Hi again -
Another myth is in need of de-bunking this year. More scare tactics by the conservative side need to be clarified. I've heard a lot of hoopla about how many seats in the House and Senate are going to be open this year. They've made it sound like the Democrats have a lot of people retiring and the Republicans have none.
The truth is that it's about even - actually the Republicans have a few more.
Right now, the Senate has 59 Democratic Seats and 41 Republican Seats.
Here's the breakdown. Let's look at Senate Seats first.
Democrats retiring in 2010 are:
Chris Dodd from Connecticut
Ted Kaufman from Delaware
Roland Burris of Illinois
Evan Bayh of Indiana
Byron Dorgan of North Dakota
Republicans retiring in 2010 are:
George Le Mieux from Florida
Sam Brownback from Kansas
Jim Bunning of Kentucky
Kit Bond of Missouri
Judd Gregg of New Hampshire
George Voinovich of Ohio
Then there are the seats up for elections this year. This makes it even as there are 13 Democratic seats and 12 Republican seats up for re-election.
Democratic Seats up for re-election in 2010 are:
Blanche Lincoln from Arkansas
Barbara Boxer from California
Michael Bennet from Colorado
Daniel Inouye from Hawaii
Barbara Mikulski from Maryland
Harry Reid from Nevada
Kirsten Gillibrand from New York
Chuck Schumer from New York
Ron Wyden from Oregon
Arlen Specter from Pennsylvania
Patrick Leahy from Vermont
Patty Murray from Washington
Russ Feingold from Wisconsin
Republican Seats up for re-election in 2010 are:
Richard Shelby from Alabama
Lisa Murkowski from Alaska
John McCain from Arizona
Johnny Isakson from Georgia
Mike Crapo from Idaho
Chuck Grassley from Iowa
David Vitter from Louisiana
Richard Burr from North Carolina
Tom Coburn from Oklahoma
Jim DeMint from South Carolina
John Thune from South Dakota
Bob Bennett from Utah
In the House currently, there are 242 Democratic Seats and 193 Republican Seats.
There are far more retirements happening in the House - 15 Democrats and 19 Republicans. 434 of the 435 Seats in the House are up for re-election in 2010.
Democrats retiring in 2010 total 15.
Artur Davis from Alabama
Marion Berry from Arkansas
Vic Snyder from Arkansas
Diane Watson from California
Kendrick Meek from Florida
Brad Ellsworth from Indiana
Dennis Moore from Kansas
Charlie Melancon from Louisiana
Bill Delahunt from Massachusetts
Paul Hodes from New Hampshire
Joe Sestak from Pennsylvania
Patrick Kennedy from Rhode Island
Bart Gordon from Tennessee
John Tanner from Tennessee
Brian Baird from Washington
Republicans retiring in 2010 total 19.
John Boozman from Arkansas
John Shadegg from Arizona
George Radanovich from California
Michael Castle from Delaware
Adam Putnam from Florida
Lincoln Diaz - Balart from Florida
Mario Diaz - Balart from Florida
John Linder from Georgia
Steve Buyer from Indiana
Mark Kirk from Illinois
Jerry Moran from Kansas
Todd Tiahrt from Kansas
Peter Hoekstra from Michigan
Vern Ehlers from Michigan
Roy Blunt from Missouri
Mary Fallin from Oklahoma
Henry Brown Jr. from South Carolina
J Gresham Barrett from South Carolina
Zach Wamp from Tennessee
Now, the next question what's going to happen in November. I guess it's going to depend on who decides to go to the polls and vote and who stays home. It also depends on how inpatient we are as a whole. Do we decide to vote anti-government and anti-incumbent because we're all just so unhappy with the economy and jobs and the inaction of Congress?
I'd like to think we could all pick ourselves up by our boot straps so to speak. Let's not forget what the previous 8 years were all about. Let's not have amnesia about how bad it was. I don't know about the rest of you - but I still have hope, I still want things to change. I still think "Yes We Can." No one ever said it was going to be easy, no one ever said it would happen in a year or two - Remember! No one ever said we wouldn't have to give up anything.
I still want all those things - Health Care Reform, Climate Change Legislation, more stringent Financial Reform, Green Energy, Energy Independence and Government Transparency. Transparency sure isn't pretty - but what it does provide is insight. It allows us to see whose dirty and unethical. And it allows them to continue to try to lie, to turn tail and "retire" or quit or it allows us to vote those people out at the next election time.
So I say, let's keep moving forward, looking to the future. Let's keep fighting for change. See ya at the polls - I hope !
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Rationing of Care - Now or the Future
Hi everyone -
Just a short note to open up another facet of the Health Care Reform debate.
Are we headed for Health Care Rationing or is it already here???
As the week proceeded, I listened to more news talk shows and some of the debates happening on The Hill.
I caught some of the "interrogation" of the Health Insurance Industry in the Capitol. I found their conviction in their insurance rate hikes quite pitiful. The CEO of Wellpoint disclosed her salary - $1.1 Billion in salary, plus $80,000.00 in bonuses plus $8.5 Billion in Stock Options. She had the nerve to say the company's profit margin was ONLY 4% - well and that totaled $2.9 Billion. She said they needed to raise their premiums 39% to just break even next year - well how about taking some of those overhead costs down a bit - like the CEO's salaries or per diem rates?
So my question at the end of the week was "Aren't we already having our health care rationed?" It sure seems this way to me.
Let's talk about it a little bit.
I've heard the horror stories of the other "socialized" medicine nations - people who die while waiting on surgeries or treatments; procedures being denied, etc....
Well I think we're already doing that in our Nation - the difference is we're not calling it rationing of care. It's being hushed up - not talked about. It's known by another name. It's called "denied service" or "not medically necessary" or worse yet, give me lots of money and we'll do whatever you want.
Once again, lucky for me and my family, right now, I don't have to worry about these scenarios because I've got a great job with great medical benefits. If I want a surgery - whether it's emergent or not, all I have to do is make an appointment and have my doctors say it's OK to do because of my condition. No questions asked, not much paid out of pocket. My doctor and clinic appointment co-payments are next to nothing - $5.00 a visit. My prescriptions, the same $5.00 a piece. And I don't have to pay anything for lab work or x-rays or most procedures. I consider myself one of the lucky few. Maybe you all know someone with this kind of plan - and maybe you're lucky enough to have the same. But I don't think there are a lot of us out there today. And because of my insurance coverage, I don't dare decide that I don't like working where I do - I sure can not afford to go somewhere else.
A few years ago, 60% of families could afford their insurance premiums. Few would consider not having health insurance. Today's figures are more like 30% can afford their insurance premiums and many more are on the brink of trying to decide whether to keep their coverage or not.
Now let's take a look at just one case and tell me it isn't some sort of rationing of care. Say you've suffered from arthritis for a few years, all those years of high impact aerobics or football games in the park from our youthful years. In the morning, as each year passes, it gets harder and harder to get out of bed and more and more anti-inflammatories to get rid of the pain. Now, let's say you're only 30 years old or you're a little bit over weight.
Finally you decide to make an appointment with your doctor to see if you need some sort of joint replacement. After your initial consultation, x-rays are ordered and it's decided that you could use one but it's not an emergency. It's an elective surgery per your insurance company's guidelines. First you're only 30 and you're a little over weight. The insurance company decides they just aren't going to approve the procedure as your x-rays don't lie - your joints just aren't that bad YET. But, don't tell your pain that.
Supposedly, hip surgeries cost between $35,000.00 and $50,000.00 in the U.S. depending where you get them done.
Because you've been denied coverage for this procedure, if you want to have it done, you'll have to pay the entire amount out of your pocket. Now who can afford that? Not anyone I know. So you just won't be able to get it done now, sorry, maybe in 20 years when you're older and your x-rays confirm the pain that you've been having for years. Then your surgery will be paid for.
Isn't this rationing of care? You can't have it done unless you can afford to pay out of pocket for it - or go to another country where it's cheaper. Oh, and in Canada, it would be done - although you may have to wait a year.
