S1: This podcast may have explicit content and also has this implicit request if you follow me on Twitter. Why not follow the gist at Slate? Just.
S2: It’s Wednesday, December 18th, 2019 from Slate, it’s the gist. I’m Mike PESCA. President Trump has been impeached.
S3: Or if I were to evoke the manner of the newsman for the third time in U.S. history, a president has been impeached by the House of Representatives.
S4: Last night, Chris Cuomo on CNN emphasized the solemnity of the moment President Trump will bear the stain of being impeached, only the second in modern history. Tonight, you will hear some of the solemn, stentorian ism, but also a lot of the stentorian solemnity. Donald J. Trump has gone down as the third president ever to be impeached in U.S. history. The thing is, if you’re older than 25, you remember the second time a U.S. president was impeached and it was kind of bullshit. And while this one is for much worse actions, I don’t think the tone around the last impeachment was one of heavy, heavy history. I just think that it was a horrible thing to happen in terms of distraction. And why are they doing this? But it doesn’t seem to be marked down in history books for the act that he was impeached over as much as it was marked down in history books for. I can’t believe the Republicans are doing this. Either way, it was in the past and therefore historical. And it is also true that for the third time in history, it’s unlikely that an impeachment will remove a president. I mean, the one time we removed a president, it was only because of the threat of impeachment. Impeachment is going to go forward and the result will be, well, it’s unclear.
S5: So, yeah, it’s historic. But doesn’t that just mean it’s precedented maybe getting impeached since it happened to two other guys and almost a third other guy? Nixon maybe getting impeached is actually the most normal, the most presidential thing this president has done. It’s a weird feeling, though, isn’t it? The confluence of an historic moment that won’t amount to a glancing blow. It’s because what’s monumental has played out in a way that’s so incremental. The headline size on the front page of tomorrow’s New York Times will be among the biggest, the literally the largest of the year. But by page views, I predict that story will be below Camille non Johnnys new torso. Sometimes when there was a horrible crime in a high crime area, residents will say I was shocked, but not surprised. And the Trump White House is certainly a high crime area. But I’ve been trying to think of an analogy to encapsulate this moment, which is both fundamentally jarring and utterly jejune. The appalling and the anodyne wrapped up as one. Maybe it’s like a huge, lavish wedding attended by 200 guests, where both families are joyous and both bride and groom are ecstatic. And everyone knows it’s a big day and a big change. But what must this seem to the catering staff? They’re saying, yeah, it’s big, but in a way it’s totally usual. It’s not really big at all. But the thing that’s bad about that analogy is there is a baseline of nonchalance set against a moment of bliss. That’s kind of the opposite of what’s going on. Maybe this impeachment is more like being a grave digger during the bubonic plague. There are so many bodies, there’s so much horror. But, you know, it’s Thursday, it’s 4:00 p.m. and I got three more holes to dig. It’s a living. Maybe it’s nothing like we’ve ever seen before. And everything we see all the time from the Trump administration. It’s nuts. It’s bizarre, it’s predictable, it’s consistent. And it’s not going to end it’s not going to ending conviction and therefore, it’s not going to end Trump’s behavior. We can see it all happening before it happens. And there’s nothing any of us can say or do to stop it from happening. I mean, think about this right now. If we figure out exactly what the calendar is going to be right now, we can pencil in the headlines of the day. And the headlines will definitely speak of events that are inexplicable and grotesque and surreal. Yet we can write them now. So how inexplicable are they? Donald Trump impeached an historic event that will go down in history for the mark. It fails to leave on the show today. I will play some of the great, great arguments made in defense of the president. Some real food for thought on the House floor today. But first, you know, there’s an actual government doing business or at least considering doing business and then not doing it. So, you know, there’s surprise medical bills. $35 is $120 for what? I don’t know. Some states ban them and the federal government was set to issue a national ban a few weeks ago. Both parties announced an agreement on that legislation. But now it appears it’s going nowhere. Well, at least they showed they care. Dan Weisman is the host of a podcast that looks at health care issues, legislation, bills, both kinds, and tries to tell human stories, often infuriating stories. It is called an arm and a leg. Dan is here to get all of our blood pressure to spike, which can be controlled by medicine with an unreasonably high co-pay.
