run it up to run it back.  Run it up. Happy Wednesday. Oh, wow. Look, Chandler and Lou look like they're sponsored the same way. That's so cool. Shamsherani, of course, Stadium Insider feeling better. Everyone across the board minus Lou. Everyone's a little bit better. Yay. Little bit better. Okay. Okay. You sound a little bit better. Um, guys, hopefully you were watching some basketball last night. And even if you weren't, I have a sneaky feeling that you saw this highlight right here. It's everywhere. Final seconds of Mavs calves. Looks like Dallas might have this one all wrapped up, but not so fast, my friends. Things get kind of crazy at the end. Yeah, Mitchell 31, 7, and 6. Luca, who normally we would probably talk about and we will end of that game crazy, but Max Drews. Have you ever, Chandler? What? Seen anything like this?  And I feel like when you're just when this is happening, you're just trying to get it off, right? No, and a million years. Do you think you're going to make this dude?  It's crazy how this is just his normal three and this was clutching and they didn't panic. He didn't throw a home run inbound pass. He threw it to mobile. He got it right back. Dallas kind of messed this up. I feel like Dallas should have had somebody at the end of that court there just so they couldn't do something like this. They couldn't roll the ball and bounds. But you know what? They gave him an opportunity and he made an absolute unbelievable shot. I think I saw this as the second longest buzzer beater. Yeah. I think ever. Besides the antique or something. So I mean, shout out to Max Shoes. This is just a huge. I can't even say clutch. It's pretty lucky shot, but it's unbelievable. I mean, Lou, what was your reaction when you saw this one? I love it. Just it was a great shot. It looks like it looked like something they practiced. You know, I know Chandler said it looked like somebody messed this up. But you know, with a second left, pick on my behalf court and live with the results. And it just so happened that he cashed it out for the game. And so it's unfortunate break for for Dallas, but this is a very entertaining basketball game. And in fairness, Struce at that point was five for five from three in that final quarter. So he he was feeling himself a little bit. Shoms, the Mavs should have had this one, I guess you could say. So what's your biggest takeaway from the way things happened out for the Dallas Mavericks? Yeah, Michelle, just a crushing loss. To me, the Mavericks are a team that they probably need to get out of the play in position and get somewhere in that five, six range and go in order to go and make some noise in the playoffs and upset a team because getting in the play in with this team, there's just too many threats in the play in tournament. There's too many threats. Once you get out of the play in tournament, if you get out of the play in tournament, we know how great Luca Donchich is and Kyrie Irving, you know, are but to get the efforts around the board. That's why you go get PJ Washington, Daniel Gafford. And last night before that Struce jumper, Luca Donchich has that pass to PJ Washington for what looked like the go ahead layup. And the Mavericks really believe that that PJ Washington pick up is going to pay dividends. It's going to be a big pick up there. They compare him to Aaron Gordon, what Aaron Gordon means to Denver, someone that can play multiple positions, guard multiple positions, versatile, offensively can impact the game.  They really discussed similar concepts. Grant Williams in our first round pick for either Bobby Portis or PJ Washington. They go and get him. So longer term, I'm curious to see how that pick up works out and how the rest of the season goes. But to me, they got to get out of the play in spot. Yeah, I would think, look, again, nine times out of 10, we're talking Luca after this kind of a game. But Max Struce decided to ruin that part of the rundown, but Luca did have a 45 and he and Kyrie together had 75 points. I want to make sure I word this correctly, Lou. Best duo in the NBA right now. No, not for me. I'm, you know, even though Luca is the leading score of the league, I don't know the exact, exact average. I know he's number one, but for me, consistently, it's gonna be, it's gonna be Tatum and Brown, right? You know, those are the only two guys, two teammates that are in the top 30 in the scoring. You know, even though they're way down on the list, they're the only two that's there. And so for the Boston Celtics to be in the position that they're in, for them to have the success that they've had, it's come down. Yes, it's come down to those two guys scoring at basketball consistently. I haven't seen this consistently enough from them and Kyrie has been in and out with injuries, this and that. And sometimes playing with Luca, he turns into kind of a facilitator and waits his turns and takes the opportunities that he gets to score the basketball. But last night was a great sample size for them for things to come for them to be successful. They're gonna both have to score the ball. So am I saying the best? I still got to go with Tatum and Brown because they do it at night in and night out. Are we agreeing with that, Chandler? Do you have a different placement for them? We're talking best scoring duo. They got to be up there. I think Lou's talking about best overall duo because then you got to give it to Tatum and Brown who are, you know, the most versatile, you know, best team in the NBA. It's hard to look away from Tatum and Brown. When you talk about scoring, yeah, they got to be up there and it's just the way they play. They can score the ball every which way. They're exciting to watch. They shoot it from deep, but there's so many good scoring duos now with, you know, Giannis and Dame and PG and Kawhi and Booker and KD. When you're talking about scoring duos, it's crazy because there's some elite, talented offensive players in this league, but they're definitely up there and this game, you're right. Without this, this hell Mary, we're talking about, you know, Luca having 45 and 14 and them combining for 75 points and do they have enough to compete and, you know, survive in advance in the playoffs and instead it's crazy. One shot will take us elsewhere, but when you talk about talent, offensive duo, I think they're top three for sure. I just love the ending and the fact that they got to do that at home was kind of perfect, but despite all of that, Cleveland right now is sitting strong at that two seed, but they happen to also still be seven games back of the Celtics. I mean, at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter if you don't get out of the East Chandler. So does this Cavs team as you're watching them have enough to beat Boston? It's hard to say they have enough to beat Boston. Boston is so complete. They've been so good all year long. They've been consistent. They're poised. They play defense. The addition, they're just, they're too solid, you know what I mean? Now, when you look at the next kind of tier, when we start looking at the Milwaukee's, the Miami's, the Knicks, I think the Cavs are right there and I think they can kind of get to that Eastern Conference finals learning with taking the experience that they learned last year on the playoffs. A year of those younger guys better. The additions of Max Shrews and guys like that, I do think they're extremely talented. I think they're well coached. I think the the murmurs of Donovan Mitchell not being happy. Those have quieted because they've been winning. I still think there's some issues there long term. I don't know how much longer Donovan Mitchell or JB Bicker staff wind up being there. But as of now, it's hard. It's hard to complain. Why would you know? Why else would you want to go anywhere else when you're 30, 19 second in the East? And there's honestly one team that's.  So they're in a really good spot. They're young, but they also have guys in their prime. They have a young coach. They're they're in a really, really good situation. Is blue dancing? Is that dancing? What are what is you doing? You agree? I'm delirious at this point. I took my kids to school. I've been recording. I'm just trying to find some mojo over here while I was on camera. Somebody's being funny and put me back on camera. You gotta know it was like perfect time. You gotta get to the nap part of your day and then you're good to go. By the way, do you have any? I mean, look, at the end of the day, do you have any hope that Cleveland could beat Boston in a series? That's just really the simple question. Yeah, it's not even about it. It's not even about Cleveland to me. I think Boston has just done a great job, even though I'm wearing a Boston green today, Boston has done a great job of just separating themselves from the pack. They look strong. They look complete. They look like they're ready to go. Well, all machine. And so I think it's going to be hard for any of these teams to compete with them unless Milwaukee gets their thing together. They start, they start to find some chemistry. I think they obviously have the names and the star power to be a problem for the Boston Celtics. Cleveland look like, Cleveland look like they have that that chemistry that you want going down a stretch and they've caught up and put themselves in a position to be in second. But Boston has taken off. And so I think this is bigger than Cleveland. I don't see anybody really competing with them. It is. It is crazy because looking at the West, I have no idea who's going to who's going to win the West, right? When you look at these, there's just one obvious pick. So barring an injury or some absolute meltdown, it's the Celtics to lose. Yeah, I think I agree with that. If they don't win, something bad happened is what probably people are expecting at this point. And speaking of, they did play last night. Easy peasy for Boston. 117 99 win over Philly. All of the Celtic starters finished with at least a plus 18 or higher. And they had a combined plus 20 27 if you're into stats like that Tatum 29 11 and eight Brown 31 and six and Maxi again sort of forced to do it all at this point 32 and five. They as we've been talking, they're running away with the Eastern Conference. But if you just take the NBA as a whole, is there a team that you would say is more whole W H O L E than the Boston Celtics? Chandler? No, I think they're the best team in the NBA. I think there's some other very good teams. I love the nuggets. I love the Clippers. I think the Clippers, the Celtics is what we've been talking about all year long. How that is their issue. But they're starting five has been so productive. You don't even really have to look much further than that. They've been somewhat healthy and they have been getting some good stuff from Richard and Houser and Al Horford. So then they didn't really, they weren't one of those teams that made a big move at the deadline because they're confident that they have enough. They're built to win now. They have arguably the best duo in the NBA that plays both sides of the floor. And the addition of Drew Holiday, I think, you know, on paper, Damian Lillard, All-Star Perennial score, I think people thought that would benefit the box more. And it didn't, it just, it didn't because Drew Holiday does so much more. He defends, he's a leader. He also can score.  