Now, let's say, you already pay $1,115.00 a month for your insurance premiums - that's the average cost of an health plan for two - so let's divide it in half. So you already pay $6,690.00 a year for your coverage - which isn't even going to count because they aren't going to cover your surgery.
Let's change the scenario a little bit. Your insurance company now says they'll approve your surgery. But ......you still have co-payments and deductibles to pay. It's still an elective surgery, not emergent. So you're already paying almost $7000.00 a year in premiums. You have had your pre-op appointments and now are getting ready to set your surgery date. The hospital now tells you, you haven't met any of your deductibles for the year and you'll have a co-payment as well.
Your plan has a $3,000.00 per person deductible and a 30% co-payment. These are the types of plans you can get for $1,115.00 per month. Wow! What a plan. That's what we call affordable insurance in this Country. So let's do a little bit of math.
The hospital won't do your surgery unless you can pay the up front fees - because it's not emergent. It can wait. So you have to come up with:
Let's say your surgery is going to cost $42,000.00. That's in the middle of the guesstimate for this type of surgery.
You owe $3,000.00 up front for your deductible. You'll owe $12,600.00 for your co-payment. Again do you know anyone who can just come up with $15,600.00 out of pocket for your surgery. I sure don't.
And that's not even the whole story. You're also going to be off work for at least, at the very least 8 weeks or longer. You'll miss work. If you have vacation or sick time, you're lucky. But if not, you're out of your income as well. If you're lucky, you have short term disability coverage. Let's say you make $30,000.00 a year which is the current median income for individuals per the census figures. That's $5,000.00 you'll lose over 2 months time if you don't have paid vacation or sick time. Now, if you have short-term disability, you can recoup some of that - usually 2/3s. So you'll only lose $1,670.00 out of pocket. But wait, don't forget you'll have to pay income tax on that at the end of the year so you'll have to take $830.00 back out.
So let's do a quick tally.
So even if you have insurance and you have this type of common plan, you'll owe out of pocket....
$15,600.00 in deductibles and co-payments.
$5,000.00 in lost wages if you don't have vacation or sick time.
That's a total of $20,600.00 out of pocket when you have insurance that you're paying $7,000.00 a year for.
If you have short term disability, you'll pay......
$15,600.00 in deductibles and co-payments.
$2,500.00 in lost wages and taxes.
That's a total of $18,100.00 out of pocket when you have insurance that you're paying $7,000.00 a year for.
Now figure on top of that all of the credit card debt that you will be using too if you decide to just bite the bullet and start paying for some of this as you are really having a lot of pain. Think of the new interest rates of 20% if you're carrying balances.
And what if there are complications???
Now take the choice away - what if you have to have emergent surgery and you have these kind of deductibles and co-payments. What if you make $20,000.00 a year instead and you don't have a good job. What if you live paycheck to paycheck? I sure can see how one illness can bankrupt a family. Cant' you?
And if you're going to tell me that the hospitals will work with you on a payment plan - yes they will IF it's an emergency surgery. But they WILL NOT if it's an elective surgery. They demand their money up front or they won't even consider doing the surgery.
Now you tell me this isn't BS. Why do we even have insurance? I find this quite appalling and a bit of a mystery? What kind of Nation are we anyway? What happened to "We the People"? I guess we know the bottom line, the profitability of the insurance companies and even the hospitals and providers are much more important then the health and well being of our citizens.
It's all quite clear to me. There already is rationing. And people are suffering and dying already while waiting to get the care they need and deserve.
Bottom Line - it's here already. And even if you haven't experienced it, it doesn't mean it's not happening to some one else that you already know or may know in the future. We can only hope it never touches us and our loved ones.
Just a short note to open up another facet of the Health Care Reform debate.
Are we headed for Health Care Rationing or is it already here???
As the week proceeded, I listened to more news talk shows and some of the debates happening on The Hill.
I caught some of the "interrogation" of the Health Insurance Industry in the Capitol. I found their conviction in their insurance rate hikes quite pitiful. The CEO of Wellpoint disclosed her salary - $1.1 Billion in salary, plus $80,000.00 in bonuses plus $8.5 Billion in Stock Options. She had the nerve to say the company's profit margin was ONLY 4% - well and that totaled $2.9 Billion. She said they needed to raise their premiums 39% to just break even next year - well how about taking some of those overhead costs down a bit - like the CEO's salaries or per diem rates?
So my question at the end of the week was "Aren't we already having our health care rationed?" It sure seems this way to me.
Let's talk about it a little bit.
I've heard the horror stories of the other "socialized" medicine nations - people who die while waiting on surgeries or treatments; procedures being denied, etc....
Well I think we're already doing that in our Nation - the difference is we're not calling it rationing of care. It's being hushed up - not talked about. It's known by another name. It's called "denied service" or "not medically necessary" or worse yet, give me lots of money and we'll do whatever you want.
Once again, lucky for me and my family, right now, I don't have to worry about these scenarios because I've got a great job with great medical benefits. If I want a surgery - whether it's emergent or not, all I have to do is make an appointment and have my doctors say it's OK to do because of my condition. No questions asked, not much paid out of pocket. My doctor and clinic appointment co-payments are next to nothing - $5.00 a visit. My prescriptions, the same $5.00 a piece. And I don't have to pay anything for lab work or x-rays or most procedures. I consider myself one of the lucky few. Maybe you all know someone with this kind of plan - and maybe you're lucky enough to have the same. But I don't think there are a lot of us out there today. And because of my insurance coverage, I don't dare decide that I don't like working where I do - I sure can not afford to go somewhere else.
A few years ago, 60% of families could afford their insurance premiums. Few would consider not having health insurance. Today's figures are more like 30% can afford their insurance premiums and many more are on the brink of trying to decide whether to keep their coverage or not.
Now let's take a look at just one case and tell me it isn't some sort of rationing of care. Say you've suffered from arthritis for a few years, all those years of high impact aerobics or football games in the park from our youthful years. In the morning, as each year passes, it gets harder and harder to get out of bed and more and more anti-inflammatories to get rid of the pain. Now, let's say you're only 30 years old or you're a little bit over weight.
Finally you decide to make an appointment with your doctor to see if you need some sort of joint replacement. After your initial consultation, x-rays are ordered and it's decided that you could use one but it's not an emergency. It's an elective surgery per your insurance company's guidelines. First you're only 30 and you're a little over weight. The insurance company decides they just aren't going to approve the procedure as your x-rays don't lie - your joints just aren't that bad YET. But, don't tell your pain that.
Supposedly, hip surgeries cost between $35,000.00 and $50,000.00 in the U.S. depending where you get them done.
Because you've been denied coverage for this procedure, if you want to have it done, you'll have to pay the entire amount out of your pocket. Now who can afford that? Not anyone I know. So you just won't be able to get it done now, sorry, maybe in 20 years when you're older and your x-rays confirm the pain that you've been having for years. Then your surgery will be paid for.
Isn't this rationing of care? You can't have it done unless you can afford to pay out of pocket for it - or go to another country where it's cheaper. Oh, and in Canada, it would be done - although you may have to wait a year.
Now, let's say, you already pay $1,115.00 a month for your insurance premiums - that's the average cost of an health plan for two - so let's divide it in half. So you already pay $6,690.00 a year for your coverage - which isn't even going to count because they aren't going to cover your surgery.
Let's change the scenario a little bit. Your insurance company now says they'll approve your surgery. But ......you still have co-payments and deductibles to pay. It's still an elective surgery, not emergent. So you're already paying almost $7000.00 a year in premiums. You have had your pre-op appointments and now are getting ready to set your surgery date. The hospital now tells you, you haven't met any of your deductibles for the year and you'll have a co-payment as well.
Your plan has a $3,000.00 per person deductible and a 30% co-payment. These are the types of plans you can get for $1,115.00 per month. Wow! What a plan. That's what we call affordable insurance in this Country. So let's do a little bit of math.
The hospital won't do your surgery unless you can pay the up front fees - because it's not emergent. It can wait. So you have to come up with:
Let's say your surgery is going to cost $42,000.00. That's in the middle of the guesstimate for this type of surgery.
