Us: “You can’t have four seasons in one week.” Missouri: “Hold my beer…”
11 Saturday Mar 2017
Posted in Uncategorized
11 Saturday Mar 2017
Posted in Uncategorized
10 Friday Mar 2017
Posted in Uncategorized
Tags
I got the missive below in my email yesterday – Donald Trump’s first effort to come out swinging in favor of Paul Ryan’s Dump and Dupe Obamacare replacement. Notice that the staffers doing the President’s thinking White House’s healthcare PR outreach don’t have much to say about Trumpcare (a.k.a. Ryancare, the American Health Care Act or the AHCA) – which is understandable since the only parties that don’t hold Trumpcare in contempt are the bill’s two sponsors and Paul Ryan – and evidently Donald Trump who tweeted that it’s “wonderful” regardless of the fact that it violates every promise he made to his supporters about replacing Obamacare with something better.
So what do you do when you haven’t really got anything nice to say about the program you’re offering as a replacement for Obamacare? Why you keep on trashing Obamacare. You blast out emails like the one below – which I have presented below in sections annotated with italicized interpositions pointing out the more obvious lies and half-truths:
It’s been seven years since Obamacare was passed, and now, more than ever, we are seeing the harmful effects of this disastrous law.
Obamacare (ACA) insured 20 million previously uninsured people through Medicaid expansion and in the private individual health care market through the exchanges. It enacted a tax on those earning over $200,000/yr that shored up the Medicare system, extending its life by four years at this point – a gain that will be lost if the ACA is repealed in favor of the AHCA which eliminates that high-income tax. Some harmful effects!
Obamacare has led to higher costs and fewer health insurance options for millions of hard-working Americans. Independent analysis found 41 states faced higher average healthcare deductibles last year, with 17 states facing double-digit rate increases. Nearly one in five Americans have only one insurer offering Obamacare exchange plans.
In just the past year, Obamacare premiums have increased by 25 percent on the typical plan and coverage choices have dropped by 28 percent as insurers have left the market.
Obamacare did not negatively affect costs for those who receive insurance through their employers; in fact, it slowed the increasing price trajectory in the pre-Obamacare insurance industry. Premiums were rising by an average of 10% a year before Obamacare – and those who had serious illnesses could be charged considerably more – a practice that Obamacare ended. While premiums for those on the exchanges did increase considerably in 2017, the increase was offset by increased subsidies based on income – and consumers were able to use the exchanges to find competitive alternative insurers.
Things are only getting worse. This past year, nearly 20 million American citizens opted not to get healthcare insurance, with 6.5 million paying the penalty and millions more asking for a hardship exemption from the penalty.
Over 48 million people were uninsured before the major provisions of Obamacare took effect. Those with preexisting conditions can get affordable insurance and don’t face lifetime caps thanks to Obamacare. Seems like things have gotten better, not worse.
A higher penalty for refusing to buy insurance, along with more generous subsidies would have brought more younger, healthier people into the exchanges, which would, in turn, have incentivized more insurers to remain in the exchange. Republicans, however, refused to consider fixing these obvious problems. Congress could still decide to fix Obamacare instead of replacing it with the vastly inferior AHCA – a much worse system that will cost more and provide less – or nothing in many cases. But, given the GOP adherence to ideology over pragmatic policy, it’s not likely that a Republican-dominated congress would ever act to make the system better instead of worse
Americans were promised that Obamacare would bring down healthcare costs — that promise was broken. Americans were promised they could keep their healthcare plans under Obamacare – that promise was broken. Americans were promised that Obamacare would not raise taxes on the middle-class – that promise was broken.
The American people want change and President Donald J. Trump promised to repeal and replace this disaster. That is exactly what the President is working with Congress to achieve. Step up and support the repeal and replacement of Obamacare.
Obamacare did slow the growth of healthcare costs as we noted above. Its subsidies made insurance affordable for many in the individual market. Politifact rated the claim that Obamacare raised taxes on the middle class “mostly false,” noting that a few minor associated taxes, like those on tanning salons, might affect the middle class.
Obamacare had problems to be sure – but in most instances they could easily be fixed if Republican in congress were willing to work in good faith with Democrats to insure the program’s success.