And he adds a whole other dynamic to this team that they didn't have, especially when they lost Marcus Bart. They needed someone like Drew Holiday and he's the perfect fit for them. So when you look at this starting lineup, yeah, it's, it's, they don't even need to have a deep team because their starting lineup is that good. There it is starting lineup, Lou. Anyone better? Right now or ever? Yeah, right now. I mean, we can do ever, but that could be a long conversation. Well, the question I'm looking at it said, who was the last team? So that's, that's all I was saying. But no, I think, I think that this is them. You know, obviously, you got to put the clippers in there on paper. The clippers look like a very strong starting five. When healthy, you would like the Phoenix Suns, but right now they're playing like the most complete best starting five there is. I mean, first and offensive rating, second defensive rating. This is just setting up to be a massive upset if the Celtics do not win this entire thing. That is what this feels like right now because we're talking about them so, so positively. And on the sixer side of thing, obviously, they're just sort of waiting on any and all Joe L and B news. Shams, do you have any for possible return? We reported on it when he had surgery February 6th. This is a six to eight week injury timetable for Joe L and B. You know, at that moment and still the hope and the optimism and the expectation is somewhere in late March, early April. That's when the window starts for Joe L and B potentially to make a return. It really all depends on how his rehab goes, where the team is in the standings. They're about a half game out from the playing tournament. So they're, they're teetering right now between being in the playoffs, being being a team that has to fight in the playing tournament. So you have to look from a team perspective. If you, if you are in the playing tournament, Joe L and B is right. Do you bring him back into the fold? Where's he at? The one thing I know about Joe L and B, I know Chandler, you know him well, Lou, you know, you know him as competitor as well. He knows his body. He's a smart player. He's been through these injury battles over and over and over. There's no one that knows his body better than he does. And so I think he's going to rehab. I think he's going to attack it the best he can. And at the end of the day, he's going to be the one that really knows, am I right enough to come back into the season? Because you're going to be missing about two months. You know, whenever you do make a return, is it worth it? Is your rehab really going that smooth? To have to hold on, to get there just for Joe L and B to come in after being out for two months, Lou? I don't know. It predicts the future for me here with this Sixers team. What are they capable of doing? If they're smart, I think they start fresh next year. You know, this is going to be a uphill battle and you're putting a lot of pressure on Joe L and B.  He's probably going to be on minutes restriction. He's going to have some limits on what he can be able to do for this team. So to try to survive and wait it out for him to get back and still try to compete for a championship, that's just, that's going to be tough. You know, when we talk about a strain on a guy's body, you're talking about putting a strain on him mentally as well and trying to put all of this pressure on him. And so if I'm the Sixers, I allow him to get 100% healthy, get back and you start over, you start fresh next year. I know that window is closing.  He's had his issues and, and rightfully so, I think this team should do right for him just by, by his health, you know, but if, if he's healthy and he can play, you throw him out there. I don't, I don't know what you really get out of that going into the playoffs and trying to get that chemistry back that you've been building all year. But I will just rather, I will much rather see Joel and B to 100% healthy then rush back for the playoffs. Yeah, here's the thing. They're, they're, the good news for them is there's seven games from falling out of the play in. So I think the beauty of the play in is it could only be one game, maybe two games if they don't win that first one.  And so if I can happen to win that play in game, one game, even with Joel on a 20-25 minute restriction and then I get a seventh seed and I'm looking at Cleveland on the first round. Now we're talking about surviving. Now we're talking about can we advance? And so I think, listen, obviously it's scary because his size and his injury history with everything that he's went through, you definitely aren't going to rush him. But if he's close to 100% to play and this, the way this team's built right now at the Ryzen Maxi and Tobias Harris, Kelly Ubre, all these, these older guys, they were also built to win this year. And obviously Joel and Bita had a huge, huge impact on that, but the play in, it's not like it's this long growing series. It's one game, maybe. So if he can play play, you have six months on the off season and obviously it's a rest to strengthen your injuries and to fully heal. So when you look at the landscape of Eastern Conference, if I can get in there and not face the Celtics in the first round, I'm doing everything I can if I'm too well to be to get on that court. I just hear fans of all the other teams just perking up their ears, hating right now on Chandler Parsons, especially the Cavs since you named them. All right, we got some scoops from Shoms. We got a lot of scoops from Shoms right now. Drew Holiday, we talked a little bit about him, but we got an update that's not necessarily Celtics related, Shoms. What's going on? USA Basel has been pursuing Drew Holiday for most of this NBA season to play in the 2024 Olympic Games in Paris. And I'm told, Holiday has delivered his commitment to USA in recent weeks and he's expected to be among the 12 man roster for the Olympics in Paris coming up, barring anything unforeseen any injury. They really value his two way ability. We know about his point of attack defense, his playmaking that he brings, his dynamic ability to be a scorer, three point shooter, passer. We saw it last night on display for the Celtics. And in 2021, when this team USA squad won the gold medal behind Kevin Durant's stardom, Drew Holiday was arguably the second best player on that team, the second most important player on that team. So when you look at this upcoming roster for the Olympics, you consider the locks along with Drew Holiday, LeBron James, Kevin Durant, Stefan Curry, Joellen Bede, Jason Tatum, I expect Devon Booker, BAM out of eye or those guys potentially, Anthony Davis to be among the other names as well. But you know Devon Booker, I think that's a guy that you would look at to be in that category as well. But Drew Holiday and his commitment, he's expected to be a part of this team. Hoops in Paris. Oh that's his wife's wife's old jersey, isn't it? Hoops in Paris, sign me up, sounds like a plan. Shams, we also have some W. Important to know. It's his wife, right? Lorne Holiday. Yeah. His Lorne Holiday, his wife, two-time Olympic gold medalist. Yeah.  That just shows you how important Drew Holiday is and he's not, I wouldn't say he's a superstar, I wouldn't say he's you know a fan favorite. The guy can do so much in impacted games that Grant Hell's like, no, no, no. I'm gonna get him before Devon Booker. I'm gonna get him before all these other players. So that's totally because that's flattering. You can't not be an Olympic star in that household.  So yes, I am all about this. He's not even a best Olympian in his house. He's really not. That's so dope. That's so dope. Crazy. And I love that for everyone involved. Some WNBA news, we have Breonna Stewart, of course the MVP, signing an extension with the Liberty. I hate the part where she took less than Max Shams because we already know their salaries, what does that say about everything that's going on here in New York? Yeah, you know, I had to get in the WNBA game a little bit. Breonna Stewart resigned with the New York Liberty the other day and it was a one-year deal. It's a below maximum contract, below the maximum salary of $208,000. But the interesting wrinkle here it's a non-guaranteed deal because of the hard cap and the restraints on the WNBA salary cap in order to keep this is a team that obviously is one at a high level. Sabrina Inesco also on this team in order to keep their starting five together, they made to the finals this past year in 2023. They had, she had to take this non-guaranteed deal. A couple other players on this team also have non-guaranteed or what they call in the WNBA, unprotected deals in order to allow the Liberty to keep this team together and have flexibility. I mean, I'm curious, Chandler Loo, they both played in the NBA when you look at your counterpart to the WNBA to, for this to even be a thing, obviously, I think it got a lot of people's attention.  So the fact that she deserves, obviously, all of that and more, she's still willing to take less to keep her squad together in Kudos, that's great for her. You see some, you see guys in the NBA do this all the time, but the paid differences, you know, slightly different. So this is, this is, this kind of shows you about her character and how much she's willing to give up, to stay in New York and to stay on the liberty and to compete for championship. I don't know. Take the money, Stewie. It's gonna be hard to beat the aces. It's New York City, you got a family, but I will say this, being in the building when they lost last season at the end of that, it was a toward bad taste in everyone's mouths so I could see that, but don't be giving that money back women. It's, there's a difference between taking 300 million in 280 and 208,000 and the max of that. Come on. You take all the money you can while you can.  Oh, we're taking a break right now. Oh, I hope to hear you, but I am for good reason. When we come back, we will be joined by Channing Frye as he joins, run it back. See you in a bit. Oh, it's a good final image right there, 14 year vet and he's a champ and he's up early. Channing Frye joins the show right now. First of all, good morning. We just learned you're on the list. You're on the video of me dunking.  How good is that? What's been early? What's been early in a career? That ain't it. We'll send it to you to make sure you have it. You know what? Channing yesterday, we barely got to get into it and it was a kind of a heated topic. It's a heated topic in the country. I know it's Wednesday, but now that we've got like grown ups talking about banning court storming, I feel like this could go on forever. So one, we can arrest them. I submitted electric fencing. No one likes that. What? Just for fun. Have you been on a court that was stormed? Yes. Just don't lose. Don't lose. Who cares? What are you talking about? Are you asking kids? Stop it. Stop it. Stop it. Right? And I said this. We talked about this yesterday. Like, there's only one guy ever in the history of maybe college sports that I'd really be worried about his health. That's JJ Reddick. Right? I'd be worried if somebody stormed the court, somebody would punch him in his face. He was hated that much. Everyone else? Like just put your hands up and walk off the court. Like why are you trying to run where drunk kids are running? It happens. It's part of college sports. Like it's not that serious. And it seems like only the coaches that lose make a big deal about it. So stop losing. Stop losing the unranked teams. Coach better. And maybe no one's going to storm the court.  See, Channing, I said, Chandler, I said, aren't you opening up the floodgates? So like where else in the world can 30, 40, 100 kids run up on you and you not have to defend yourself or do something? Isn't it open up the floodgates though for issues? No. I've got the court stormed on me three times. And honestly, I did put my hands up. Right? We lost to, I think Oregon State, we lost to, in my four years, Oregon State, Washington State, and maybe like Stanford at the buzzer. And you see me just walk off my hands up and security runs to me. Nobody bothers me.  It's just, it's physics. They don't know their equilibrium is off.  Security is going to come get you first.  Somebody's going to come find you. It's not that big a deal. Those poor walk-ons are just going to get pummeled. Hey, listen, look, no offense, you'd air for the grades anyway. So come on, you get all the gear and you're there for the grades. Come on, let's keep it a buck. Poor champ, he's the only one, the only one fighting it. I just hate that it's due, because I just disagree with everything about due. Yeah, I don't know. Nobody likes due. Nobody likes due. Nobody likes due. If it was anybody else, I'd probably make an exception, but it's due.  