You owe $3,000.00 up front for your deductible. You'll owe $12,600.00 for your co-payment. Again do you know anyone who can just come up with $15,600.00 out of pocket for your surgery. I sure don't.
And that's not even the whole story. You're also going to be off work for at least, at the very least 8 weeks or longer. You'll miss work. If you have vacation or sick time, you're lucky. But if not, you're out of your income as well. If you're lucky, you have short term disability coverage. Let's say you make $30,000.00 a year which is the current median income for individuals per the census figures. That's $5,000.00 you'll lose over 2 months time if you don't have paid vacation or sick time. Now, if you have short-term disability, you can recoup some of that - usually 2/3s. So you'll only lose $1,670.00 out of pocket. But wait, don't forget you'll have to pay income tax on that at the end of the year so you'll have to take $830.00 back out.
So let's do a quick tally.
So even if you have insurance and you have this type of common plan, you'll owe out of pocket....
$15,600.00 in deductibles and co-payments.
$5,000.00 in lost wages if you don't have vacation or sick time.
That's a total of $20,600.00 out of pocket when you have insurance that you're paying $7,000.00 a year for.
If you have short term disability, you'll pay......
$15,600.00 in deductibles and co-payments.
$2,500.00 in lost wages and taxes.
That's a total of $18,100.00 out of pocket when you have insurance that you're paying $7,000.00 a year for.
Now figure on top of that all of the credit card debt that you will be using too if you decide to just bite the bullet and start paying for some of this as you are really having a lot of pain. Think of the new interest rates of 20% if you're carrying balances.
And what if there are complications???
Now take the choice away - what if you have to have emergent surgery and you have these kind of deductibles and co-payments. What if you make $20,000.00 a year instead and you don't have a good job. What if you live paycheck to paycheck? I sure can see how one illness can bankrupt a family. Cant' you?
And if you're going to tell me that the hospitals will work with you on a payment plan - yes they will IF it's an emergency surgery. But they WILL NOT if it's an elective surgery. They demand their money up front or they won't even consider doing the surgery.
Now you tell me this isn't BS. Why do we even have insurance? I find this quite appalling and a bit of a mystery? What kind of Nation are we anyway? What happened to "We the People"? I guess we know the bottom line, the profitability of the insurance companies and even the hospitals and providers are much more important then the health and well being of our citizens.
It's all quite clear to me. There already is rationing. And people are suffering and dying already while waiting to get the care they need and deserve.
Bottom Line - it's here already. And even if you haven't experienced it, it doesn't mean it's not happening to some one else that you already know or may know in the future. We can only hope it never touches us and our loved ones.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
The Truth as It Is - Not as It's Being Told - Reconciliation
Hi everyone -
Well today, I'm going to try to de-bunk some of these "myths" out there floating around. I'm going to talk a little bit about the Reconciliation process. If anyone wants to fact check, go ahead. I got all my information off the official House and Senate Sites - attached to the actual Bills that passed as well as the CBO site.
So let's take a look at what Reconciliation is really about, what it was originally supposedly intended to do and a couple of little tiny loopholes that sure been taken advantage of over the last 20 years.
Reconciliation was originally initiated in 1974 to allow consideration of contentious budget bills without the threat of filibusters. It's intent was to limit debate and favor the majority party. It changes existing law to bring spending, revenues or debt limit into conformity with budget resolution.
The one loophole was that it only specifies that the measures would include budgetary "changes". It did not specify whether or not these changes would be an increase or decrease in the deficit. This loophole has never been changed and I find that quite interesting as the Byrd Amendment has been amended on multiple occasions. So although I'm sure Mr. Byrd's intent was to only include items that reduce the debt (wink, wink), that's not the way it was written and it's not the way it's been used.
The second loophole is that if the Reconciliation Bill causes a budget deficit, it has to expire or get renewed in 10 years. Again, if it's intent was only to reduce the deficit, why is this little part written in as well. This is the loophole that President Bush used for the tax cuts for the rich. That's why this is such a talking point now as it's been 10 years and President Obama is not willing to renew the tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% of the population.
And don't forget, there's a Parliamentarian whose supposed to determine what can and can not be decided by Reconciliation. This year, that would be Alan Frumin. But surprise, the Presiding Officer doesn't have to follow his recommendation. And guess who that is - Vice President Joe Biden.
So here are some statistics on reconciliation.
It was enacted in 1974.
It was first used in 1981.
17 of 23 times it was used during a Republican Presidency.
9 times, the Republicans had control of both the House and the Senate.
6 times, the Democrats had control of both the House and the Senate.
1 time, the Democrats had control of the Senate and the Republicans had control of the House.
7 times, the Republicans had control of the Senate and the Democrats had control of the House.
1 time, it was used completely for a non-budgetary issue. The College Cost and Access Act of 2007 passed
with a Republican President and a Democratic Congress.
Health Care issues were addressed in a few of these Bills. The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 was mostly Health Care Reform. Medicare and Medicaid - yes, "entitlement" programs were
addressed in many of these Bills. Here are a few of them:
1982 Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act
1985 COBRA
1987 OBRA
1989 OBRA
1990 OBRA
1993 OBRA
1995 Balanced Budge Act - This was Vetoed by President Clinton.
1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act/Welfare Reform
1997 Balanced Budget Act which Includes the Medicare Advantage Programs/Insurance Company
Give-Aways
1999 Taxpayer Refund and Relief Act - This was Vetoed by President Clinton as it increased the deficit.
2000 Marriage Tax Relief Reconciliation Act - Again, Vetoed by President Clinton as it increased the deficit.
2005 Deficit Reduction Act
Now, the next talking point I want to talk about is the "huge majority passage" and "bi-partisan" passage of these Reconciliation Bills. The Republicans contend that all of their Reconciliation Bills passed with "huge majorities" and "bi-partisan" votes. OK, now, that's a red flag for me. Let's just go there.
I've checked the votes on these Bills on the Congressional Sites.
7 of these 23 Bills passed with less than 60 votes. OK I know that 7 out of 23 is not "all" or 100%. I also know my math - I'm thinking that would be 70% of these Bills were passed with a majority vote. Let's look at some of the numbers. These are the ones I could find easily.
1996 - H.R. 3734 which is the Welfare and Medicaid Act. This was during President Clinton's Presidency
with a Republican Congress. This Bill passed with a 78-21 vote.
53 Yeas were Republicans, 25 Yeas were Democrats. All 21 Nays were Democrats.
1997 - H.R. 2015 which is the S-CHIP Program - which by the way, is a complete "entitlement" program.
This Bill has a significant Health Care platform.
Again, still a Democratic President with a Republican Congress. This Bill passed 85-15.
43 Yeas were Republicans, 42 were Democrats. 12 Nays were Republicans, 3 were Democrats.
2001 - H.R. 1836 which was President Bush's first Tax Cut for the Wealthy. So it was a Republican President
with a Republican House and a 50-50 Split Senate. This Bill passed 58 - 33.
46 Yeas were Republicans, 12 were Democrats. 2 Nays were Republicans, 31 were Democrats.
FYI - The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office predicted that this Bill Decreased the Surplus
by 1.35 Trillion Dollars.
2003 - H.R. 2 which was President Bush's second Tax Cut for the Wealthy. So it was a Republican President
with a Republican Congress again. This Bill passed 50 - 50 with Vice President Cheney breaking the tie.
48 Yeas were Republicans, 2 were Democrats. 3 Nays were Republicans, 47 were Democrats.
FYI - The CBO predicted that this Bill Increased the Deficit by 350 Billion Dollars.
2006 - H.R. 4297 which was President Bush's third Tax Cut for the Wealthy. Again, a Republican President
with a Republican Congress. This Bill passed 54 - 44.
51 Yeas were Republicans, 3 were Democrats. 3 Nays were Republicans, 41 were Democrats.
FYI - The CBO predicted that this Bill Increased the Deficit by 70 Billion Dollars.