So what about Trumpcare? Estimates are that it could leave more than 15,000 people who are currently insured under Obamacare without coverage, cause premiums to raise for even those in the employer-based market, and perhaps ultimately destroy the entire individual market. Pretty clear why the White House doesn’t want to talk about Trumpcare, but prefers to resort to the type of lies about Obamacare they’ve been peddling for the past seven years. Nancy LeTourneau best describes what we get in Trump’s surrender to the Republican ideology that he has ipso facto endorsed – despite his earlier promises to do the opposite:
This embrace of ideology over competence is exactly how we’ve arrived at a post-truth era. An abandonment of facts/data coupled with emotional appeals (often based on lies) have been the tools used to promote ideology. The Republican Party remains devoid of any principles based on the pragmatism of what works. It is possible that, in their zeal, they will be able to destroy Obamacare and maybe even pass their massive tax cuts for the most wealthy among us — all while ignoring the facts about what a disaster those policies will be.
*Formatting revised for readability, text with links to White House Web Page eliminated) (3/11/2017; 11:31)
10 Friday Mar 2017
Posted in social media
From Charles P. Pierce at Esquire:
Paul Ryan Doesn’t Know How Insurance Works
But he’s got his sleeves rolled up, so watch out.
[….]
I had thought that the burlesque comic opera The Agony of Paul Ryan, Genius had closed on the night in 2012 when Joe Biden laughed the zombie-eyed granny starver off the stage during their debate. (That was the night that Ryan demonstrated that he knew it snowed in Afghanistan in the winter.) But I had not reckoned with his many fanboys among the kept political press. He ascended to become Speaker of the House, largely because nobody else wanted the job after John Boehner got kicked to the curb by the crazy people.Now he is out there pimping the dungheap that is the new healthcare reform bill as though Mitch and Murray from downtown were lighting his pants on fire. He even lost the suit coat and broke out the PowerPoint on Thursday. It was like watching something on cable access late at night, or a flop-sweaty rookie substitute teacher, and it was hilarious—except for the parts where people will lose their health insurance and die, of course. And this is what he said and, peace be unto Dave Barry, I am not making it up, either:
Paul Ryan said that insurance cannot work if healthy people have to pay more to subsidize the sick.
This is literally how all insurance works. If someone’s house burns down, some of your fire insurance money goes to help that person rebuild. If someone gets sick, some of your premium, healthy person, goes toward that person’s coverage. Increasingly, I have come to believe that Paul Ryan is a not particularly bright creature from another world…
Paul Ryan doesn’t actually believe that. He believes that his party’s right wingnut base doesn’t know any better. And probably a number of members of his caucus.
You Tweet it like this, you own it:
Rep. Vicky Hartzler @RepHartzler
#Obamacare has failed. I’m looking forward to repealing & replacing w/ a patient-centered solution.
[….]
2:08 PM – 9 Mar 2017
Some of the responses:
@RepHartzler #fakenews, you’re looking forward to Paul Ryan’s #Wealthcare that’s just a tax cut for the wealthy.
@RepHartzler You have failed. You have failed to listen to your voters. #wewillremember #doyourjob #trumpcare #crookedVicky #neverTrump
@RepHartzler prove that your solutions would provide more coverage at better rates than existing plan.
Maybe it’ll eventually trickle down.
@RepHartzler Kicking people off healthcare makes you happy?
[….] @RepHartzler Yeah Vick, kicking ppl off of healthcare makes you happy??
Evidently.
@RepHartzler I’ll be glad when we can vote you out in 2018.
There aren’t going to be any open public town halls in the 4th Congressional District with the current representative anytime soon. Like probably never again.
Previously:
Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): just checking (February 20, 2017)
Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): Well, you asked. (February 21, 2017)
You think Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) has been smiling a lot this week? (February 23, 2017)
Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): just a slight indication of what an open public town hall in the district would be like (February 26, 2017)
Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): before that Russian thing happened today (March 2, 2017)
Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): get used to it (March 8, 2017)
09 Thursday Mar 2017
Posted in Missouri General Assembly, Missouri House
Tags
benefits, General Assembly, HB 1194 & 1193, Jason Chipman, living wage, Minimum wage, missouri, screwing working people
In 2015 the City of St. Louis, by ordinance, established a higher minimum wage than the state. A few people took exception to that. On February 28, 2017 the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the city can have a higher minimum wage than the one established by the state.