Janning, Clay Thompson, he's continuing to come off the bench and you've been on this early. You've been saying they should do this since November. What made you feel that way so early on? I think you saw him early pressing and even the year that they won, Wiggins and Clay, they are such good teammates and such good like team guys that they're always like, well, if I don't play good, he'll do it. Or if I don't play good, you know, Clay will do it. To me, you got to put the pressure on one of them to come out and play good basketball. And then also, for me, Clay right now, coming off of all his injuries, I'd like to showcase him. Ring some of that firepower off the bench. Clay is a top 75 player of all time. I don't care what about that list or whether you made it or not, but Clay is that good. And I think if you bring him off the bench or a guy like Chris Paul, you can keep that rhythm going that you need. So you're going to introduce the young guys like Kaminga and the rest of them to allow them to put them in good situations to win games. To me, playing Clay, Steph, Draymond, Kaminga, everybody in the first lineup, you're not getting any firepower off the bench. When they win, they have a great bench. Think about Sean Livingston.  Think about those kind of guys coming off the bench. Now you have Clay Thompson coming off the bench. It's no wonder that they're doing great. He's going to play us 34 minutes anyways. So with all that being said, the struggles, the up and downs, is this the last year Clay Thompson's on the Warriors? Does he go and start somewhere else or does he go back there? Man, listen, we're talking about Breonna Stewart. Take that change now. Look, I know a lot of teams that go pay him crazy. I think it's up to him. Let me go with my gut here. I do think it is. I do think this is his last year. I think there's a team that is going to pay him crazy just to not be on the Warriors anymore. You know, obviously the Warriors got to make decisions. I think they're going to go younger now. I think this is kind of their last full run. If Clay doesn't have a crazy playoff run, I can see somebody else saying, hey, we'll start you. You got 35, 40 minutes a night on a good playoff team. I can see somebody throwing some money at him.  It's just a truth because whether they think they're going to win, they're going to say, do you have 20 million for Clay Thompson or 30 million? Joe Shmoa, he's going to put people in the stands. You had Clay Thompson to Dallas. You had Clay Thompson to the Lakers. You had Clay Thompson to Sacramento. You had Clay Thompson to anybody. You're like, all right, well, we got a chance. Like we're going to be a playoff team. I mean, he's just that. It's a weird picture. I'm in another journey. It's a weird picture. I'm like an Orlando Magic. It is. Yeah. It's like D-Way going to Chicago. You're like, ah, I get it. But that ain't it. That ain't it. It's going to be weird. And it's going to take a while for us. I guess Damon of Bucks Jersey was a little bit weird as well. And that's a great segue because they've won three straight now. And we all know for the beginning of this Doc Rivers experiment, it felt like, uh-oh, but for what we all do for a living, it was fantastic. What is your opinion, not just on what they've been able to do and it looks like they're figuring things out, but kind of Doc's entrance as the Bucks coach and all the talking that he was doing? Man, where do I? Okay. Where do I?  You know, obviously I think Doc has had success in this league on different teams. I think this is an interesting situation for him to come in. I think no matter who you, you could have Phil Jackson on this team. I don't know if I put the Bucks above and it's a hot take. I don't know if I put them above a healthy Philly or Boston regardless. I just don't think they're built that way. I think I'm a little disappointed that they really, they're always going to be good because you have Giannis, you have Dame, you have Brooke, you have good pieces, but they haven't evolved for me, right? They haven't like adjusted to the times. I feel like they are very, very good during the regular season. I'm curious to see what happens if they get an unfavorable matchup, how they make adjustments, which is I think their biggest problem. I don't think they're an adjustment team. I think they're just do, we do harder. And that's what I worry about. But you have Giannis and if he can be healthy, he's a monster in the playoffs, controlling the pace of the game. But I think Doc Rivers is just there to make Dame and Giannis work as best as they can. So I don't think it's about X's and O's. I think it's about superstar management. So he did a pretty crappy job at the beginning. He won three in a row. I think a pretty big win against Minnesota. That was kind of impressive for me. But it'll be interesting to see what happens during the playoffs because teams are going to say, during a regular season, you ain't hacking Giannis like that. During the playoffs, teams are now stacked. And think about the Knicks. They got four or five dudes that are six, nine physical that can just guard him, right? And Dame, he's playing amazing. I think he has the most fourth quarter points in the league. Right now. So for me, it's like, I don't really see them both play great at the same time together. You know, it's kind of weird. It's almost like Luca and Kyrie. They could play well together, just not, like it's not like Penny and Shaq. It's not like Kobe and Shaq. You know, it doesn't, it makes sense, but it just doesn't look, it looks weird. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But here's my, here's my thing as, as much as we talk about the inconsistencies of the Bucks, right? They're still sitting in third and they're looking at, right? If it, if it was today, we're looking at a unhealthy Philly. We're looking at Orlando Magic team. I still like them getting out of the first round and then playing somebody else in a second. I still feel really, really good about the Milwaukee Bucks with, with the circumstances. So I mean, if they played those two teams in the first round, I think that's a quick 50 piece nugget. Four and done. I just don't think, I don't think Orlando shoots well enough in their first year guys. I love Orlando. I think they need a true point guard and some shooting. And I think they're going to be top five in the East. But to me, that's the issue is like, what are our expectations for Milwaukee? You have Giannis in game.  No, we need to see them in the Eastern Conference Finals. Like that's the expectation. When you have players like this, when you have two players that are probably top 15 in the league right now, and that's a lot of pressure, but it's also what you get. I mean, you have an older team. You've stopped developing your young guys. You started, you've really bought into like, this is our time, which you should. And so for me, okay, you got out the first round. Congrats, here's your cookie. Now who you got to play? What happens in the Eastern Conference Finals? Are you going there? Those are my expectations for them. So I feel like I know your answer then. What's more likely for this particular Bucks team, a first round exit or going to the finals and winning? Man, no, I don't think they win. I'll be honest, they not beating Boston. All right, fair enough. I just don't think so. Boston is too complete and to their bench, their system, their defensive versatility, their range of shooting, superstar power. Okay, let's say Yannis and Tatum. Okay, and then you have Jalen Brown and Dame. So those four just go out the window. Boston has everything else. Yeah. Or Zengas drew holiday. Boom, boom, boom. You're killing. You're too soon to start to need to win your two games. You're coaching your bench. That's four games in the playoffs. This one's easy. They happen to get a beat or something in the first round. They could very well lose in the first round of the playoffs to the Miami Heat. How well they'll play the New York Knicks. Yeah, if they got Miami, New York, they don't want that. They don't want them problems. They want Orlando, a beat-up Philly. They want something to kind of warm up and understand. They don't want Miami. You guys listen, no matter who's on Miami's team, they're going to get grandma and grandpa out there. And next thing you know, they're going to average 12 and five, make good basketball plays. Like, what are y'all doing at practice that no one else is? Oh, they're probably practicing. They're probably practicing. That's it. Man. Man, it's crazy. Y'all got a lot of hot kicks in there. They're going to lie. What are you talking about, Lou? These are good takes. Because that's your team. You like that because that's your team. You know, more so than adopting. You don't think Miami can beat Milwaukee in a four game. In a series, first round of the playoffs. You never count Milwaukee out how they're built. You know, they're a system team, so they can plug in and plug guys in and out. But they've been just as inconsistent as Milwaukee has this year. And Milwaukee's been able to survive and stay in a third place. So that's the only thing that's different for me. But I want to stay on the bugs really quick, because we always make a big fuss about Doc. But Giannis recently said he doesn't watch a lot of film, doesn't watch a lot of basketball. And I thought he said it in jest, kind of trying to get people going. He said he likes to be surprised going in games to see what guys do. What was your take on that? Well, you know what my take was on that. One, if that was funny, if he thought that was a joke, that's not funny. I just don't think that's funny. As a leader, you have to be the most prepared. I played on teams with guys like Brandon Roy, Steve Nash, LeBron, even guys way back, Stefan Marbury. All they did was watch film. And it wasn't a joke. It was like they'd get in a car, they'd have a driver just so they can continue to watch film. So for me, it was like he probably does watch film, but that's not really funny. I didn't think that was funny. I think your team has been pretty inconsistent this year. I think for you as a leader, obviously you want to portray that I'm doing when everything possible to help my team win these games. So yes, they're on a three game win streak, but I think it just depends on what happens this year. If they don't win the big thing, then people are going to come back to that unfunny joke of, oh, haha, I don't watch film. So it wasn't my favorite quote. It was bad timing too. Like you guys are losing. You just got fired a coat. Like it just it was rough and right. It wasn't funny. He's got four coaches in nine months. So it's like, oh, and I don't watch film. It's probably like, yeah, you probably should have kept that one to yourself. You have put that one back in the pocket, you know. Read the room. Read the room. Read the room. Can we talk a little Lakers for a second? Because I know you've talked about the title window being officially closed. I believe it was zero chance at winning the championship. Do you still, are you still there? Has it moved at all? With the Lakers? Yeah. No, that's a zero. That's a zero. That is a zero. Good try. Hey, I love you guys. You know, I mean, put it this way. If we stop right now, who they playing in the plan? The Warriors? That's a 50-50 chance right there. That's tough. And then you got to go against a young, a young Minnesota or Dallas. Yeah. Or Dallas who's cooking right now. Stop it. Braun, listen, that's my guy. I love you. If I saw him, I'd tell him the same thing. Hey, you had a great year. Big guy. That's crazy. You're 39. I sweat going up the stairs. I need a breath. You out here averaging 25. But it ain't it. There's no way no one could say, now if they win, I will come back on this show and say, you know what, I retire from media because I don't know what I'm talking about. But they got, they got to climb Mount Everest. They got to climb Mount Everest. He knows at the top of that? Yolkich. And there's nobody in the Western Conference. Maybe other than, I'll say the Clippers. Yeah. Because Kawhi is balling. He's the best, most untalked player in the league right now. Yeah. Barbecue and the whole league with no words. It's crazy. No, no TV, no words. Just cooking everybody. But no, the Lakers. No, thank you. I'm sorry. Yes. I love the Kawhi part. Okay. So let me ask you this then. Because now we're already starting the Willie have a farewell to our wonky rumors about LeBron in different cities. Do you see a world in which he leaves LA for one last hurrah and a shot at a time? Oh wow. Heck no.  What for what?  