I also found evidence that some other Bills passed with Reconciliation with close votes but I couldn't find the Bill numbers so I couldn't verify the final votes.
I found articles that said 7 Bills passed with less than 60 votes. Again, far from the 100% that the Republicans have claimed to have had a huge majority win on.
2 of the others listed were the 1995 Balanced Budget Act with a win of 52 -47 (later vetoed) and the 2005 Deficit Reduction Act with a 50 - 50 tie with Vice President Cheney breaking the tie again - and only after they fired the Parliamentarian.
Now to me, there are some really important facts that we need to look at. These facts are not debatable - they're not open to interpretation. They are just the facts. I just don't see how any or either side or any person can put a spin on them. The facts are the facts. They are part of public record.
My first question would be:
Why would the Republicans have to have a Bill pass through Reconciliation if they had a majority vote?
Now the only reason to use Reconciliation is because of a filibuster or not having the majority vote. This means that the minority (mostly the Democrats) would have been filibustering these Bills. Therefore, I predict that they did not have a majority vote to begin with. Make sense?
Now then what comes next is a lot of back room dealing or horse trading, pork, pork, pork. So at some point, the majority (mainly the Republicans) must have been really wheeling and dealing to get these Bills through. So in the end, they brought along a few other "friends" to vote on the final Bill - either with back room deals or the amendments that were attached to these Bills. Then when the final Bills came to the floor, they ended up with a majority vote.
The other possibility could be that if the members opposed to the Bill then realized the Bill would pass with a 50% vote, some of them decided to vote for the Bill as they felt it would look good to their constituents. This in itself is reason enough that there shouldn't be anonymous votes allowed on the floor.
So there it is - the first of the de-bunking myths entries in my blog.
Off for some red carpet viewing - something almost as controversial. lol. Take Care.
Well today, I'm going to try to de-bunk some of these "myths" out there floating around. I'm going to talk a little bit about the Reconciliation process. If anyone wants to fact check, go ahead. I got all my information off the official House and Senate Sites - attached to the actual Bills that passed as well as the CBO site.
So let's take a look at what Reconciliation is really about, what it was originally supposedly intended to do and a couple of little tiny loopholes that sure been taken advantage of over the last 20 years.
Reconciliation was originally initiated in 1974 to allow consideration of contentious budget bills without the threat of filibusters. It's intent was to limit debate and favor the majority party. It changes existing law to bring spending, revenues or debt limit into conformity with budget resolution.
The one loophole was that it only specifies that the measures would include budgetary "changes". It did not specify whether or not these changes would be an increase or decrease in the deficit. This loophole has never been changed and I find that quite interesting as the Byrd Amendment has been amended on multiple occasions. So although I'm sure Mr. Byrd's intent was to only include items that reduce the debt (wink, wink), that's not the way it was written and it's not the way it's been used.
The second loophole is that if the Reconciliation Bill causes a budget deficit, it has to expire or get renewed in 10 years. Again, if it's intent was only to reduce the deficit, why is this little part written in as well. This is the loophole that President Bush used for the tax cuts for the rich. That's why this is such a talking point now as it's been 10 years and President Obama is not willing to renew the tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% of the population.
And don't forget, there's a Parliamentarian whose supposed to determine what can and can not be decided by Reconciliation. This year, that would be Alan Frumin. But surprise, the Presiding Officer doesn't have to follow his recommendation. And guess who that is - Vice President Joe Biden.
So here are some statistics on reconciliation.
It was enacted in 1974.
It was first used in 1981.
17 of 23 times it was used during a Republican Presidency.
9 times, the Republicans had control of both the House and the Senate.
6 times, the Democrats had control of both the House and the Senate.
1 time, the Democrats had control of the Senate and the Republicans had control of the House.
7 times, the Republicans had control of the Senate and the Democrats had control of the House.
1 time, it was used completely for a non-budgetary issue. The College Cost and Access Act of 2007 passed
with a Republican President and a Democratic Congress.
Health Care issues were addressed in a few of these Bills. The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 was mostly Health Care Reform. Medicare and Medicaid - yes, "entitlement" programs were
addressed in many of these Bills. Here are a few of them:
1982 Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act
1985 COBRA
1987 OBRA
1989 OBRA
1990 OBRA
1993 OBRA
1995 Balanced Budge Act - This was Vetoed by President Clinton.
1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act/Welfare Reform
1997 Balanced Budget Act which Includes the Medicare Advantage Programs/Insurance Company
Give-Aways
1999 Taxpayer Refund and Relief Act - This was Vetoed by President Clinton as it increased the deficit.
2000 Marriage Tax Relief Reconciliation Act - Again, Vetoed by President Clinton as it increased the deficit.
2005 Deficit Reduction Act
Now, the next talking point I want to talk about is the "huge majority passage" and "bi-partisan" passage of these Reconciliation Bills. The Republicans contend that all of their Reconciliation Bills passed with "huge majorities" and "bi-partisan" votes. OK, now, that's a red flag for me. Let's just go there.
I've checked the votes on these Bills on the Congressional Sites.
7 of these 23 Bills passed with less than 60 votes. OK I know that 7 out of 23 is not "all" or 100%. I also know my math - I'm thinking that would be 70% of these Bills were passed with a majority vote. Let's look at some of the numbers. These are the ones I could find easily.
1996 - H.R. 3734 which is the Welfare and Medicaid Act. This was during President Clinton's Presidency
with a Republican Congress. This Bill passed with a 78-21 vote.
53 Yeas were Republicans, 25 Yeas were Democrats. All 21 Nays were Democrats.
1997 - H.R. 2015 which is the S-CHIP Program - which by the way, is a complete "entitlement" program.
This Bill has a significant Health Care platform.
Again, still a Democratic President with a Republican Congress. This Bill passed 85-15.
43 Yeas were Republicans, 42 were Democrats. 12 Nays were Republicans, 3 were Democrats.
2001 - H.R. 1836 which was President Bush's first Tax Cut for the Wealthy. So it was a Republican President
with a Republican House and a 50-50 Split Senate. This Bill passed 58 - 33.
46 Yeas were Republicans, 12 were Democrats. 2 Nays were Republicans, 31 were Democrats.
FYI - The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office predicted that this Bill Decreased the Surplus
by 1.35 Trillion Dollars.
2003 - H.R. 2 which was President Bush's second Tax Cut for the Wealthy. So it was a Republican President
with a Republican Congress again. This Bill passed 50 - 50 with Vice President Cheney breaking the tie.
48 Yeas were Republicans, 2 were Democrats. 3 Nays were Republicans, 47 were Democrats.
FYI - The CBO predicted that this Bill Increased the Deficit by 350 Billion Dollars.
2006 - H.R. 4297 which was President Bush's third Tax Cut for the Wealthy. Again, a Republican President
with a Republican Congress. This Bill passed 54 - 44.
51 Yeas were Republicans, 3 were Democrats. 3 Nays were Republicans, 41 were Democrats.
FYI - The CBO predicted that this Bill Increased the Deficit by 70 Billion Dollars.
I also found evidence that some other Bills passed with Reconciliation with close votes but I couldn't find the Bill numbers so I couldn't verify the final votes.
I found articles that said 7 Bills passed with less than 60 votes. Again, far from the 100% that the Republicans have claimed to have had a huge majority win on.
2 of the others listed were the 1995 Balanced Budget Act with a win of 52 -47 (later vetoed) and the 2005 Deficit Reduction Act with a 50 - 50 tie with Vice President Cheney breaking the tie again - and only after they fired the Parliamentarian.
Now to me, there are some really important facts that we need to look at. These facts are not debatable - they're not open to interpretation. They are just the facts. I just don't see how any or either side or any person can put a spin on them. The facts are the facts. They are part of public record.
My first question would be:
Why would the Republicans have to have a Bill pass through Reconciliation if they had a majority vote?
Now the only reason to use Reconciliation is because of a filibuster or not having the majority vote. This means that the minority (mostly the Democrats) would have been filibustering these Bills. Therefore, I predict that they did not have a majority vote to begin with. Make sense?