The right wingnut controlled Missouri House has a low opinion of anyone increasing the minimum wage and acted with alacrity as only they can:
HB 1194
Prohibits political subdivisions from requiring a minimum wage that exceeds the requirements of state law
Sponsor: Chipman, Jason (120)
Proposed Effective Date: Emergency Clause
LR Number: 2328H.02P
Last Action: 03/09/2017 – Reported to the Senate and First Read (S)
Bill String: HCS HBs 1194 & 1193
[….]
3/01/2017 H 793 Introduced and Read First Time (H)
3/02/2017 H 822 Read Second Time (H)
3/02/2017 H 832 Referred: Rules – Administrative Oversight(H)
3/06/2017 Public Hearing Completed (H)
3/06/2017 Executive Session Completed (H)
3/06/2017 HCS Voted Do Pass (H)
3/06/2017 H 868 HCS Reported Do Pass (H) – AYES: 10 NOES: 4 PRESENT: 0
3/08/2017 H 897 Taken Up
3/08/2017 H 897 Laid Over (H)
3/08/2017 H 905 Taken Up
3/08/2017 H 911 Title of Bill – Agreed To
3/08/2017 H 911 – 912 HCS Adopted (H) – AYES: 109 NOES: 44 PRESENT: 0
3/08/2017 H 912 Perfected with Amendments (H) – HA 1 adopted
3/09/2017 Taken Up
3/09/2017 Third Read and Passed (H)
3/09/2017 Emergency Clause Adopted (H)
3/09/2017 Reported to the Senate and First Read (S)
Well, that was fast. Ten days.
The details:
FIRST REGULAR SESSION
[PERFECTED]
HOUSE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NOS. 1194 & 1193 [pdf]
99TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY2328H.02P D. ADAM CRUMBLISS, Chief Clerk
AN ACT
To repeal sections 285.055, 288.062, and 290.528, RSMo, and to enact in lieu thereof two new sections relating to the minimum wage, with an emergency clause.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:
[….]
2. No political subdivision shall establish, mandate, or otherwise require an employer to provide to an employee:
(1) A minimum or living wage rate; or
(2) Employment benefits
that exceed state laws, rules, or regulations. Sections 290.500 to 290.530 shall preempt and nullify all political subdivision ordinances, rules, and regulations currently in effect or later enacted relating to the establishment or enforcement of a minimum or living wage or the provisions of employment benefits.
[….]
[emphasis in original]
Yep, this from the people’s worker’s party.
Previously:
Missouri Supreme Court: St. Louis can indeed establish a higher minimum wage (February 28, 2017)
08 Wednesday Mar 2017
Posted in campaign finance, Missouri Governor
A brand spanking new nonprofit corporation in Missouri:
Name: A New Missouri, Inc.
Address: 105 E High Street
Suite 100
Jefferson City, MO 65101
Type: Nonprofit Corporation
Charter No.: N000704138
Domesticity: Domestic
Registered Agent: Stuerman, Jeff
Status: Good Standing
Date Formed: 2/5/2017
In the filing:
The Corporation shall be organized for the purpose of conducting activities allowed pursuant to the Act, including, but not limited to, the advancement of social welfare by promoting ideas, policies and/or legislation to create more jobs, higher pay, safer streets, better schools, and more, for all Missourians.
You mean like Kansas? Just asking.
You think the “and more” includes better streets and safer schools? Just asking.
They left out mom, apple pie, truth, justice, and the American way. Could be an oversight. Nah.
Well, isn’t this special?:
March 8, 2017 7:00 AM
Nonprofit linked to Greitens raises new questions about ‘dark money,’ ethics
By Jason Hancock
[….]
In the shadow of the Missouri Capitol, just a block from the governor’s mansion, sits the headquarters of a just-started nonprofit called A New Missouri Inc.
[….]
…its focus will be advocating for the governor and his agenda, a Greitens adviser said this week. And because it’s a nonprofit, A New Missouri can accept unlimited contributions and won’t be required to disclose who is giving it money.