You're about to have your number in the rafters with Kobe and Shaq and Kareem. What other place can you do that? You've already done an LA. You've already done it in Cleveland, right? Now you're in LA. You want to move from your $30 million mansion to where? Oklahoma City? To Dallas? To San Antonio? Stop it. No. He's living luscious. He's like this. Ah, we're in the seventh spot as he looks at the sun, looking at the Hollywood sign. He's like, well, all right, here we go. Another game. The ease of life is crazy. Yeah, I only played on the Lakers for like a quarter of a season. That's a different experience. Playing in LA is a different experience. Absolutely. And I played in New York. If you can be successful there, there's no reason to leave. You know where they get rid of people? People are like, now I go, I'll wave this, just let me stay. It hurts going from LA to Orlando. LA to Charlotte. LA to New Orleans. It is, it ain't the same. LA is beautiful. We got to have Channing on more just so you can keep shitting on cities like I do every single game. Crapping on the city, but I'm saying it ain't the same. You know it's not the same. Look, there are certain cities where you got outfits playing at the beginning of the year. Then there are sweatsuit cities. Okay. You're not leaving. You're not leaving a fashion city to go to a sweatsuit city. I sold my soul. I sold my soul at Winter Memphis for three years, bro. Trust me, I know exactly what you're talking about. Don't just sell for $90 million. Don't start, Channing. Don't start, Channing. I don't want to go too. Channing, start. We were doing good. Leave Memphis alone, Channing. Start, start. Talk about Memphis, Channing. Leave Memphis alone. We were doing good. No, no, listen. Look, man, you can have all the ribs you wanted, Memphis, right? Look, honestly, when you did that, I was like, dang, I didn't know your injuries or whatnot, but I was like, I think they had still had part of the grindhouse there. I thought that was a good matchup for you. Obviously, the city's not my favorite, but they got a certain culture there. It worked. So it's different than going, it's different than going to Detroit. It went from a good fit for literally all right. Oh, great fit. Oh, yeah. All right. Y'all would have been great. Tomorrow I'll meet a great grind because the Parsons contract. Yeah, yeah, yeah. You don't mess that up, buddy. But hey, you living good. I see that fancy painting behind you. Yeah. He's living the best life of everyone. I look expensive. Wait, kidding. So you don't think the Braun waits and goes wherever Brauny gets drafted or wherever he goes. You don't think he's staying in L.A.? Stop it. And then I said this before, but number one, the Braun is a dad, right?  Like for me, I got a 13-year-old boy. Now, if he's like getting ready to go to college, I'm like, man, yeah, Hendricks.  Like people are going to pay attention to this, especially if he's not playing the best that he can. So for me, it's like if Brauny plays in the league, when he does, I think he is a league player. I don't know if he's going this year, next year, whatever. Just an opportunity to play in a league, Braun will be happy. I think he's done it differently than his own, than his dad. I think if Braun can hang around, if he can hang on by a thread, even if he's 42 and Brauny's gone to San Antonio or someplace like that, but those two to play and be on the same court, I think that's going to be pretty impactful and pretty awesome for them, both of them. Yeah. Now, Michelle hates this San Antonio. No, I don't. I don't want him to go to San Antonio. I want to throw him back. Why? I just told my team, because then I'm putting a precarious situation, chanting. I'm even wearing his first hat today. You don't do this to me right now. I mean, he's very unprofessional. To me, I think if you're going to get somebody like Brauny, San Antonio is the safest place to put him. Why do you think the NBA put Wemby in San Antonio? It's the safest place to put superstars like that, where they can grow into their opportunity. Could you imagine Wemby in Detroit? What? You look, come on now. That ain't it. They put him with the best coach ever and said, hey, we're going to put you on TV just every so often. A little bit. There's no pressure to win. Don't worry about it. And you can live in your little bubble in San Antonio. No state tax. I want to bring it back to 2016 when you get to Cleveland.  What did you mean by that? And how did you remove those sticks up their butt? First of all, I wasn't moving. No sticks up, no butts. But so I got traded from Orlando. We were one of the worst teams in the league. I was with Scott Skiles, who I like and appreciate, but his practices sucked. They were three hours.  We had to do layups for 30 minutes, like tedious, boring, boring stuff. And we were still getting drug by 30. So one day I told Skiles, I was like, man, Skiles, man, look, I'm 33 at the time, whatever.  So we kind of had an understanding I didn't have to do that. So when I got traded to Cleveland, I was like, hold up. We don't got to practice this and we're winning. What are y'all thinking about? Y'all don't talk to each other?  So me being me, I put every single player on a text chain and then started, you know, wait up at night to watching the games and then started just texting everybody. And then they were like chanting, leave us alone. It's late, blah, blah, blah. Then I send funny gifts. Then I send, you know, rude things and things probably like HR would talk to me for. And then honestly, everyone just kind of ganged up at like hating my text threads. And then a month later, everyone started to love them. And so I was like, hey, Kyrie, you have a book reading. Why don't we three people go to the book reading? Right? Whatever it is, right? He had a sound bowl reading, right? So I went to that.  We're like, hey, let's three, four people, let's go to this. So it just turned out to like actually take time away from your life to go hang out with your teammates. Like they're not that different. We're all cool. Like, I think Kevin especially was like, dude, Kevin, you're just chilling and Cleveland by yourself. We're like, you got a big old house. You got all this expensive liquor.  And so we literally used to throw parties at Kevin's house, right? Because he had the best, obviously the best charcuterie plate, but, you know, he had the best liquor too, right? So for me, yeah, we were like, why not hang out? Listen, we're not practicing. We're drumming teams. What are y'all mad for? I just got came from Orlando. Come on, man. We got to have some fun while we do this. So we started having fun and started working. Yeah. Like you started to see people start to talk to each other more, hang out more and obviously it worked out. Just a text thread, you guys. See, Lou, we want to hang out with you. And you won't respond. And it hurts our feelings. Lou lives in Atlanta. He's with his people. I know Atlanta people are different. He won't do anything. All right. So you guys won the championship that year that, of course, then led to the argument that I just, I'm not a huge fan of the, if Draymond hadn't been a suspender, the Warriors would have won that series. But it is an argument that's been made many times. Why? And none to do with Draymond. It was Andrew Boget got hurt. It was the biggest issue. If you watch the film, Andrew Boget, the first two games, regardless of staff or anybody else, made the biggest impact on our ability to win. So he was blocking shots at the rim, setting big time screens, rebounding, outletting. Like he was doing everything. When he got hurt, you notice we started driving the ball over and over and over again, like relentlessly. And the only time we'd settle for a three is if, like, end of shot clock, or you were wide open.  You could not play, let's just shoot threes with them. You were going to get crushed, right? They can go on a 9-0 run like this. You make a mistake, you know? Every game that we lost, we'd look at the film and they were so... I mean, it was wild how good that team was. You made a mistake. Oh, that's three points. You made another mistake or a turnover. Oh, that's five points, four points. Like, you're like, dang, I'm down 12 now. How did that happen after three possessions? Well, you had turnovers.  You didn't communicate. You didn't know the assignment. Like, Andrew Boget was the biggest issue for us. When we started driving the hole, he would block everything. So when he left, when he got hurt, we were driving to the basket, getting layups and then getting our defense set so that we could actually have an opportunity to grab and hold so they weren't running around like crazy people. It was, he should get the most credit. It wasn't about Dremon. We were going to win that game regardless. Dremon could have played. You could have put Scotty Pippen out there, Dennis Rodman. We were going to win that game. Channing, this has been awesome. If you don't know, you probably already do. Road Trippin is the podcast with that fool Richard Jefferson and Allie Clifton. We appreciate the time so much. We could probably go on for another hour. Yeah, thank you so much. Yeah, yeah, anytime, anytime. We'll take a break. We'll be right back. My goal, I appreciate that. My goal is, um, Paul George.  Paul George is the best player ever. Colby, Paul George. When are you going to say your... Call my little Anthony. Call my little Anthony. If you didn't say your dad first, it's crazy to me. That's, I don't, obviously you need to go at his levels though, like, he don't, he don't even got it. He just threw the cards at me. He doesn't have to. He don't even got to be talked about. Yeah, it was a good, it was a good big fit in. All right, that's obviously Kai and Anthony and Lala. Um, any issues here?  Let's start there. Lou, you first. No, this is, listen, I'm the corniest, lamest person in the world to my daughter when it comes to everything. She thinks I'm a square.  And everybody else is the coolest person in the world, but she absolutely adores me behind closed doors. Is it so in public? I, I, I get this. That's just dad. You know, that's not Carmelo Anthony to him. That's, that's pops. That's dad. And so, you know, and a lot of kids like Paul George, man, you're starting to find out that a lot of young hoopers really, really love Paul George.  He like who he like. I have no issues with this. It's just, it's just funny because it's not like you say an MJ or LeBron. He's saying, he's saying Paul George is cause that's just, that's his personal prep. That's probably who he likes watching growing up. Probably who he emulates his game after. So yeah, I got no problems with it. And I'm like, Lou, like my daughter thinks I'm cool right now, but she's only two years old.   The honeymoon ends, Chandler, trust me. The honeymoon ends. Yeah, Chandler, you have got, you've got two little ones. Do you already play footage of your golden days so that they can start to understand? You know, what's funny is that my daughter, my daughter Rocket, she watches the show again in the other room or zoom. So she wants, she'll see me on TV. And then we have shown her like highlights of me. So now when I'm watching basketball, she'll just point to a white guy on the TV and go, dad. So now she thinks any white basketball player is dad. So that's who we got going on. Yeah. Same. Oh, that does it for today, but we will be back tomorrow. Good news.