Now then what comes next is a lot of back room dealing or horse trading, pork, pork, pork. So at some point, the majority (mainly the Republicans) must have been really wheeling and dealing to get these Bills through. So in the end, they brought along a few other "friends" to vote on the final Bill - either with back room deals or the amendments that were attached to these Bills. Then when the final Bills came to the floor, they ended up with a majority vote.
The other possibility could be that if the members opposed to the Bill then realized the Bill would pass with a 50% vote, some of them decided to vote for the Bill as they felt it would look good to their constituents. This in itself is reason enough that there shouldn't be anonymous votes allowed on the floor.
So there it is - the first of the de-bunking myths entries in my blog.
Off for some red carpet viewing - something almost as controversial. lol. Take Care.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Special Commentary by Keith Olbermann - His Dad and the Health Care System
Hi everyone -
Tonight I was on the computer and half-heartedly listening to another one of Keith Olbermann's special comments. Again, most of the time, I think he's a little over the top. And yes, I could almost compare him on a bad day to Glenn Beck on on a good day - except well, I just don't care for all the blithering that Beck does.
Tonight, like one other night that he did a special comment on his father's illness and the state of our country's health care crisis, I found myself getting choked up. I looked over at my fiance, and he was all teary-eyed as well.
Now, before all you conservatists jump on the bandwagon, take it for what it was about. He's emotional - he's probably losing his dad - it's raw emotion. But, it's far from being wrong. It's very important to have these conversations with your family members so you know what they'd want in a time like this. His dad's been fighting for his life for months and Keith has been by his side. On the emotional family front, I'm sure it's been hard.
But I must say, I do love a story told by a family going through the broken health care system. Kind of ironic that he says he's spent more out of pocket money for his dad's care than the insurance has paid for. Kind of sad isn't it - that he can afford it - unlike most Americans.
Listen and watch here if you like and take it to heart while the Health Care Summit is going on tomorrow and we listen to all the B.S. that we're bound to hear. I do love transparency - let's see who shows their asses more.
Have a great night.
Tonight I was on the computer and half-heartedly listening to another one of Keith Olbermann's special comments. Again, most of the time, I think he's a little over the top. And yes, I could almost compare him on a bad day to Glenn Beck on on a good day - except well, I just don't care for all the blithering that Beck does.
Tonight, like one other night that he did a special comment on his father's illness and the state of our country's health care crisis, I found myself getting choked up. I looked over at my fiance, and he was all teary-eyed as well.
Now, before all you conservatists jump on the bandwagon, take it for what it was about. He's emotional - he's probably losing his dad - it's raw emotion. But, it's far from being wrong. It's very important to have these conversations with your family members so you know what they'd want in a time like this. His dad's been fighting for his life for months and Keith has been by his side. On the emotional family front, I'm sure it's been hard.
But I must say, I do love a story told by a family going through the broken health care system. Kind of ironic that he says he's spent more out of pocket money for his dad's care than the insurance has paid for. Kind of sad isn't it - that he can afford it - unlike most Americans.
Listen and watch here if you like and take it to heart while the Health Care Summit is going on tomorrow and we listen to all the B.S. that we're bound to hear. I do love transparency - let's see who shows their asses more.
Have a great night.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Anyone for Dodge Ball in the Capital Rotunda??
Hi everyone -
I just had to write this all down before I forget it all or lose the whimsical side of it !
So after thinking about the whole stalemate in the House and Senate with pretty much any and all issues, I had this silly kind of idea.
Do you guys all remember Dodge Ball from school??? Gosh, I miss dodge ball. It was a blast - albeit a bit dangerous at times. You could really lose an eye or worse if you were a guy.
I had this vision. If the boys on the hill are going to act like children, maybe they'd like to be treated more like children. Let's line them up - Republicans on one side, Democrats on the other side. Now sorry, Republicans, you're going to be a little short on people to start - but there are consequences to losing Congressional seats. And besides, you don't quite play fair anyway, so you'll make up for it in spirit and scrapiness.
So let's take a certain Bill or two - like the Health Care Reform Bills. Since, supposedly, they all agree on 80% of these Bills - why not pass just the 80% for now. If they agree on it, put it in writing, pass it through, no questions asked - because they all agree, right? What's so hard about that?
Then the compromising and negotiating can begin. We'll make it like dodge ball where we pick teams and take turns throwing the ball.
First each side would divide out the other points they want in the Bill, two at a time. Start with the easiest ones to negotiate and work their way up to the tough ones. Now, they'd have to go back to some point where the Democrats already started to really compromise. The Democrats really want to include all Americans for coverage, the Pre-Existing Clause, etc. on their side. The Republicans really want better language to exclude Illegal Aliens and Abortions from being covered; they want to sell across State Lines, etc.. So now each side just picks one talking point, everyone gets to discuss it and take it to a vote - compromise. Get enough votes on both sides to pass both their requests - now pass that as an amendment. Sounds pretty darn easy doesn't it???
Then of course, they could work up to the top big two - Tort Reform for the Public Option. Now that would be a real battle. But if either side really wanted their choice to go through, they'd be more apt to try harder to get it.
And overall then, what would be the worse that would happen. If they couldn't agree on anything else, then the 80% would have already been passed.
I feel that this would really take all the horse trading and back room deals off the table. Maybe they could remember that they are working for all Americans, not just their districts and own personal gains.
And I'd sure like to see this posturing on C Span. Maybe we'd see some real testosterone at play - men do like competition and what better way then to indulge their sports-mindedness.
And one more thought - if you act like a 5 year old, you should be expected to be treated like a 5 year old. If you can't play nice together, you shouldn't be allowed to play together. If you have a child and he/she misbehaves, don't you take privileges and/or money/personal property away from that child? I liken this concept to the insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies and banks - if you screw up and rob vulnerable people out of billions of dollars - you should lose your privilege to continue to do the same until you learn to play nicer. I personally think you deserve a much sterner punishment than just a chastising from the President.
To make this end on even a funnier note, while I was explaining my latest concept to my fiance, Kevin, he just kept telling me he couldn't think any more about my actual concept as it related to legislation - because as a man, he couldn't get the image of all the members of the House and Senate lined up smacking each other in the heads with the Dodge Ball - and he wanted to see it in the Capital Rotunda.
So to each of you - what do you think? Could they pass reform this way? Or do you now just have a bunch of men and women in your mind, in suits and dresses, lined up, winging the balls at each other. I must say, that would be just hilarious and I have a few I'd like to just nail and nail good.
I just had to write this all down before I forget it all or lose the whimsical side of it !
So after thinking about the whole stalemate in the House and Senate with pretty much any and all issues, I had this silly kind of idea.
Do you guys all remember Dodge Ball from school??? Gosh, I miss dodge ball. It was a blast - albeit a bit dangerous at times. You could really lose an eye or worse if you were a guy.
I had this vision. If the boys on the hill are going to act like children, maybe they'd like to be treated more like children. Let's line them up - Republicans on one side, Democrats on the other side. Now sorry, Republicans, you're going to be a little short on people to start - but there are consequences to losing Congressional seats. And besides, you don't quite play fair anyway, so you'll make up for it in spirit and scrapiness.
So let's take a certain Bill or two - like the Health Care Reform Bills. Since, supposedly, they all agree on 80% of these Bills - why not pass just the 80% for now. If they agree on it, put it in writing, pass it through, no questions asked - because they all agree, right? What's so hard about that?
Then the compromising and negotiating can begin. We'll make it like dodge ball where we pick teams and take turns throwing the ball.
First each side would divide out the other points they want in the Bill, two at a time. Start with the easiest ones to negotiate and work their way up to the tough ones. Now, they'd have to go back to some point where the Democrats already started to really compromise. The Democrats really want to include all Americans for coverage, the Pre-Existing Clause, etc. on their side. The Republicans really want better language to exclude Illegal Aliens and Abortions from being covered; they want to sell across State Lines, etc.. So now each side just picks one talking point, everyone gets to discuss it and take it to a vote - compromise. Get enough votes on both sides to pass both their requests - now pass that as an amendment. Sounds pretty darn easy doesn't it???