[….]
The reviews are coming in:
Tony Messenger @tonymess
Astounding level of secrecy and obfuscation of ethics laws here by @EricGreitens. This is the very definition of what he campaigned against.
[….]
2:37 PM – 8 Mar 2017
“…This is the very definition of what he campaigned against.” The mistake was in believing him then.
Previously:
Campaign Finance: Oh, like they couldn’t come up with another $25,000.00? (July 18, 2016)
Campaign Finance: attempting to follow the money… (October 15, 2016)
08 Wednesday Mar 2017
Posted in social media
Tags
4th Congressional District, ACA, Misouri, Obamacare, social media, Trumpcare, Twitter, Vicky Hartzler
The republicans in Congress have revealed Trumpcare. They’ve laid an egg.
Via Twitter on Monday, from Representative Vicky Hartzler (r):
Rep. Vicky Hartzler @RepHartzler
Folks all across my district are being hindered by high insurance costs. We can and should do better. #RepealAndReplace
5:29 PM – 6 Mar 2017
Some of the responses:
@RepHartzler If u support the GOP draft bill I just reviewed, u r soooo out of a job come Nov 6, 2018 and it’ll be Hell between now n then
@RepHartzler If that bill is what u meant by “access to health care”, u r totally out of touch w/ your constituents. Oh wait no town halls
@RepHartzler With respect, ma’am, how would you know if you never meet with people from your district?
@RepHartzler I’m in your district, and you have never held a town hall or spent time with your constituents that I can tell.
Hey @RepHartzler – how does screwing them over with HSA plans help them out at all? Oh right, it doesn’t. The replacement is a J-O-K-E
@RepHartzler Meet with the “folks” in your district sometime, you liar.
@RepHartzler do you think HSA’s are a fair or realistic solution for the people of Cass County? Do you know our average household income?
@RepHartzler Better? The new GOP bill favors young and wealthy over elderly and poor. How is that better? Hope you’re ready for a fight.
@RepHartzler, this plan will let ppl die and make rural hospitals fail.
@RepHartzler How will insurance costs go down for those who need it most?
@RepHartzler Once again you leave out the people in your district that ACA helped. LIES MATTER! Read your Bible about them
@RepHartzler Where is the CBO score, which shows cost and how many will lose their insurance and lives? You are not a Christian
@RepHartzler you sure don’t know your district
@RepHartzler The people of Boonville would like to invite you for a townhall on the subject. You name time and place.
That ain’t gonna happen.
Previously:
Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): just checking (February 20, 2017)
Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): Well, you asked. (February 21, 2017)
You think Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) has been smiling a lot this week? (February 23, 2017)
Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): just a slight indication of what an open public town hall in the district would be like (February 26, 2017)
Rep. Vicky Hartzler (r): before that Russian thing happened today (March 2, 2017)
07 Tuesday Mar 2017
Posted in Uncategorized
Yesterday Republicans finally released their plan to dump Obamacare while duping Americans about how badly it’s going to hurt. And how badly will it hurt? Paul Waldman offers a quick summary of the most salient parts of this mess – in short, it will cut benefits for older and poorer people, cost them more, undermine the insurance market, undo Medicaid expansion, cut Planned Parenthood funding and drain Medicare sooner – but, hey, it will also give a big tax cut to the wealthy so it’s all good right?
And then there’s the question of its cost relative to the number of people it will deprive of insurance. A question that we can’t answer because Paul Ryan is intent on getting it out of committee and up for a vote before the Congressoinal Budget Office (CBO) has a chance to score it. It’s that bad.
Paul Krugman explains just how bad the GOP Dump and Dupe plan really is:
For the GOP proposal basically accepts the logic of Obamacare. It retains insurer regulation to prevent exclusion of people with preexisting conditions. It imposes a penalty on those who don’t buy insurance while healthy. And it offers tax credits to help people buy insurance. Conservatives calling the plan Obamacare 2.0 definitely have a point.
But a better designation would be Obamacare 0.5, because it’s really about replacing relatively solid pillars with half-measures, severely and probably fatally weakening the whole structure.
First, the individual mandate – already too weak, so that too many healthy people opt out – is replaced by a penalty imposed if and only if the uninsured decide to enter the market later. This wouldn’t do much.