All right, we're back. Thank you all. We've had a little break and now we're back at work. Although we probably were working during break, which is typical for all of us. So committee we've we heard a great deal of testimony on S 120. My suggestion on this bill is to have take a minute and let Jen go through the proposed amendment that that I have put up on our web page. Then we'll let's take some time to go through that. And then comments will go through with a kind of a discussion mode if we can. This morning is then to move S 120 over to Thursday. We certainly need more time and I would suggest that we're going not going to be able to pass this bill until Friday. And so what for Friday we have h430. We're going to look at h430 today briefly and then we'll try to act on 430. As soon as we can, along with some of the other bills that we're looking at tomorrow. So our goal is to our goal is to pass all of the bills out that we have on our agenda. Today and tomorrow and Friday, but I'm just restructuring the timeline because we've heard so much new testimony today. I think it will be helpful for all of us to dive into it and we keep. And I will say this we keep getting emails and notes from people wanting us to add things into our budget member wanting us to add things into our bills and you know we're just about. To fill up with information. So, I mean there's no reason why you can't keep sending things for those of you who are out on the in the audience we certainly do welcome your comments but understand that our timing is very tight, and we'll do just the best we can. And we have another year of our session to cover some of the things that we can't get to this this year. So, Jen. Hello, there you are. Why don't you sending the 430 language to Nellie for. Oh, good. Oh, good. Okay, great. Thanks. Let's do let's go through the 120 proposed amendment and then we'll move on to 430 and budget memo. Okay, great. I will put up that language. I just committee FYI I did send you an email about this over the weekend, hoping that you would just have a chance to look at it. I tried to triage some of the more problematic and difficult complex areas out of s 132 to streamline that a bit and then to add some comments in to s 120 that reflected I think has reflected some of the testimony we heard today but the language certainly is open for modification further modification, of course, but so, Jen. Okay. So this is, I didn't put it in as an actual amendment format, but some proposals from Senator lions. The first relates to this study committee that she has re branded a little bit different name although did you send me even something else after this, and I did not. I did I thought that it should we should elevate it it's a value to commission rather than committee. So I want to call it commission on affordable. I think that's, but that's another. We can, we can discuss because I had was of a short duration and comes back with a report it seemed like a study committee but you can call it whatever you want. So the change in the findings, a couple of changes. One relates to adding a finding on the cost of prescription drugs. This is the ever increasing cost of prescription drugs continues to significantly increase the cost of health insurance and limit individuals ability to access care. Probably care and treatment, you know, because drugs are treatment. But, okay, let me can make changes as we go along, or make that in my version. I've indicated all of the changes in highlight with new language in bold. So again there's the change to the, whether it's a committee or commission but instead of being joint legislative healthcare affordability it's a committee or commission on affordable accessible health care. So I've renamed that in a couple of places. Then under the powers and duties the committee shall explore opportunities to make health care including prescription drugs, more affordable. And then in the under the powers and duties the second one on the all payer model, looking at the efficacy taking that out and changing it instead to look at how alignment of Medicaid Medicare and private insurance patient care management rules and guidelines affect access to an affordability of care, including access to referrals for extended care counseling and social services. Then think that is it on on what has been s 120 and then there are certain provisions from s 132 that are included and so I tried to indicate where and s 132 those had come from. The first couple of sections deal with ACOs. The first one here being what had been section five and s 132 on data collection and analysis. And then I took out the language referring to what the Green Mountain care board with would do with that information because that those provisions are not in this version. I still have the ACO collect and analyze clinical data and report that to the Green Mountain care board but it would not be specifically used by the board to inform other work that they're doing. Because that other work is no longer called for. What is now here section for had been section six and s 132 is that language giving the auditor state auditor access to the ACOs records. You have to placeholder in here for health insurance coverage for hearing aids. You have the language that you're recommending in the budget memo to be part of DFR is benchmark plan review was a little unclear what to do with what if anything to do with the remaining provisions at this time, including, you may need a better understanding of what Medicaid currently covers my understanding from them they think they already cover what the bill would have them cover. So you may want to hear that from them. Then we move to the state health improvement plan so what is section 15 and s 132 and this is where the bill would give specific direction to the commissioner of health and not just the secretary of human services or designee to be the one to adopt the state health improvement plan and updated as necessary, and then a new section that would be would have the commissioner of health submitting copies of the current state health improvement plan by January 15, along with any updates to the plan and a timeline for adoption of a new state health improvement plan to this committee and the House committees on health care and human services. Additional reports that come from s 132 just renumbered here so the first is the Green Mountain care board report on increases in health insurers administrative expenses for the last five years and how that compares with increases in the consumer price index. So that is again renumbered the section 18 of s 132 report requiring the ACO to provide a description of its initiatives to connect primary care practices with social service providers and have that report come in by January 15. And also is that we have the primary care visits without cost sharing reports from section 19 of s 132. So we have the primary care visits and those. It seemed that everything could take effect on passage because in the underlying bills they all took effect on passage so none of the ones unless you do something else with the hearing aids or something else didn't require separate effective dates, and then there would likely need to be a new title reflecting whatever you have in the bill. I'm going to take it down. Okay. Yeah, so committee open to conversation questions, thoughts at this point, I do want to add one thing as we were going through the, the work that we have done and just wanted to remind us that in h 315 which has now been allowed to become law. There is support for a JFO to hire a consultant to study the, the ACO. So there will be some that will be what I think we might consider an objective analysis of the ACO that the only piece I'm aware of that has JFO hiring a consultant, I think is around, and maybe I didn't want to speak to this but was around advising the committees on global commitment, the global commitment waiver. I don't think JFO was going to be hiring someone to do an ACO ACO right you're right so but it is tangentially it is very much related to that work. Senator Taranjini, go ahead. Thank you, Senator Alliance I just took a note when we were hearing from one of our witnesses about the s 120 bill and it. If it's true it's a little concerning, and unless I misunderstood this individual said that s 120 would has the potential to increase adult premiums by $1,000. I'm not sure if we increase the Dr dinosaur funding, and does anyone have any insight into that. I think we can find you the report. It was done a few years ago. And if others have other recollections. I'm happy to let you respond. In the context of several reports that have been done on primary care Dr dinosaur and others and it was in Devin greens testimony. So there is some, there is some specific testimony that as we go through that testimony will be helpful maybe to focusing on the goals of the of the group. It just seems, you know I'll read the studies and look into it a little more just seems a little counterproductive to what we're trying to do here as we as we look to expand coverage for children yet. We're saying, you're going to have to pay more in your premiums to adults. I don't like the balance so. And so it's something that will have to be weighed out risks, benefits. And so I see Senator Hardy and then Senator Cummings. Senator Cummings, were you going to comment on both of you going to comment on this. Is the Dr dinosaur in this bill. No, that's in another bill. I think it was the study piece, you know, analyzing if that expansion would be a route to take for savings. And so then the comment is a study there's no. Yeah, anything we do in this bill wouldn't. I mean, so this bill does include. The top of page four of what we just went over and in the and as 120 itself. In number C five opportunities made available by the Biden administration it does look at expanding Medicare to cover individuals between 50 and 64 years of age and for expanding Vermont's Dr dinosaur program to cover individuals up to 26 years of age. So that's the study there is a link in Devon's testimony haven't clicked on the link yet but it may be a quick way to get you to that report my my general recollection of the rationale behind the cost increases that younger individuals tend to be healthier and less costly and so removing those lives from the spread risk had the result of increasing premiums but there's I'm sure much more information in that. And we are now separating those markets. Because of changes. Right. Yeah, but yeah if you remove younger healthier individuals from the pool, the price is likely to go up for everybody else that's been a constant dilemma if we add covered services, the price for the remaining services goes up. And the guidelines if you don't mind if I ask a follow up here. The way the way this is written right now this, this is another study so we vote to support it. It's not saying we are raising premiums nothing we are enacting this or that this is allowing for a study to happen. And the next step would be for the legislature to take action upon that study. Yeah, so I mean there have to be a legislative recommendation. Right. Yeah, so many steps. Okay, go ahead. Thank you, Senator Lyons. I'm still absorbing a lot of the stuff we heard this morning it was a lot of testimony so I'm not sure I can fully relate, or you know, relate all of it to our conversation but to Senator Taranzini's point. I think it was Devin or somebody who mentioned that there have been tons of other reports done, and including this one that's mentioned about Dr. Dinosaur and I think having some reference to those reports and I don't know how we reference because it sounds like there are tons of them, but maybe some generic language that just says that the committee shall take under consideration previous studies or something like that so it's, you know, there's some charge to look back at other things that have been done. Yeah, I think having a knowledge base built into the committee work makes a whole lot of sense because people people out there don't have a lot of that knowledge. And there's no need to reinvent the wheel or re-study things that have been studied so I would support that and that would sort of get at some of the concerns that I think Senator Taranzini has about, you know, maybe doing something that's already been studied and whatever. Yeah. Okay, Senator Cummings follow up and then Senator Hooker. I'm just go ahead. The difference is that there have been changes in DC. And so, if I'm reading this, it's to say, okay, we've got all these studies but have recent changes, you know, cause the change in the conclusions. And there will be more changes before we're done with this. That's a good point. I think one of the goals of the committee in looking at what's going on is pretty key. Absolutely key. Senator Hooker. Just to follow up, you know, we do have to look at what's happening in DC, but with regard to the reports that have already been done, it'd be interesting to see what recommendations were made and what things have been put into place here in the state, as well as, you know, what's happening now in DC. So it, I think that there's a real value to looking back, but certainly a need to look at what's happening now. No, I think that is the point we don't, but I think as Senator Hardy has said, we don't want to reinvent a wheel. So the goal is to build on what's there. But we, you know, just sort of identifying some of the good work that's been done and whether or not recommendations have been followed up on and so on. So, so there's a sense of, of what we can do to move forward. Okay. Any other questions. Comments. Yes ma'am. I was just looking at some of the language suggestions that Jessa Barnard made. She had some specific language. And I just noted, oh, see her wording suggestions I'm just looking at them right now. I think it might be helpful to consider that she has changes in the same section you made changes, though, so I don't know if they're consistent with what you were trying to do. You know, listen, I heard the same thing and I think that that we should probably give ourselves a little time and a little time, very little time to go through, go through that and I wrote down the same thing Senator to, I thought that some of those suggestions might fit. So let's go through. Let's give ourselves that assignment. Let's go through the testimony and, and then as we come back to this tomorrow I'm hoping we can get back to it tomorrow. I'm hoping we can get some time and then firm up our discussion for mark up and vote on Friday so let's give let's do that that's let's go through this testimony and try to bring some thoughtful recommendations we don't have to doesn't have to be a lot, you know, just enough to make it succinct and effective. And we don't. So we've heard a lot so good yep good suggestion. Committee does that make sense to everyone I know no one has free time right now but can sit on the couch at the end of the day and do some very informative reading.  