Then of course, they could work up to the top big two - Tort Reform for the Public Option. Now that would be a real battle. But if either side really wanted their choice to go through, they'd be more apt to try harder to get it.
And overall then, what would be the worse that would happen. If they couldn't agree on anything else, then the 80% would have already been passed.
I feel that this would really take all the horse trading and back room deals off the table. Maybe they could remember that they are working for all Americans, not just their districts and own personal gains.
And I'd sure like to see this posturing on C Span. Maybe we'd see some real testosterone at play - men do like competition and what better way then to indulge their sports-mindedness.
And one more thought - if you act like a 5 year old, you should be expected to be treated like a 5 year old. If you can't play nice together, you shouldn't be allowed to play together. If you have a child and he/she misbehaves, don't you take privileges and/or money/personal property away from that child? I liken this concept to the insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies and banks - if you screw up and rob vulnerable people out of billions of dollars - you should lose your privilege to continue to do the same until you learn to play nicer. I personally think you deserve a much sterner punishment than just a chastising from the President.
To make this end on even a funnier note, while I was explaining my latest concept to my fiance, Kevin, he just kept telling me he couldn't think any more about my actual concept as it related to legislation - because as a man, he couldn't get the image of all the members of the House and Senate lined up smacking each other in the heads with the Dodge Ball - and he wanted to see it in the Capital Rotunda.
So to each of you - what do you think? Could they pass reform this way? Or do you now just have a bunch of men and women in your mind, in suits and dresses, lined up, winging the balls at each other. I must say, that would be just hilarious and I have a few I'd like to just nail and nail good.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Oh the Big Liars - Which Ones This Week? Big Health Insurance Companies !
Hi Everyone -
I ran across this interesting article yesterday. And once again, I must say Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire. I guess in the back of my mind, I thought the insurance companies couldn't possibly be for health care reform. After all, they stand to lose billions of dollars off of this legislation.
I'm glad some reporters are doing their work. Aetna, Cigna, Humana, Kaiser, United Health and Wellpoint were all called out about their roll in paying for anti-reform ads - to the tune of $10 - $20 million dollars. Apparently money was solicited by AHIP and funneled through the Chamber of Commerce. It was too risky, I guess, to just run the ads themselves like they did back under the Clinton administration.
I was initially really disappointed in Kaiser, since I work for them, and they had been so positive in all of our employee emails about reform. The article states that their monies went for positive health care reform ads. If you read down through the response threads, you'll actually see a thread from John Nelson from Kaiser Foundation. I'm wondering what positive ads were run by AHIP and if Kaiser should ask for a refund of their money.
Wow, and we wonder why the insurance companies are charging us such absorbent fees for our premiums and ailments. Who says special interest groups don't throw big bucks at potential legislation and campaigns. I would think they could take these millions of dollars and use them for something positive - like lowering premiums or covering our bills. Novel idea, huh?
So anyway, here's a link to read the article in full. Click here.
Have a great night everyone.
I ran across this interesting article yesterday. And once again, I must say Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire. I guess in the back of my mind, I thought the insurance companies couldn't possibly be for health care reform. After all, they stand to lose billions of dollars off of this legislation.
I'm glad some reporters are doing their work. Aetna, Cigna, Humana, Kaiser, United Health and Wellpoint were all called out about their roll in paying for anti-reform ads - to the tune of $10 - $20 million dollars. Apparently money was solicited by AHIP and funneled through the Chamber of Commerce. It was too risky, I guess, to just run the ads themselves like they did back under the Clinton administration.
I was initially really disappointed in Kaiser, since I work for them, and they had been so positive in all of our employee emails about reform. The article states that their monies went for positive health care reform ads. If you read down through the response threads, you'll actually see a thread from John Nelson from Kaiser Foundation. I'm wondering what positive ads were run by AHIP and if Kaiser should ask for a refund of their money.
Wow, and we wonder why the insurance companies are charging us such absorbent fees for our premiums and ailments. Who says special interest groups don't throw big bucks at potential legislation and campaigns. I would think they could take these millions of dollars and use them for something positive - like lowering premiums or covering our bills. Novel idea, huh?
So anyway, here's a link to read the article in full. Click here.
Have a great night everyone.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
House Bill 3962 Cliff Notes
Hi everyone -
I'm trying to find an easier way to share my cliff notes from the Health Care Reform Bill with everyone. Now I'm not finished yet - but here's a start. I'll post updated ones as I get further.
But at the very least, you can see all the good stuff (my personal thought) - as well as bad stuff (depending on your view).
Please let me know your thoughts.
Let's see if it works. Click here. When you get to the google doc page, just hit download and open with Microsoft Word. The document should just open.
Take care. Stay in and stay warm and dry! It's pouring here STILL.
I'm trying to find an easier way to share my cliff notes from the Health Care Reform Bill with everyone. Now I'm not finished yet - but here's a start. I'll post updated ones as I get further.
But at the very least, you can see all the good stuff (my personal thought) - as well as bad stuff (depending on your view).
Please let me know your thoughts.
Let's see if it works. Click here. When you get to the google doc page, just hit download and open with Microsoft Word. The document should just open.
Take care. Stay in and stay warm and dry! It's pouring here STILL.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
1 Year Later - What has He Accomplished - Or Not
Hi -
Wow, long time, no write. I guess the holidays kind of kicked my proverbial free time for writing.
Here I go easing back into with a noncontroversial subject.
So let's talk a little bit about the past year. This blog is in preparation for all the nay-saying that will be going on next week about President Obama's one-year anniversary in office.
I guess it's pretty debatable. Are we in a better place than we were last year at this time? I guess it depends on who you are, where you live, what circumstances are occurring in your life. It's been a hard year for a lot of people. And a lot of people have no idea how hard it's really been for a lot of people in our Country. I have to say, if more people had a clue - and a bit of a soul, they'd be a lot more humble and thankful.
Have we gotten the change we thought was going to happen - in the magnitude we expected? I'm pretty sure the answer to that is a resounding No ! . I still believe in "Yes, We Can", but the question is how fast can we? and who is going to be and stay in the way? I do believe we are on our way - at least I hope. And without hope - and a lot of faith, there is nothing.
We've seen a lot of greed, hatred and prejudice over the last year. I guess maybe Washington DC has always been a politically corrupt ugly place - but I don't think a lot of us knew the extent of it - and probably still don't. With the Internet and the media of today, it's a lot more evident. It's not pretty - and I think, personally a lot of people should be losing sleep at night and be ashamed of themselves.
This is supposed to be a democracy - I think we're all supposed to be humanitarians - maybe not. I'm going to research that a little bit later and come back to that issue - what kind of a society are we really living in? I don't believe our Country qualifies as a true democracy, looking out for each other.
So let's do a little recap of President Obama's accomplishments. What did he campaign on - what if anything did he promise? Has he flipped on his priorities? Or is he just taking it slow and easy - getting what he can when he can? Pacing himself and concentrating on his priorities?
I've done a lot of googling, visited a multitude of web sites - some partisan, some bi-partisan and some claiming to be non-partisan. Here's what I found.
During his campaign, the following items were President Obama's top priorities:
#1 - Withdrawal from Iraq
#2 - Health Care Reform/Universal Coverage for All Americans
#3 - Climate Change
Increased Energy Independence
Decreased Lobbyist/Special Interest Group Influence
Re-Focus Anti-Terrorism Strategies on Afghanistan, Pakistan and Other Problem Spots
Eliminate Weapons of Mass Destruction World-wide
Immigration Reform, including Electronic Tracking Systems to Identify Illegal Aliens
Education Reform
Supports Affirmative Action
Supports Roe v Wade and Women's' Reproductive Rights
Supports Civil Unions
Supports Gun Control, While also Supporting Right to Bear Arms, Tightening Loopholes
Supports Stem Cell Research
Now those items were the talking points on his campaign trail, mostly during interviews.
The next items are actually things that he's either signed into legislation or accomplished so far. Again, these items were found on multiple web sites. I have no reason to question any of these items.