Second, the ACA subsidies, which are linked both to income and to the cost of insurance, are replaced by flat tax credits which would be worth much less to lower-income Americans, the very people most likely to need help buying insurance.
Taken together, these moves would almost surely lead to a death spiral. …
Nothing here that’s too surprising. The GOP boxed itself into a corner, braying continuously about the horror that was Obamacare – which, in fact, incorporated many ideas devised by conservative thinkers at the Heritage Institute Foundation. Obamacare pumped all the workable ideas out of the conservative idea well. Which why the repeal part of replace and repeal hasn’t gotten much attention from Republicans apart from bland assurances that all will be well. Of course, now that they have to come up with something, they don’t want to be left with the mess repeal and replace will inevitably create, so they’re twisting and turning and hoping to placate their base with dump and dupe.
Lots of observers think that this particular iteration of dump and dupe will die in the Senate if it even makes it that far – the super rightwing House Freedom Caucus rather emphatically doesn’t buy into the replace/dupe part of the exercise – they want straight out repeal or nothing. That assessment has been cautiously echoed by Missouri’s always cautious Roy Blunt, a junior member of the Senate leadership group:
“Well, I haven’t had time to look at it in great depth yet, so we’ll see,” Blunt said of the plan on KMBZ local radio Tuesday. “What I don’t like is it may not be a plan that gets a majority votes and let’s us move on. Because, we can’t stay where we are with the plan we’ve got now.”
Blunt said any final plan would need to be negotiated.
“I think the nucleus of the plan is clearly there and the President says it’s negotiable and so do House members,” he said. “So, I’ll be interested to be a part of that negotiation as we work toward a majority in the House and Senate that puts a bill on the President’s desk.”
There are two things we can unpack from this statement that tells us a lot about Roy Blunt:
1. Blunt’s priority is, as usual, the political ramifications – he doesn’t really care too much about the bill itself. He just wants to get something done so that he and his fellow corporate shills can get back to doing their real work serving the interests of the folks who write the campaign checks. He knows, though, that Republicans need to check this rather tiresome box off – the GOP’ has demonized Obamacare and promised to repeal it for so long that they have to deliver something or eat some very public crow.
2. Blunt tells us that he believes that “the nucleus of the plan is clearly there” and we can’t stay “where we are with the plan we’ve got now.” But if Obamacare is really so bad, why preserve its structure, the nucleus, I presume, while making it less effective and hurting thousands of his constituents in the process? Could it be that he just doesn’t care what it does or doesn’t do for Missourians?
Roy wants to be part of the process, the “negotiation,” going forward. And that fact should scare us. We know who Blunt is in congress to serve. And it isn’t those folks who finally got insurance under Obamacare. If the new dump and dupe plan is bad, its next iterations will probably be even worse, and we’ll have Roy Blunt and his cronies to thank for it.
07 Tuesday Mar 2017
Posted in Uncategorized
I got a newsletter from State Rep. Stacy Newman (D-87) which noted that when recent anti-abortion measures have been debated in the House, Republicans have come up with some interesting comparisons – abortion as slavery, or, alternatively, the Holocaust.
Ironically, the politicians making these ugly comparisons consider themselves to be conservatives. And conservatives have a really bad record when it comes to racism and anti-semitism.
Conservatives, for example, have defended effort to reanimate the revisionist history of the 1920s that tried to paint slavery as benign. Just today, African-American conservative HUD secretary Ben Carson publicly described slaves as “immigrants” willing to work for “low” wages. Just consider the ongoing controversy over Texas conservatives’ efforts to foist off on the state’s school children history textbooks that have invented an entirely new lexicon of euphemisms to describe the various practices associated with slavery.
Then there are the Holocaust deniers. While it’s not necessary to deny the Holocaust to be conservative, Holocaust deniers do tend to go to roost on the right – they seem to feel comfortable there for some reason. Just consider some of the more rabid denizens of Trumplandia – whom few in the Missouri conservative world seem willing to denounce. Their chosen champion, Donald Trump, couldn’t even bring himself to name Jews as victims of the Holocaust when he offered the now obligatory presidential Holocaust remembrance statement. That may not be denialism per se, but it’s sure flirting with it.