All weekend, all day, Monday, it's good. So that would help and I know each of you has a specific interest. And my suggestion is can we please make this a committee process you're going to be inundated with people telling you what to look at what not to look at. So we've heard a great deal of testimony let's try to make this a committee process from this point on, and I know there are very interested people out on YouTube right now, wanting to influence us and our thinking, and, and that's going to happen regardless, but I do think if we can make this a committee process where we've got. This is a great group of people to do this work. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. To one quick question and then to to your point about this being a committee process is their value in making this just a committee bill rather than having it the number since it's a combination. I don't know what the process works right now in terms of, but wanting, you know, sit, saying it's a product of all of our thinking or that's a good question for our ledge council. Hello, Jen. Hi, I think that's really a policy slash political question. Oh, yeah. Okay, I'm happy to make it a committee bill whatever I mean either way you'd still either way it has not met crossover. So I know it's going to be, it's going to be a heavy lift, regardless, but so I'm, I'm happy to make it a committee bill, so as we can get to a place that I'm happy with, that's fine. Yeah, I just it's more for the your point about it, all working together kind of thing. But my other question is specific to the hearing aid section. Jen mentioned, when she went through the bill, whether or not the stuff that we are recommending to be put in the budget would sort of take care of the first steps of that, or if there's more that should be added to this. It seemed to me like what we did there might move us down that road. Yeah, I think you may be right. And Senator Cummings, did you want to add something? No, I from conversations I've had it sounds like that the benchmark would be the way, because if we add it then we have to pay the additional costs with state funds. Right. If we say it's a required coverage, and it's not in the benchmark so I think that's the best place to have the discussion. So, and Jen is there anything else I'm trying to remember there were three sections and I know the, the, is there any one of those sections that we might keep or should we just say the benchmark work is doing its job. Well, what I can tell you is what's in the bill right now so what's in the bill right now is are in the s 132. Sorry there's nothing in in the language we're just looking at except the placeholder is the section 12 of s 132 has the coverage for in a large group market also Medicaid and state employees and teacher plans. Section 13 is the application to change the benchmark plan so it sounds like you've wanted to wait on that until you've had the benchmark plan analysis. And section 14 is directing the Agency of Human Services to seek approval from CMS to provide the coverage that is called for in section 12 which as I said they have indicated at least to me that they believe they already cover and so that would be unnecessary. So I think those three sections are probably unnecessary given the work that the DFR is doing and others on the benchmark plan. Right, so I think the policy question for you is whether you want to enact the large group requirement. Now, or if you are looking to address it in all of health insurance at the same time after the benchmark plan review. Okay. Do we have any analysis as I'm assuming these are the non-erisous or essentially state employees and the teachers and right and the commercial large group. Okay, that's spot. Do we have any estimate on impact on rates. I don't I don't know if I mean it's an actual real question so I'm not sure if Nolan has heard from any of the carriers or the state employee plan administrator. There has been some conversations about what the impact would be but I don't have anything that I can provide you at the moment. Yeah I know that I know the companies were interested in testifying and they are submitting some testimony and writing, but this conversation might sort of obviate the need for that. I think we've sent it a coming point to the state impact would be the state employee plan. Yeah. I've heard enough from teachers about they have high deductible plans at this point. I think everybody wants it but I'm not sure they want it to the tune of having their premium go up $1,000. I'm not comfortable doing it without knowing. Now and I agree with you which is, and I think if we wait for the benchmark plan analysis that will help us make decisions going forward and it's not just this committee, it's obviously your committee that's very much involved so my suggestion is to take those three sections out. That doesn't mean we aren't very supportive of hearing aids for our citizens regardless of age and income and and coverage so for the record I don't see anything that would make premiums go up $1,000 a year. I'm just throwing that out I have no idea. Okay. And I'll start getting lots of you wait you're influencing our thinking senator. Okay, does that make sense to people though, really to to I hate taking hearing aids out because I think they're so important, but we have that language that we're Will the benchmark study also gives give us any information about the other plans, the You know what it might cost for the other plans to add hearing aids bank it's going to be specific to the exchange mark well to the individual small group markets because that's what the essential health benefits applies to. So maybe go ahead and all and sorry. I think I would recommend you talk to Blue Cross Blue Shield MVP because I believe that they have done their own internal estimates already. Yeah I think both, and they both. If we want to continue and add something in about having that analysis. Then we should have them in to present. I think that you would also probably want to hear from DFR because I don't think that's within the scope of what they have requested the federal funding to do. Right. Right, but could we could we ask the private insurers to do that analysis and report back to us. We could just ask them, and they probably have already done the work. Yeah. If we get information about the small group exchange or exchange programs and then we get information about the others and we have it all together to look at make a decision for everyone. Next session, right. That's sending you emails about it already. Blue Cross and MVP in before we make this decision. I think we need to do that. So I think that we'll ask Sarah Teachout and Charles Storrow who represents they represent their respective companies and they have contacted me, and I will. Nelly, did you think they would not. I think it's great. Let's try to get them in first thing tomorrow morning. Hopefully they're available. Not the first thing because we have people on but the second thing somewhere tomorrow. You may also want to hear from SIGNA as I believe they have some of the large group insured market. Okay. Who's a signal representative at this point. Jean Kennedy. Oh, Jean. Okay, good. All right, let's do those three tomorrow. Nelly, and asking them for written testimony that we just, you know, they understand the gun that we're under the time frame we're under so if we can get their information and writing and then they can come in briefly. The sooner we get the information, the better. The message to the YouTube world. Please, please get us what you have. Okay. That was that's good I think that's a good place to end the discussion on hearing aids. Anything else. To the S 120 draft that we'd looked at I have at least for now put in an additional item under powers and duties and a new five and I move five to six to say, so this would be the committee shall consider the following the findings and recommendations from previous studies and analyses relating to the affordability of healthcare coverage in Vermont. Excellent. And I hope that addresses the excellent issues raised. Okay. Okay. Anything else. Slowly but surely we're going to make some progress. All right, so let's this is our this is our goal tomorrow. We'll find some time. We'll put Nellie Nile. However it happens will will put S 120 up, and we'll have the insurers come in. And hopefully they'll get us some written testimony testimony prior to our meeting tomorrow. Then I'm also going to suggest while we're just talking about tomorrow. We'll just do read through H 210 again. And there are a couple other folks who have asked to testify they'll be testifying but that's going to be very brief testimony. And then we'll be talking about S H 210. Then we'll also be looking at S 120. That'll be next in line. And then we'll try to finish off our work on H 46 and H one 104 so that means to do a little bit of reading on those bills and thinking where we are on those bills. And then today right now, Jen I'm going to ask if you would please take us through H 430. And I know there's been some. You've done some great work with diva on this to help clarify what can and should or should not happen in the bill so maybe I think put up the proposal. The suggested changes that diva was offering, and then explain the reason why we have that please. Thank you for and Nellie hasn't hosted. I think after some technical difficulties. So if you, you may need to refresh again. I will put up the language. We know when you're ready. All right, we have draft 2.2 upgrade and this is the one that you have in front of us so Jen go right ahead. This is so this is H 430 this is expanding coverage under Dr dinosaur although as we'll look at it's really similar to Dr dinosaur for individuals who are not eligible for Medicaid because of their immigration status and I did work collaboratively with diva and coming up with language that they think will more appropriately meet the stated intent of providing coverage to individuals who are we had referred to undocumented immigrants or people who are not eligible because of their immigration status. And the issue with that is that it potentially requires a full Medicaid eligibility determination with a denial based on immigration status in order to then provide this coverage so in trying to allow for a more streamlined process to determine eligibility for this particular benefit. We have moved it to a different part of chapter of title 33 