S6: ARM and a Leg is a podcast whose title works on three levels one, it is about the body and health. So literally those are body parts, arms and legs too. It’s about how God damn expensive health care is, i.e. per the popular idiom. It costs an arm and a leg and three and this is implied and maybe a deep cut. It will arm you with information to get a leg up. I’m being told that was never intended. And if that offends you, please. That is not what Dan Weisman creative the show wanted to happen. Dan is with me now and he has a story to tell. In fact, he’s been telling it over three seasons on this arm and leg podcast. Hey, Dan, what’s up?
S7: Hey, Mike. Thank you. I had never I had not thought about those puns before. So thank you for that. What you thought of two of them? Yeah. Cover art is an arm and a leg. Right.
S8: The thing is, it’s not. I think the first season was telling stories, usually stories where you slapped your far Farhad and kind of confirming and fleshing out not upon also things that you knew were true about health care, but lately you really literally have been doing that a little consumer oriented. Here’s what to do. For instance, if you get one of these crazy bills out of nowhere from a doctor or a lab you never heard of. So it is a little arming you with information.
S7: E Absolutely. Absolutely. Yeah, that that’s where all of this season about self-defense because the cavalry is not come. No.
S6: So let’s start there. Is this was the last one I heard. I’ve gotten those thirty five box some lab you never approved and either give it to him or you don’t. But if you don’t, that could metastasize medical term into a lot of money. What’s the as they say, what’s the deal with that.
S7: Right. Well there’s two sides of it. Right. And one is like, what am I doing getting this bill from a lab I never heard of? And that is this whole thing that’s actually a little bit in the news this week. If you really nerd out about stuff called surprize billing. Yes. And that’s the situation where you go some place there in your insurance network and then you get a bill from somebody, I guess, that they put on the case who doesn’t happen to take your insurance and now you’re getting a bill from them.
S9: And the bill could be anything. And in the case that we looked at this week, it was it looked so innocuous. It was a bill for thirty five dollars for a lab test. And that this gets in the news a lot because it can be like if you go to the emergency room one, this is a very common scenario. The doctor you see may be out of network and may actually be part of some giant physician staffing company that has figured out that providing out-of-network physicians to folks who are basically captive customers cannot come to the E.R. is like a license to print money. And so they’ll charge you unbelievable amounts of money.
S6: When you say the doctor, you see you might be out of network. You go to a hospital and you maybe you’ve been to this hospital before and they’re in network even possibly you’ve been for emergency services at this hospital and it’s fine. But then one day it’s not.
S9: Well, that can happen. Yeah. The way it works is there’s these companies that, as I understand it, started out as just kind of expedients. They were called physicians, staffing companies and basically figured out like, oh, man, you know, if I’m running a hospital, it is a hassle, you know, running the E.R. where like, I’ve got to have people there 24 hours a day, seven days a week. If one of them calls in sick or goes on, you know, that’s a problem I got right now. I got to call somebody at 2:00 in the morning and say, can you come in to cover the shift? And so somebody came up with the idea of like, you know, let’s let’s have a physicians group that just does the staff’s e.r.’s and we handle all that. And so they went to the hospitals and said, we’ll do this for you. You’re always going to have an E.R. doc when you need one where you expect them. And we’re taking care that for you. And, you know, they said, you know, guess what? We’ll handle the billing, too. Mm hmm. Right. Well, the doctor work for us. We’ll handle the billing. And so along the way, over time, what occurred to them is like we’re billing separately, who says we have to take insurance? We don’t work for that hospital. This is a separate relationship. And so what’s happened in recent years is that hedge funds have caught on and they’ve bought up a bunch of these physicians, staffing firms. And it’s most common in cases where it’s not a doc that you chose. Do you have any relationship with other than this one off? So. E.R. docs are one example. Radiologists are another one. So but you never meet an anesthesiologist if you go to surgery. So these are these are instances where getting someone who is actually in-network can be a big hassle, even if you Notah, to look for that in advance.
S6: So it’s even more insidious than that. Look, I don’t want to jump ahead of myself, but I’ll tease this by saying the hedge funds, they they are responsible for perpetuating this system in a way that had to be uncovered. But first, the woman you talked to got the literally 35 dollar bill that wound up costing her hundreds and they wanted to charge her thousands. Is that legal? Which is a question you ask, right?