Hate Crime Bill making it a federal offense to harm someone because of their sexual orientation
S-CHIP Bill extending health insurance to low-income children
Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act forbidding wage disparities due to gender
$787 Billion America Recovery and Reinvestment Act - otherwise known as the Stimulus Plan.
This includes the Cash for Clunkers Program, Making Home Affordable Plan,
Bank Bailout, Auto Industry Bailout, Tax Cuts for Low and Middle Income Americans
Set new Federal Fuel Efficiency Standards - Part of Cap and Trade
Increased Tax Rebates for Purchase of Hybrid Cars
Extending the First Time Homeowners Tax Credits
Credit Card Act Blocking some of the Unfair Consumer Protections Laws, Limiting Fees
Increased Student Loans, Enabled Students to Refinance if Needed
Increased Disaster Management and Prevention Funding, Infrastructure Changes
Froze Salaries for Top White House Staff and Aides
Set Lobbying Constraints on Gifting and Employment Practices
Ended Tax Benefits for Companies who Outsourced Employment of US Jobs
Ended the Practice of Forbidding Medicare Drug Price Negotiations - Saving Seniors Money
Allowed Visitation to Cuba by US Family Members
Closed Off-Shore Tax Loopholes
Remodeled Global Role for Better Foreign Policy
Set a Deadline to Pull out of Iraq
Set a Deadline to Close GITMO
Increased Troops in Afghanistan
Banned Torture and Inhumane Treatment of Prisoners
Ordered "Secret" Prisons Closed throughout World
AMD Stabilization and Support Bill Passage to Change Military Practices
Phased Out F22s
Purchased Better Body Armor
Money for Better Housing
Money for Better Wages
Hiring of Spouses into Federal Jobs
Ended Media Blackout for Fallen Soldiers
Expenses of Families Paid to go to Dover AFB to Meet Fallen Soldiers Bodies
Ended Stop-Loss Date that was Keeping Soldiers Abroad Past their Enlistment Date
Increased Patrols off Coast of Somalia
More Money for Veteran Services and Medical Care at Walter Reed Hospital
National Service Legislation to Increase Money for the Ameri-Corps and Youth Groups
And a little bit of gossip - supposedly he paid for the redecoration of the White House out of his own pocket. I wondered who paid for that.
If you ask me, not too shabby. Have I gotten everything that I would want or everything that he said he was going to do, no, not yet - but I think it's a good start.
Now let's go back and go over what he hasn't gotten done - according to his campaign platform.
We're not out of Iraq - although there is a deadline.
Health Care Reform hasn't passed - although it's gotten further than it has in the last 60 years.
Climate Change, Cap and Trade, Education Reform and Immigration Reform haven't
even taken off yet.
GITMO isn't closed yet - I think he's taking his time on this one, making sure he handles it
the best way he can.
He hasn't Repealed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" - which seems like it should just be so easy.
Pres. Obama sure has a lot on his plate - a lot of unfinished business to tend to. All the above items still need a lot of attention, plus our economic forecast is still in bad shape. Plus:
All of the Stimulus Package isn't Rolled Out Yet
Unemployment Rates are Still High although trending Down
I'd like to try to attach a copy of my notes about Obama's Vision for Health Care Reform. I made notes and continue to make notes as I read more of the Bills. My goal is to read the entire House and Senate Bills and then the combined Bill. I'm taking notes on the parts of the Bills so when the final one is out, I can put out what stayed in and what got left out. I'll share those notes with everyone along the way.
Let's see if it works. Click here. Let me know if you can't see it and I can email it to you. It's kind of interesting what people actually think his vision for Health Care Reform is. And no the public option isn't in there - although I know he did voice this as something he wanted and needed at times, but he didn't include this in his vision that was published on his web site or online.
So now, I'll move onto some of the verbiage of some of the political tabloids and pundits. Sorry, for me, I'm going to concentrate on the positive - not the negative - and I'm going to look toward the future, not the past.
According to the Congressional Quarterly, Pres. Obama has done better than any of the Presidents in getting Congressional Votes on the issues he took a position on. Now, they've only been keeping track for 50 years or so - but Pres. LB Johnson held the record before at 93%. According to this study, Pres. Obama has a 96.7% record so far. If you google it, you can see the graph. They attribute this high percentage to two concepts - his past background in the Senate, knowing how DC works and being a little bit smart in picking his battles and taking his time.
Next I pulled up a few articles on the state of the economy. CNBC and the BBC commented on the Profit of the twelve Federal Banks. Imagine this, they actually made a huge profit this year, greater than any time since the Federal Reserves inception in 1914. Their profit was $52.1 Billion dollars and they paid the US Treasury $46.1 Billion in 2009. Technically this also means that we, as citizens, made a profit off of the Bank Bailouts. Now if only, we could get the banks and the credit card companies to finally lend some money to us again, we'd all be good.
According to Slate, the Stimulus plan and the Bail Outs seem to have diverted a depression.
The most interesting study I found though was published in the Washington monthly, showing the unemployment rates from Jan 2008 until Nov 2009. If you get a chance, you should google it. It clearly shows how OK it was in Jan 2008 and how horrible unemployment was in Dec 2008 and Jan of 2009. It also shows that as of Nov 2009, the rate is actually better than it was in Jan 2008. Now again, I've heard these rates are very open to interpretation and there is a lot of information that isn't available for statistics - but of what is trackable, they tracked it here. Now granted, I am in no way saying it's still not horrible. There are so many people out there out of work, so many that desperately want to work and can't find jobs, so many that have given up. I'm just saying, it looks like it's going the other way - it may take some time, but again, I'm being hopeful for everyone out there that is struggling and being thankful for the job that I have, so thankful.
So in summary what I'd like to say is, there are a lot of nay-sayers out there, a lot of pessimists, a lot of people who want instant gratification and an answer to all of our problems. One thing I do remember from Pres. Obama's many speeches is that he said, over and over again and very clearly, our Country is in a great economic mess, he was going to work hard on fixing it, but it was going to take time (I recall he said he didn't even know if it would be better in 4 years, that some of the progress would take longer than that.) and we were all going to have to sacrifice in one way or another. I don't know about all of you out there reading this article, but it's been a year. I think we're moving in the right direction. And although it's been harder for me, financially this year, I am very thankful that I still have my health, my health care, my job, my house, my loved ones, friends and family included.
What I'd like to wish for the New Year is a lot more of the good stuff, and a lot less of the bad stuff. Again, I sure would like to see a lot more of Country Unity taking place. I'm all for everyone having their own opinions and passions, but I wish we could work on merging those ideas peacefully or just agree to disagree and let democracy rule. Take care.
Wow, long time, no write. I guess the holidays kind of kicked my proverbial free time for writing.
Here I go easing back into with a noncontroversial subject.
So let's talk a little bit about the past year. This blog is in preparation for all the nay-saying that will be going on next week about President Obama's one-year anniversary in office.
I guess it's pretty debatable. Are we in a better place than we were last year at this time? I guess it depends on who you are, where you live, what circumstances are occurring in your life. It's been a hard year for a lot of people. And a lot of people have no idea how hard it's really been for a lot of people in our Country. I have to say, if more people had a clue - and a bit of a soul, they'd be a lot more humble and thankful.
Have we gotten the change we thought was going to happen - in the magnitude we expected? I'm pretty sure the answer to that is a resounding No ! . I still believe in "Yes, We Can", but the question is how fast can we? and who is going to be and stay in the way? I do believe we are on our way - at least I hope. And without hope - and a lot of faith, there is nothing.
We've seen a lot of greed, hatred and prejudice over the last year. I guess maybe Washington DC has always been a politically corrupt ugly place - but I don't think a lot of us knew the extent of it - and probably still don't. With the Internet and the media of today, it's a lot more evident. It's not pretty - and I think, personally a lot of people should be losing sleep at night and be ashamed of themselves.
This is supposed to be a democracy - I think we're all supposed to be humanitarians - maybe not. I'm going to research that a little bit later and come back to that issue - what kind of a society are we really living in? I don't believe our Country qualifies as a true democracy, looking out for each other.