of chapter 33 in the same chapter but a new sub chapter that I've just called covered for additional populations. And now be Dr dinosaur like coverage for certain Vermont residents, because if we call it Dr dinosaur it suggests they'll be on a program, which is a Medicaid funded program this would be state dollars only. I'm not sure what you're reading, but just for for I wanted to keep. If they thought it was okay I wanted to keep this reference to Dr dinosaur because I think it's helpful to the rest of us and understanding what's contemplated. Don, I was looking forward to having some creative name but that makes a lot of sense. So that so yes open to other suggestions but that's why we like Dr dinosaur like. As used in the section the term Vermont residents who have an immigration status for which Medicaid coverage is not available includes migrant workers who are employed in seasonal occupations in the state. That had been something that was a priority for the House committee the health care committee, and then it requires the agency of human services and instead of saying requires them to provide Dr dinosaur because as we discussed that in operation would not be quite shall provide hospital medical dental and prescription drug coverage which is all of the coverage in the Dr dinosaur program to the following categories of Vermont residents who have an immigration status for which Medicaid coverage is not available, and who are otherwise uninsured. So this is children under 19 years of age whose household income does not exceed 317% of the federal poverty level, and pregnant individuals whose household income does not exceed 213% of the federal poverty level for coverage during their pregnancy and for 60 days postpartum. And so this description here of of who is eligible and the income levels are aligned with what is offered in the Dr dinosaur program. So the incomes are 312% with a 5% disregard that's how we get to the 317 and 208% with a 5% disregard that's how we get to the 2013 for pregnant individuals. And it allows AHS to adopt rules under the Vermont Administrative Procedures Act carry out the purposes of the section. And then the remaining provisions are making conforming changes to use that new terminology and the new location where the language would be codified. So it still has 1.4 million in one time funds to the agency of human services and FY 22 for grants or reimbursements or both to healthcare providers for delivering healthcare services during FY 22 to children and pregnant individuals who and instead of saying are undocumented immigrants, we say who have an immigration status for which Medicaid coverage is not available. And I want to pause there for a moment as well I should have mentioned under the undocumented immigrant piece. Using that terminology diva had concerns that there were other types of folks who were not eligible for Medicaid because of their immigration status, but we're not undocumented undocumented immigrants per se and these are things like I'm not going to get the numbers right but the H one agricultural worker visa program, those people are in the country legally but they are not eligible for Medicaid because of their that is not an immigration status that makes someone eligible for Medicaid. And that was a big part of moving away from this undocumented immigrant terminology and referring instead to immigration status is for which Medicaid cover just not available. Then we so it was still now back to this 1.4 million and FY 22. It's also for grants to Vermont organizations that work with members of and I kept this language here for months undocumented immigrant community, because it still seemed reflective of the types of organizations that you would be looking for but I'm open to other language there, or with members of the healthcare provider community to provide outreach and information about opportunities for children and pregnant individuals in Vermont to and changing this language, have an immigration status for which Medicaid coverage is not available to access health care services at lower no cost in FY 22 and thereafter, and implementing the technological and operational processes necessary for diva to administer the coverage for Vermont residents to have an immigration status for which Medicaid coverage is not available as set forth in this recodified section beginning on July 1 2022. And then, in section three still asking for this estimate but calling this Dr dinosaur like coverage rather than dinosaur cover Dr dinosaur coverage expansion. And so requiring a chest to provide information on the estimated FY 23 costs of providing coverage to Vermont residents who have an immigration status for which Medicaid cover does not available pursuant to 33 vs a 2091 beginning on July 1 22 as part of the agency's FY 23 budget presentation to the various committees. And then, in the effective date section section two is the same, or second, subsection a is the same subsection be again making this language change, and the codification change, keeping the language about subject to appropriations for the purpose. And then renaming the bill and I'll put this in proper format if it's an amendment, but renaming the bill to an act relating to expanding coverage for spending eligibility for Dr dinosaur like coverage to all income eligible children and pregnant individuals regardless of immigration status. Perfect. Yeah, and with the explanations going forward and that there is time here for some fiscal analysis it doesn't go into effect right away so that that's helpful. And, and just in terms of the administration of this that was it was, which was a question that I was going to ask. I just, I just have to share with folks because this brings back so many memories to me about my work with migrant workers, years and years ago, and have continued somewhat but in establishing just a migrant care program for kids but a family clinic and going around and taking people to the hospital and then accessing a physician or to to provide immunizations and take care of kids and families, and we established a clinic for these people and today that clinic has expanded from one area farming community area to cover. I think it's the whole county, a huge county in New York but I'm. So, this could be the beginning of something good is what I'm saying that never know. Any questions for Jen. Senator Senator Cummings does. Okay, can't see you. Okay, I can see me, and I can see you. Vermont resident. And that term going to give us any issues if you're talking about people in on a farm workers visa. They're here for a month, two months to harvest apples. I'm just standing from diva that their rules address Vermont residency and are fairly broad in their, in their interpretation of it, while still requiring some kind of a physical presence here. So they're later on in the bill you said there is the seasonal folks and so, right that's right here in the beginning it includes migrant workers who are employed in seasonal occupations. So, they are considered by Medicaid residents. I'm trying to write that's my understanding that they and they showed me in their health benefit eligibility and enrollment rule there's a quite extensive. Yeah, description and definition. Okay. Good question Senator Cummings any other questions. So if you have a question, please speak up. Okay, this is Ruth. I had sent Jen a few comments last night and I can go through those. There were three to pretty minor and one that I needed Jen's advice on.  Jen, would you know the spot in the bill. I think the first one is right here so I figured I just leave this language right up. Yeah, the first one is right there to just add seasonal and agricultural occupations in the state and the reason is I'm from Addison County and we have lots of dairy farms and dairy farm workers are not generally seasonal, because you have to milk cows all year. So I wanted to add that to make it clear it covered those workers and the coverage, but it says includes my, the word includes means that they're that it goes beyond that so. That's meant as an addition to, you know, to the extent that there would be a question about residents that migrant workers who are employed in seasonal occupations would be considered. Fit this definition so we could certainly say includes agricultural workers and migrant workers who are employed in seasonal occupations in the state if that's a concern or of interest otherwise I don't. And this underlying language includes the people that you're talking about who are here year round. Okay, I understand that that includes now is about the temporary state status of rather than that. That's fine. And then further down in paragraph two, I believe on page two that and this is about the outreach and information and I just was hoping we could add culturally and linguistically appropriate outreach and education. Just to make sure that you know when it's necessary that it would be done in Spanish or whatever language is appropriate. This is often a challenge for state government and so wanting to make sure that that is covered. This became a really big issue last year at the early part of the pandemic when a lot of the information about coven was not translated yet. And yeah, it's an and Department of Health we added language and some of our bills around this. So how would you say that Jen is it is should be related to culture and language or simply language. Culture probably is important. Yeah, I think Senator Hardy's recommendation of culturally and linguistically appropriate outreach and information seems to work. That's what the committee is interested in. Is anyone on the committee not interested in adding that. Okay, so let's do it. Okay, I put that in my actual draft. Thank you. And then the final one and this was what I needed your advice on was some kind of guarantee or at least assurance of confidentiality. This was something that we had included in the bill that we did about the stimulus equity payments last year that started in Senate Agriculture Committee, and was a big concern about that to make sure that this information would again be shared with the federal government and cause, you know, deportation or, or any problems like that so I don't know specifically where it makes sense or what the language should be I believe, Michael Grady had something in that bill. But Jen I would defer to you on your expertise on that. Looking up I know there are some fairly significant confidentiality provisions around Medicaid itself. And I just wanted to look at there is confidentiality of Medicaid applications and records and I know we talked about this not being Medicaid like it. But I'm, I'm, let me check in with the diva folks I think maybe just a cross reference to this provision saying she'll be subject to the same confidentiality provisions as in this existing section 33 vs a 1902 a might be sufficient we could put that right in the statutory section creating this program. And then if you wanted we could also put something in that outreach. I think that is a very good addition. I think there's something like and the confidentiality of information submitted to obtain coverage something like that I'll look at that does that sound like what you're looking for Senator Hardy. I think so. I just want to make sure we're just able to give people assurances that this wouldn't lead to them or family members or separation from their kids or anything like that that is, you know, a very real and understandable fear and so anything we can do to make those assurances so if you want to check in with diva that would be good, but just want to make sure we're explicit about it. I will. Yes, so that that would be my thought let me check in with them, but I'm thinking adding something in section, I'll put the language back up and show you where I'm thinking. So I'm thinking, potentially putting in something like a new see here that says the agency shall adhere to the same confidentiality provisions as in section 1902 a of this chapter, and then putting something here with the grants. So we already have the culturally and linguistically appropriate going in here before outreach. And then adding something right here at the end that would be, you know, and the confidentiality of any information submitted to obtain this