S7: Yeah. That was the second to I mean, this raised two questions and one of them was, what’s this? What am I doing getting this bill? And this is one that health policy nerds are all over. But then I was very cure’s when they were like, yeah, if you don’t pay it right away. Right. It’s gonna go up to thirteen hundred dollars. Yeah. Like. Even legal and health policy nerds mostly were like, I was unclear about that.
S9: So I had to go a little deeper when I found out is.
S6: I mean, they can ask you for whatever they want, but yes, it’s legal, but it’s not enforceable as a matter of contract law.
S9: I mean, it’s enforceable unless you push back to get your rights, which is a hassle. Yeah, but what I found out by people who do this, including a law professor who specializes in this kind of stuff, is he said, yeah, from a contract law perspective, this is shooting fish in a barrel. You know, you’ve signed you have signed something presumably when you went to get treated that says like I’m gonna pay you and it doesn’t have a price built in because nobody knows what exactly is gonna have to be done. You know, your stomach hurts. Maybe you eat something weird. Maybe you have an ulcer. You know, who knows what they’re gonna have to do. That’s called an open price contract. I learned all this from this guy. And that doesn’t apparently mean from the court’s perspective that whoever you are in the contract with, guess you just charge you whatever they want. They don’t just get to make up a number. Right. And make you pay it. And then similarly, if you’re late, like they want at first of, like we want thirty five bucks if then you’re late they’re like now it’s a thousand. What he said is this is like you say breached the contract by not paying on time. Well apparently they teach on on the first day of contract law that the breach of contract does not also mean you’re giving you other side a blank check. That when courts evaluate, well, there’s a breach in this contract. How do we remedy it? They’re like, well, what did it cost the person who suffered the breach? And it would be pretty hard to say. I didn’t get my thirty five bucks in July.
S7: Now it’s September. I I’m out. Twelve hundred dollars payment. Right. That’s the judge. A judge might not smile on that.
S6: So you also talk about there are ways to rebut the bill by citing what the fair value of services is. Sounds like a lot of work. I mean, if you’re facing a fifteen hundred dollar bill, you might want to put the work in. But it’s not easy just by saying, no, I’m not going to pay. And they’ll say, okay, fine, give me 70. We’ll call it a wash.
S7: No, right. It’s not easy at all. I mean, a lot of people who do this stuff all the time do say like Paul them try negotiate up front. But you always say it’s a lot of hassle, right. You want to arm yourself with knowledge. There’s a site called Fair Health that has a site called Fairhope Consumer dot org. And you can look up usually what what the going rate for something is in your area. But in order to look it up, you have to know the billing code called a CPA T code, which means you have to get that code from the providers to get them to cough up that information first. And then you have to go through all the steps and be like, well, their health says the going rate is X, so I’m gonna offer you X. I mean, I’m already tired. Just talk.
S6: Jesus, you got a bill. They jacked up the bill. You have to know billing codes to rebut them. But here, here’s where it even goes deeper. So hedge funds are investing in this business, which must mean it’s a cash cow. And you found out or you talk to people who found out that they were also this secretive. This sounds the sounds made up, but the secret of dark money. Am I right? I may say it with the secret of dark money behind an ad campaign and a pressure campaign to stop the rules from being changed by Congress.
S7: Yes. So Congress has been hearing from people, you know, for a while, like these bills are outrageous. This ought to be against the law. And it requires an act of Congress for reasons that are too nerdy for me to get into here. Yeah. And by the way, we talked about CPG codes, rid of it, how they work. That’s how nerdy they’re. Yeah. And I and I and that. That’s too nerdy for us to get into. But it requires an act of Congress and Congress was really interested in so over the summer. Committees in both the Democratically controlled House and the Republican controlled Senate passed legislation on to the full bodies. That would be like, yeah, we’re going to restrict this surprise billing stuff. And then they broke for summer recess and these members came home to ads running in primetime saying like Congress is considering letting the government set rates. This will cause hospitals to close. This will cause doctor shortages. Call and tell them you oppose it.
S9: 30 million bucks got spent on this. And it was and they said at the end, things like paid for by doctor patient unity. And nobody ever knew who doctor patient unity was. There was you know, it came out of nowhere. And so reporters dug in. And that, you know, all those ads started in August, essentially in mid-September. Stories are coming out like, oh, we figured it out. And it was hedgefund. Yes, it was. Or rather, it was these physicians, staffing firms that are owned by hedge funds that were paying for these ads. Yeah.