Interesting how conservatives present slavery and the Holocaust as really bad things when they can use them as labels to try to discredit the entirely legal exercise of choice by women who have every right, legal and moral, to make decisions about how their bodies will be used. But when acknowledging the evils of slavery or the Holocaust focuses unwanted attention on the similarity between conservative policy preferences and the the mindset that led to those horrific events, many on the right try to difuse the impact by pretending that slavery was a bed of roses and the Holocaust wasn’t really about Jews – and maybe it didn’t even happen at all.
*Last sentence edited slightly for clarity.
06 Monday Mar 2017
Posted in Resist
06 Monday Mar 2017
Posted in Uncategorized
Great article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch today about the Christian anti-abortion group, Thrive St. Louis, that has finagled its way into 75 public schools in the St. Louis area where it teaches a values-heavy version of sex education as part of a program titled Best Choice. I won’t go into the gory details – you can read them in the original article, but this snippet gives you an idea about how this group deals with the need to remain impartial when it goes about fulfilling the provisions of the Missouri law that mandate teaching abstinence (the Best Choice, get it?) as a preferred method of birth control:
Another activity to demonstrate the effects of having had sex with more than one person involves chewing cheese crackers and spitting them into a cup of water, which is then poured into another student’s cup. All the while, one student’s cup of water remains pure.
Slut-shaming, right? Which is not, as Leora Tanenbaum suggests, just “a catchy way to signify old-fashioned sexism,” but is a profoundly harmful approach to human sexuality for both boys and girls.
I know that there are lots of folks who might want their children to get this message along with the conservative Christian world-view that it reflects, but lots more don’t. Public school sex education must be factually correct and as neutral in its approach as is possible – even though ideologically driven legislators feel empowered to mandate the teaching of “preferred” sexual behaviors. Religious folks should be teaching their values at home.
Nor is the Thrive approach necessarily a very good way to insure adolescent abstinence. Parents who defend the program might want to take into consideration the fact that heavy-handed efforts to influence their children’s behavior might backfire. There are likely many reasons why abstinence programs don’t do much to dissuade kids from experimenting with sex, but trying to stack the deck in an obvious way definitely doesn’t help.
When I was in the sixth grade there was a law in my state (perhaps a federal law?) that mandated teaching about the evils of communism and the glories of capitalism. The result of the ham-fisted approach that was preferred? A few of my peers in the late sixties and early seventies ended up dedicated Maoists, quoting from the Chairman’s little Red Book. More of us, myself included, endorsed democratic socialism. I would probably never have become interested in the issues of distributive economics had lawmakers not decided that my little brain needed to be bent – hammered, actually – in what they believed to be the right direction. I should probably thank whoever was responsible for those inept educational modules.
Another example is provided by the efforts to combat drug abuse. All the overkill and false facts about how marijuana, for example, was the sure path to hard drugs and a life of squalor were obviously over the top – and all too often delivered by folks who had no qualms about several before-dinner martinis or a few too many beers on the weekend. Consequently, the ubiquitous anti-drug indoctrination programs only served to make even justified warnings about far more problematic drugs suspect to many young people. The final fillip: it now looks like marijuana will sooner or later become fully legal nationwide.
Get the point? Obvious propaganda rarely works and more often than not renders the purveyors of false or one-sided information suspect. To be effective you have to demonstrate that you deserve trust which means putting all the cards out on the table.
Of course there’s another dimension to the whole issue which is that while Missouri law mandates teaching abstinence as the preferred birth-control method, it doe not mandate that other methods be ignored. Quotes in the Post-Dispatch article imply that while Best Choice goes after the evils of unmarried sex like gangbusters, it does not deal with the full range of important sexual issues – the variety and relative effectiveness of birth control methods, gender identity issues, etc. Children in many St. Louis schools are being given incomplete, often harmful information that disrespects the values of many families. That’s not right.
And guess what? We’re paying with our tax dollars for this indoctrination program. Thrive can offer the Best Choice program to schools “free of charge” because it receives federal funding to do so. We’ve all heard about “faith-based” initiatives. Looks like maybe what we really need is a little more separation of church and state.