So let's do a little recap of President Obama's accomplishments. What did he campaign on - what if anything did he promise? Has he flipped on his priorities? Or is he just taking it slow and easy - getting what he can when he can? Pacing himself and concentrating on his priorities?
I've done a lot of googling, visited a multitude of web sites - some partisan, some bi-partisan and some claiming to be non-partisan. Here's what I found.
During his campaign, the following items were President Obama's top priorities:
#1 - Withdrawal from Iraq
#2 - Health Care Reform/Universal Coverage for All Americans
#3 - Climate Change
Increased Energy Independence
Decreased Lobbyist/Special Interest Group Influence
Re-Focus Anti-Terrorism Strategies on Afghanistan, Pakistan and Other Problem Spots
Eliminate Weapons of Mass Destruction World-wide
Immigration Reform, including Electronic Tracking Systems to Identify Illegal Aliens
Education Reform
Supports Affirmative Action
Supports Roe v Wade and Women's' Reproductive Rights
Supports Civil Unions
Supports Gun Control, While also Supporting Right to Bear Arms, Tightening Loopholes
Supports Stem Cell Research
Now those items were the talking points on his campaign trail, mostly during interviews.
The next items are actually things that he's either signed into legislation or accomplished so far. Again, these items were found on multiple web sites. I have no reason to question any of these items.
Hate Crime Bill making it a federal offense to harm someone because of their sexual orientation
S-CHIP Bill extending health insurance to low-income children
Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act forbidding wage disparities due to gender
$787 Billion America Recovery and Reinvestment Act - otherwise known as the Stimulus Plan.
This includes the Cash for Clunkers Program, Making Home Affordable Plan,
Bank Bailout, Auto Industry Bailout, Tax Cuts for Low and Middle Income Americans
Set new Federal Fuel Efficiency Standards - Part of Cap and Trade
Increased Tax Rebates for Purchase of Hybrid Cars
Extending the First Time Homeowners Tax Credits
Credit Card Act Blocking some of the Unfair Consumer Protections Laws, Limiting Fees
Increased Student Loans, Enabled Students to Refinance if Needed
Increased Disaster Management and Prevention Funding, Infrastructure Changes
Froze Salaries for Top White House Staff and Aides
Set Lobbying Constraints on Gifting and Employment Practices
Ended Tax Benefits for Companies who Outsourced Employment of US Jobs
Ended the Practice of Forbidding Medicare Drug Price Negotiations - Saving Seniors Money
Allowed Visitation to Cuba by US Family Members
Closed Off-Shore Tax Loopholes
Remodeled Global Role for Better Foreign Policy
Set a Deadline to Pull out of Iraq
Set a Deadline to Close GITMO
Increased Troops in Afghanistan
Banned Torture and Inhumane Treatment of Prisoners
Ordered "Secret" Prisons Closed throughout World
AMD Stabilization and Support Bill Passage to Change Military Practices
Phased Out F22s
Purchased Better Body Armor
Money for Better Housing
Money for Better Wages
Hiring of Spouses into Federal Jobs
Ended Media Blackout for Fallen Soldiers
Expenses of Families Paid to go to Dover AFB to Meet Fallen Soldiers Bodies
Ended Stop-Loss Date that was Keeping Soldiers Abroad Past their Enlistment Date
Increased Patrols off Coast of Somalia
More Money for Veteran Services and Medical Care at Walter Reed Hospital
National Service Legislation to Increase Money for the Ameri-Corps and Youth Groups
And a little bit of gossip - supposedly he paid for the redecoration of the White House out of his own pocket. I wondered who paid for that.
If you ask me, not too shabby. Have I gotten everything that I would want or everything that he said he was going to do, no, not yet - but I think it's a good start.
Now let's go back and go over what he hasn't gotten done - according to his campaign platform.
We're not out of Iraq - although there is a deadline.
Health Care Reform hasn't passed - although it's gotten further than it has in the last 60 years.
Climate Change, Cap and Trade, Education Reform and Immigration Reform haven't
even taken off yet.
GITMO isn't closed yet - I think he's taking his time on this one, making sure he handles it
the best way he can.
He hasn't Repealed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" - which seems like it should just be so easy.
Pres. Obama sure has a lot on his plate - a lot of unfinished business to tend to. All the above items still need a lot of attention, plus our economic forecast is still in bad shape. Plus:
All of the Stimulus Package isn't Rolled Out Yet
Unemployment Rates are Still High although trending Down
I'd like to try to attach a copy of my notes about Obama's Vision for Health Care Reform. I made notes and continue to make notes as I read more of the Bills. My goal is to read the entire House and Senate Bills and then the combined Bill. I'm taking notes on the parts of the Bills so when the final one is out, I can put out what stayed in and what got left out. I'll share those notes with everyone along the way.
Let's see if it works. Click here. Let me know if you can't see it and I can email it to you. It's kind of interesting what people actually think his vision for Health Care Reform is. And no the public option isn't in there - although I know he did voice this as something he wanted and needed at times, but he didn't include this in his vision that was published on his web site or online.
So now, I'll move onto some of the verbiage of some of the political tabloids and pundits. Sorry, for me, I'm going to concentrate on the positive - not the negative - and I'm going to look toward the future, not the past.
According to the Congressional Quarterly, Pres. Obama has done better than any of the Presidents in getting Congressional Votes on the issues he took a position on. Now, they've only been keeping track for 50 years or so - but Pres. LB Johnson held the record before at 93%. According to this study, Pres. Obama has a 96.7% record so far. If you google it, you can see the graph. They attribute this high percentage to two concepts - his past background in the Senate, knowing how DC works and being a little bit smart in picking his battles and taking his time.
Next I pulled up a few articles on the state of the economy. CNBC and the BBC commented on the Profit of the twelve Federal Banks. Imagine this, they actually made a huge profit this year, greater than any time since the Federal Reserves inception in 1914. Their profit was $52.1 Billion dollars and they paid the US Treasury $46.1 Billion in 2009. Technically this also means that we, as citizens, made a profit off of the Bank Bailouts. Now if only, we could get the banks and the credit card companies to finally lend some money to us again, we'd all be good.
According to Slate, the Stimulus plan and the Bail Outs seem to have diverted a depression.
The most interesting study I found though was published in the Washington monthly, showing the unemployment rates from Jan 2008 until Nov 2009. If you get a chance, you should google it. It clearly shows how OK it was in Jan 2008 and how horrible unemployment was in Dec 2008 and Jan of 2009. It also shows that as of Nov 2009, the rate is actually better than it was in Jan 2008. Now again, I've heard these rates are very open to interpretation and there is a lot of information that isn't available for statistics - but of what is trackable, they tracked it here. Now granted, I am in no way saying it's still not horrible. There are so many people out there out of work, so many that desperately want to work and can't find jobs, so many that have given up. I'm just saying, it looks like it's going the other way - it may take some time, but again, I'm being hopeful for everyone out there that is struggling and being thankful for the job that I have, so thankful.
So in summary what I'd like to say is, there are a lot of nay-sayers out there, a lot of pessimists, a lot of people who want instant gratification and an answer to all of our problems. One thing I do remember from Pres. Obama's many speeches is that he said, over and over again and very clearly, our Country is in a great economic mess, he was going to work hard on fixing it, but it was going to take time (I recall he said he didn't even know if it would be better in 4 years, that some of the progress would take longer than that.) and we were all going to have to sacrifice in one way or another. I don't know about all of you out there reading this article, but it's been a year. I think we're moving in the right direction. And although it's been harder for me, financially this year, I am very thankful that I still have my health, my health care, my job, my house, my loved ones, friends and family included.
What I'd like to wish for the New Year is a lot more of the good stuff, and a lot less of the bad stuff. Again, I sure would like to see a lot more of Country Unity taking place. I'm all for everyone having their own opinions and passions, but I wish we could work on merging those ideas peacefully or just agree to disagree and let democracy rule. Take care.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