S6: And by the way, fired one of the patients involved in the doctor patient unit was off. Who’s all on board with this right now? I live in New York, which is, I think the third most populous state. And California is the most populous state. And they have laws against this. So we should these surprise bills. So we should be protected. But of course, nothing is that simple. I’m not really protected, am I?
S7: Well, I mean, this will this is where we get it, where we’re going. This is why we need an act of Congress to change things. It depends on how you get your insurance. Yeah. So. If you buy your insurance through the Obamacare exchange, that surprise billing law that covers you if you work for.
S6: I work for Slate. You write for Slate. I get my insurance through the company like the majority of people do.
S9: Right. So in general, companies like Slate that are bigger employers. I am. You guys are big time, right? Oh, yeah. And it operate across state lines. They do not buy kind of what we think of as regular insurance products where you’re paying a premium to BlueCross BlueShield and they are covering you. And if there’s a claim the money comes out of Blue Cross or Cigna, whoever is providing the coverage. Instead, you probably got an insurance card from work and it says them like Blue Cross or Cigna or whatever. Yeah. What’s really happening on the back end is that your company, that slate we are assuming is self insuring they are hiring Blue Cross or Cigna or whatever to do all the other stuff that they normally do. Right, like agree on rates with providers and process claims and stuff like that. But once there’s a claim and it’s been processed and it’s like, you know, Mike saw this doc. This doc is owed X from insurance. What Blue Cross or Cigna is doing is not cutting the check themselves out of their own money. They are telling the employer, like, time for you to pay this claim. Mike saw this doc, you owe the doc X. So the company is self insured. Yeah. And we’ve gone all the way there because all that stuff is not not regulated by the states which regulate insurance. Right? Insurance is regulated by the states. So all those surprise billing laws exist state by state because it’s the state’s responsibility to do that. But in this case, this is this whole other arrangement. And it is it is governed by the federal governed by the U.S. Department of Labor. Right. Which doesn’t have a law telling it like you’ve got to protect Mike from surprise bills.
S8: So to give a summary, you can get a surprise bill. They can jack that up by thousands. You may have a way to fight back. You need to know billing codes. You need to engage them on the phone. Even fighting back might not get you a majority of what they’re charging off the bill. If you live in a state like New York or California and you have a certain kind of insurance, you may not be subject to surprise bills. But if you have another kind of insurance, which I understand most people who are insured have, you will be subject. And let me also state this was one episode of your three season podcast, which goes to show maybe how unbelievably complicated it is. Yes. I’m never going to run out of material. So I want to ask your question about a big story that you did in conjunction with 99 percent invisible.
S7: And this was about the TV show Quincy, partly at which I loved.
S6: Yeah, I found an old episode health related about asthma. Yeah. Quincy. And this was about a bill about coverage of somewhat rare diseases. Is that what the issue was?
S9: Yeah. This is actually a really great example, actually, of this idea of unintended consequences. So 40 years ago is when the story starts, you know, Jack klugman’s making Quincy and there’s a mom who has a kid who has problems and it eventually takes a long time to get it diagnosed. It’s what we now know is Tourette’s at the time that was really poorly known. And she’s like always there medication. And she’s told like, oh, there’s this thing they’re testing. But then then she hears like actually they canceled the test because not there’s not enough patients for Tourette’s. Like, there’s no market for it. And she’s like, oh, crap. And so she lobbies to get Congress to pass a bill to basically create incentives for pharmaceutical companies to develop what are called than orphan drugs. They’re still called this. The idea is they’ve got no pharma company to raise them because it’s not worth their time. There’s not enough patients to sell to. And the idea is, you know, you create incentives like, okay, you can you can set your own price, basically becomes the incentive and you get some tax breaks for research. And she’s pushing this and a big victory. She gets a little tiny hearing in D.C. and nobody comes. Nobody comes except one guy. Nobody recognizes it turns out to be a reporter for the L.A. Times. And he publishes a tiny little story. And Jack klugman’s brother, Jack Klugman. If for those of us of a certain age was ubiquitous on TV, doing 1970s. Unknown to people younger. But like he was big. He was a big cheese.
S6: Then in this show, Queensland, Oscar Madison on the odd couple right then and then Quincy, the dramatic foray afterwards.
