University have developed a new touch-and-gesture recognition technology called Touche, envisioning a future where almost every item could be controlled with a touch sensor. Their project obviously aims to illustrate more applications of touch sensitivity in everyday items like water, tables and door handles using a person's body as the control.

Firms that are paid tens of millions of dollars to root out Medicare fraud are bidding on contracts to investigate companies they are doing business with _ sometimes their own parent companies, according to a government report released Tuesday. Two-thirds of the companies that bid on contracts during a nearly year-and-a-half time period beginning in October of 2010 had financial ties to claims processors _ and in some cases also processed Medicare claims themselves, according to the study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' inspector-general. The report blames what it calls a flawed bidding system and an inadequate conflict-of-interest policy. The study looked into bids from about 100 potential contractors and subcontractors and found nearly 2,000 relationships that posed potential conflicts. For example, one company submitted a bid to investigate Medicare fraud even though its parent company provided two types of Medicare coverage in all 50 states. Medicare fraud contractors are often tied to a large number of providers, but the report doesn't break the numbers down by each contractor. The federal government requires Medicare fraud contractors to identify their potential conflicts and their financial interests in other companies when submitting bids, but the report found they often failed to provide all the information. Even when they did, it was sometimes inconsistent or unclear, according to the study, which urged federal health officials to adopt formal, clear guidelines for companies to follow when submitting bids. Tuesday's report examined only companies bidding on springhill groupMedicare-fraud contracts, not those with existing contracts. But a 2011 congressional survey of companies providing Medicare reimbursements revealed that some had financial relationships with the contractors investigating them. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the federal agency overseeing Medicare, said in a statement that it has a robust

To help protect yourself and Medicare from fraud and identity theft you should report it. Whenever you get a payment notice from Medicare review it for errors. The notice shows what Medicare was billed for, what Medicare paid, and what (if anything) you owe. Make sure Medicare was not billed for health care services, medical supplies, or equipment you did not get. Before you contact your health care provider, Medicare, or the Inspector General's hotline, carefully review the facts, and have the following ready: * The provider's name and any identifying number you may have. * The service or item information you are questioning. * The date the service or item was supposedly given or delivered. * The payment amount approved and paid by Medicare. * The date on your Medicare Summary Notice. * Your name and Medicare number (as listed on your Medicare card). * The reason you think Medicare should not have paid. * Any other information you have showing why Medicare should not have paid. http://springhillmedgroup.com/