coverage, something like that. So, so Jen. Regardless, even though this is a Dr. Doris or like program or and as with any health care. This is HIPAA protected. Well, this isn't that this is, I don't know how to answer that question this isn't treatment. So it's there are confidentiality provisions that apply but I'm not sure the extent to which it's specifically HIPAA in an application for coverage so I so I don't know how to answer that question. Okay, so forget I asked it, but I think that we should add the pieces in that we've been talking about here. Okay, I'm thinking maybe just to say in the confidentiality of information provided by applicants, something like that, applicants and enrollees I guess, right. For regarding at like, okay, yes, I will work on that language in consultation with the diva folks. Thank you. Sure, thanks for raising it. Yeah, no those are good. Those are good things to add into the bill. So, let's do this then let's, this is Senator Hooker. Did you have a question. Yes, thank you. Just a small point with regard to the renaming. Expanding eligibility, but is this not a new program would it be more like just plain eligibility right eligibility rather than expanding since it's not really. You're talking about the new title. Correct. I think that's a good point. Yep, I will take it out. So eligibility for Dr. dinosaur like coverage for all income eligible children and pregnant individuals regardless of immigration status. I think that thank you. That's a good. Yeah, so keep your eyes open, go through the bill again and general bring back language for us and this bill we will look at tomorrow I think rather than Friday to try to get it. We'll get it out along with H 210 of 46 and 104 and anything we have that spills over spills over to Friday and pretty sure 120 will be. We'll, we'll, we'll talk about it tomorrow I think that we'll probably finish it on on Friday, just just the timing of it all. Okay. Thank you. That's great. Thank you for making huge progress. Jen, so let's take a look at the budget memo yet again. And I did make a, I forgot, I forgot something so you'll have to help us. Okay. So I put that and I wasn't sure I put it in under additional proposals for consideration because I don't think you have a dollar. Unless you have a dollar amount. No, we don't. All right, well I will just for now put the language up. And then when we have it finalized I can send it to Nellie. So the only two changes, I think since we looked at it earlier that as I've highlighted them to make it easy to find for additional one time appropriations we have $25,000 to the Vermont donor milk center to provide Vermont infants and their families with access to pasteurized donor human milk which is the term that they use that look like what folks were expecting. That looks good to me. Thank you. Sure. And then down here under additional proposals for consideration. I put in consider increasing Medicaid reimbursement rates for primary care services to 105% of the Medicare rate. So that's been a that's been an ongoing issue. And it does help to promote primary care in the state that. But the question is the what is the, what's the fiscal note on that one. So we're not adding in the fiscal note we're just putting it in as a recommendation and if we can find the dollars for that I think that would go a long way, with primary care docs and others, APRNs perhaps as well, but in the state and actually attracting more so that is anyone not want to put that one in. Let me know now. Nolan, you have your hand you know want to put it in. Go ahead I can't see you so you have to speak up. So I did a little bit of work for this for Senator Hooker. And I did have an estimate. If you want me to talk about absolutely. I'm just reading my notes here so diva does have a program where they attest that the providers board certified primary care provider so that's an enhanced primary care program. These providers already receive 100% of Medicare for their identified primary care codes. So to increase. And so this is this is this is so to increase the rates for primary care codes for these providers to 105% would be a $1 million gross. Now the reason I highlight that is because it would be increasing it for people who are, I've been identified as a primary care provider versus just using a primary care code. So if you did the, if you just increased all, if you just increase it to 105% for primary care codes, regardless of whether people are part of this primary care so they might be like a non primary care person using a primary care code, then that would be a $1 million gross. So I think that if you one way to, to specification you could say is increased primary care codes to 105% for those board certified primary care providers who are participating in any hands and medicaid enhanced primary care program. And that would be a million so you could be specific, the specific or you can. So that's just. It was based on the 2020 primary care rates. So probably a little bit more than the $1 million, but that's your sense. Is there a way do you think there's a way to have both of those in. So an or as an or I mean one's a one's an umbrella the $8 million and then the other one is greater specificity. I think that if you say increased primary care rates for primary, you know, 205%, just leave it as it is. Okay, it's unclear. Yes, could be as much as a million $8 million. If you want it to be clear, you could be more specific. Yeah, I think it does make sense to leave it as it is because then there's some decision making that can go on based on what funds might be available.  Thanks centerline. I think I actually think we should be more specific if we're going to include this because our goal is to help primary care providers themselves. These codes could be used by any kind of provider just that is doing something that would be coded as a primary care. That is my understanding if I'm understanding Nolan correctly so it could be like a podiatrist, not to become podiatrist, but who might be doing something that would be coded as primary care. But if our goal is to really focus more dollars to primary care providers, then it would seem to me that we would want to be specific about it. Then it's cheaper also but but that's I mean, this is benign we're just including it in a list to consider so if we but you're right if we put it in and it's and it's with specificity. It is cheaper. So then when the question is asked of Nolan, how much is this going to cost us Oh, it's a million dollars maybe that's actually, and you can be more specific you can be a million dollars gross 440,000 general funds. Yes. Okay, so. Okay, so. Senator Taranzini any thoughts on this one. Senator Hooker. He's got his guys thumbs up. Senator Cummings. Like the more limited. Okay, let's do it then. Are you looking for this and you're still in the additional proposals for consideration or do you want to do an additional one time appropriation dollar amount. I think it's in our wish. It's in the additional proposals. Okay, I think it has to be at this point. And so what was the language for the narrower. And again, and just to clarify this is my I'm explaining in the way that was explained to me so I hope I did it justice to explain that maybe you'll hear from you. I'm sure you did the medical society doing actually but I did, you know, 105% of Medicare for bird board certified primary care providers who participate in Medicaid's enhanced primary care program or something like that. Can you say that again. To 100 105% of Medicare for birth board certified primary care providers who participate in Medicaid's enhanced primary care program. And maybe this is listening and she'll send me an email clarifying a better way of saying that but I was just I was just asking to have you repeat it because Jen is typing away. Entering data. That's great. Okay. And then you could say it's a million dollars estimated to be approximately a million dollars gross or 440,000. Well, see that's 2020 rate so to be a little bit more, but so I just say approximately a million dollars gross or $440,000 general funds based on 2020 Medicare rates or so, estimated to be something like that. And then I can work with Stephanie if they were to do that on a more specific number. Okay. Well it's on the list and now we have an understanding of what it is and I guess the Nolan. Does the word does the phrase board certified come to you from diva or do they need to be board certified, I guess my question. Right I think that's quite a subset. Yeah that is you're muted Nolan, if they're participating in the. Yeah yeah so what you exact sorry I apologize I would mute it. I think you're about to go down the road you can just say physicians participating in the enhanced primary care program because. So when you say physicians do you really mean physicians or because we had primary care providers and that's. Okay, in Medicaid enhanced primary care program. And yes. Okay, do we keep them as primary care providers or it doesn't even need to say that if they're participating in the Medicaid enhanced primary care program. I'm guessing that if I think test that they are board certified so I think you're right you don't have to say that you can just say participate in. All right, but Senator lines do you want to keep it as primary care providers who participate in the Medicaid enhanced primary care program. Yes. Okay. Okay, so. What does it look like. Yes. All right, let me put this back up for you. Sorry school vacation week. Kids are coming this afternoon. Goodie. The last two days. They're going to have fun playing out in the snow, Senator. All right. So here's how I revise that consider increasing Medicaid reimbursement rates to 105% of the Medicare rate for primary care providers to participate in the Medicaid enhanced primary care program. The estimated cost is approximately 1 million gross 440,000 state based on 2020 Medicare rates. Okay. Committee. Senator Taranzini, Senator Hooker, Senator Cummings. Okay. Senator Hardy, I know you're fine with it. I think. Yep, looks good to me. Okay. All right, so are we fine with our memo. This memo has taken its toll of time. Will it be posted on our page or what's the yeah. I think so. I mean, I would, my plan, I didn't want to send, keep sending. You know, Yeah, I think you probably need to get it off versions of the tropes and then. Yes, but if you're good, I will. Should do we need to vote on it? Yeah, I think we just, you know, we don't usually vote on it. We just all agree that this is the memo we'd like to send. So is there anyone who is not interested in Senate sending the memo. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know if anyone would take a vote. I guess. We're good. Thank you for all your hard work on this. It's been a, it's been, this has been a, this has been good work. Do you want me to send it to you to send to appropriations? Do you want me to send it to appropriations and copy you? How do you want to do it? How do we usually do that? I don't know. Just send it. Okay. Send it on my behalf and on the behalf of the committee. We'll do. All right. We're good. Okay. And it's the precursor to all of these money bills that we're sending out. So they'll get a flavor for what, what's coming. All right. So tomorrow I'm going to work with Nellie a little bit on restructuring the agenda, but we will start out with. As to 10. And I know that there are people who keep asking to testify. So I keep getting. People asking if they can testify and. The answer is we'll, we'll make a decision based on the time that we have. But certainly anyone who is very much interested in as to 10, because it is an important bill. Should please submit some written testimony. And if you have suggestions for improving the bill. That's good. But I also want to. I want to make sure that the bill is. Warn us that, you know, we want this bill to go forward. And we're going to, if, if there are differences that the house can't tolerate. We'll have a conference committee. So we do want to make sure that the bill is as. As effective as we can get it. So. We'll keep working on that one. But what we're going to do is. We'll have the board meeting on the 4 at H1 04 H46. S one 20. H4 30. We're all on our agenda for tomorrow. So we're good. I'll see you all.