S9: Yes, he was. He was lt was like House M.D. as a medical examiner, basically without the drug addiction. And so he had this show was a hit and his brother wrote for the show and his brother was dying of a rare cancer. His brother read this story about this little hearing with great interest and immediately called up this woman, Abby Meyers, who’d organised it and was like, I want to do an episode of Quincy about your cause. And she was like, is this a joke? And it was like, no, I’m really Jack Lippman’s brother. We’re really gonna do this. And they did. Yeah. And, you know, it produced giant sack fulls of mail to her and to members of Congress. And it actually took a second. Episode of Quincy. To get the law passed, but that is what did it. As the orphan drug bill became the orphan drug law and it had all kinds of consequences. I ended up doing that story because I had done a story about a woman who had made all kinds of sacrifices. When her family’s gonna go without health insurance, could she, in order to live, needs a drug that costs a half a million dollars a year? And my question was like, how the hell does a drug get that kind of price tag? And the answer is the orphan drug law essentially creates incentives for people to develop drugs for which they can set any price they want. And that’s now the world we live in.
S6: Dan Weisman is the creator and the reporter and pretty much the everything behind the arm and a leg podcast.
S10: Check it out. Wherever podcasts are, serve and wherever you want to be depressed by the state of the health care industry. Thank you, Dan.. Mike, thanks so much for having me.
S5: And now the schpiel. After weeks of committee hearings in which Republicans attempted to rebut claims about the facts and implications of Donald Trump’s call with the Ukrainians. Those very arguments made their way to the wider House floor and we found them to be refined and improved, sharpened and honed. Now I’m getting there were still talking out of their congressional bung holes. Here was James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin speaking to the full house.
S11: He was actually on the Judiciary Committee is the best he could come up with this phone call and question had the president say our country has been through a lot. I want you to do us a favor, not me a favor. US a favor. And there he was referring to our country, the United States of America, not a personal political gain. He was not afraid to let this transcript go public. And he released the transcript almost immediately after the call.
S5: Actually, the call was July 25th. The transcript was released September 25th, only after it was reported that the House Intelligence Committee had troubling information about the call and was going to release the whistleblowers report. Speaking of the whistleblower, the constitutionally protected whistleblower guy, Russian THALL, a Republican from Pennsylvania and congressman who most looks like comic actor Rob Riggle, called upon his background as a lawyer in the Navy. Drawing on this experience, he said he would dismiss the charges against Trump.
S12: But I prosecute the Democrats for obstruction. How about the fact that judiciary Democrats voted down my request to subpoena the whistleblower?
S13: They voted down my request to violate the law.
S5: Here was Debbie Lesko, Republican of Arizona.
S12: God takes us on journeys in our life.
S14: And about 30 years ago, I was married to an abusive ex-husband.
S12: And when I finally left him, there are times in my life I had no money and no place to live.
S14: And I tell you what, I never dreamed in a million years that I would be standing here today as a congresswoman in the United States House of Representatives.
S12: And I tell you what, I never would have believed that I would be standing here talking about impeachment of a president of the United States.
S5: But you did know the president was Donald Trump. Right. And you should have known this because your first took office two years into the Trump presidency. That’s what we call a context clue representative. Representative lusco’s critical thinking skills were further on display with this argument.
S15: The Democrats are really undermining their own own argument here, because 17 out of the twenty four Democrat members on the Judiciary Committee voted here on this floor to put forward moveforward, articles of impeachment on July 17th of this year before the President Trump’s call even took place.
S5: Well, because they believed in impeachment for those other impeachable offenses, I would assume it’s like arguing in 1992, you brought murder charges against John Gotti. But before that, you charged him with assault in 1989. And back then, some of those guys he murdered were still alive. How’s that even possible? Our old friend Doug Collins was there to muddy the waters and claim vindication based on what he said was popular support for his stance.
S16: Let the accuser determine what is relevant to the one being accused. The people of America see through this. The people of America understand due process and they understand when it is being trampled in the people’s house.
S5: I don’t know what the American people do or don’t understand. Fox says that there are 50 to 45 pro impeachment verses against. But even if they do understand that in a criminal trial, there is a certain set of rules. They should certainly understand and you definitely should understand that those rules don’t apply to impeachment and that the Democratic committee chair setting the rules, all the rules for impeachment. It is not unfair, is it is exactly fair. Representative Lee Zeldin of Long Island entered into evidence this argument. So stop saying that. The facts are uncontested. OK. Point granted, you are contesting the facts. You are saying facts aren’t facts. You’re wrong. But you’re contesting them. Drawing on deep historical precedent like this from Georgia’s Barry Loudermilk.
S16: When Jesus was falsely accused of treason, Pontius Pilot gave Jesus the opportunity to face his accusers during that sham trial. Pontius Pilot afforded more rights to Jesus than the Democrats have afforded this president in this process.
S1: Oh, Jesus, though in fairness, the parallels between the two landmark cases are quite stark. Here now, a clip from Court TV’s coverage of Pea Pilot Veejay Christ.
S17: Jesus Christ. I agree. He’s mad. Ought to be locked up. But that is not a reason to destroy him. He’s a sad little man, not a king or God, not a thief.
S1: Well, in this case, he probably is a thief. The current defendant, Trump, comma, Donald J. Did, however, have a far different comportment during his trial than the past defendant. Christ comma, Jesus H had as was noted by Pontius Pilot.
S18: How can someone in your state be so cool about his feet? An amazing thing, this silent king.
S5: That again, from the Court TV trial, Ross Spano showed that he doesn’t really understand his rival party.
S13: And fortunately, it’s clear the majority has had laser focus on one thing for three years, impeaching the president. Have you looked at the Democrats laser focus?
S1: Not an apt description. Not apt. Also, here’s a thing that didn’t happen.
S19: It seems to many Americans that for the past three years, the House majority has been carrying out the wishes of the Kremlin.
S5: Thank you, John Rutherford. And then there was Louisiana’s Clay Higgins. Take it away, Clay.
S20: I have descended into the belly of the beast. I have witnessed a tear within.
S5: Is he going to quote deontay or is he just quite unhinged? Let’s find out.
S20: And I was committed to oppose the insidious forces which threaten our republic. America has been severely injured by this betrayal, by this unjust and weaponise impeachment brought upon us by the same socialists who threaten unborn life in the womb, who threaten First Amendment rights of conservatives, who threaten Second Amendment protections of every American patriot, and who have long ago determined that they would organize and conspire to overthrow President Trump. Oh, it’s unhinged. We’re not being devoured from within because of some showreel assertion of the socialists newfound love of the very flag that they try to be on.
S4: And then he went from the graphic to the cada graphic.
S20: We faced Disha because up this map.
S5: So he’s now pointing to a map next to him. And it is the map of the counties that Trump won in 2016. It is really quite red. There are more red counties, including large swaths of unpopulated areas than there are blue counties. And then Representative Higgins beseeched the great and powerful Lord to make this map come alive. Make it speak the truth to all of us. And lo, it did with these words on the map.
S21: I’m the map. Play that again. I can get you right back. I’m the map. I’m the man. The map. I’m the map. The map. The map, the map.
S5: A cheery musical interlude courtesy of a famous Latino explorer has a solve a bomb. Four hours of argumentation that really and truly were just as terrifying as anything the president is alleged to have done in Ukraine. In the spirit of bipartisanship, I would like to close with the words of the last Republican president. The last one before the current occupant of the office is, of course, George W. Bush. He was speaking of the inaugural address, but he could have been speaking of all the arguments advanced in support of the man who gave that address.
S1: And what he said was, I quote, that was some weird shit. And with that, I yield.
S2: And that’s it for today’s show. Daniel Schrader is the Gist producer. You know who he’d prosecute the whistleblower and also whistles. And the rapper KURTIS Blow and the Ukrainians come into a Javelin missile negotiation, all innocent and coquettish. They’re not so innocent. Little teases. That’s who he’d prosecute. Christina Josiah, just producer wonders if Jesus had just denied Judas from testifying like Don McGann. Maybe Jesus would be remembered as the fellow who made Galilee great again. Just maybe the gist sometime shop at Banana Republic or like for socks or t shirts or something at Old Navy. But not the gap.
S22: Not the gap. Not the gap. Not the gap. Not the gap. Not the gap. Not the gap. There’s a place I’ll never go, and I hope you’ll want to know. It’s not the gap. Not the gap. Not the gap. Not the gap for a desperate to prove. And thanks for listening.