Remember "cash for clunkers," the program that subsidized Americans to the tune of nearly $3 billion to buy a new car and destroy an old one? Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood declared in August that, "This is the one stimulus program that seems to be working better than just about any other program."
If that's true, heaven help the other programs. Last week U.S. automakers reported that new car sales for September, the first month since the clunker program expired, sank by 25% from a year earlier. Sales at GM and Chrysler fell by 45% and 42%, respectively. Ford was down about 5%. Some 700,000 cars were sold in the summer under the program as buyers received up to $4,500 to buy a new car they would probably have purchased anyway, so all the program seems to have done is steal those sales from the future. Exactly as critics predicted.
Cash for clunkers had two objectives: help the environment by increasing fuel efficiency, and boost car sales to help Detroit and the economy. It achieved neither. According to Hudson Institute economist Irwin Stelzer, at best "the reduction in gasoline consumption will cut our oil consumption by 0.2 percent per year, or less than a single day's gasoline use." Burton Abrams and George Parsons of the University of Delaware added up the total benefits from reduced gas consumption, environmental improvements and the benefit to car buyers and companies, minus the overall cost of cash for clunkers, and found a net cost of roughly $2,000 per vehicle. Rather than stimulating the economy, the program made the nation as a whole $1.4 billion poorer.
The basic fallacy of cash for clunkers is that you can somehow create wealth by destroying existing assets that are still productive, in this case cars that still work. Under the program, auto dealers were required to destroy the car engines of trade-ins with a sodium silicate solution, then smash them and send them to the junk yard. As the journalist Henry Hazlitt wrote in his classic, "Economics in One Lesson," you can't raise living standards by breaking windows so some people can get jobs repairing them.
In the category of all-time dumb ideas, cash for clunkers rivals the New Deal brainstorm to slaughter pigs to raise pork prices. The people who really belong in the junk yard are the wizards in Washington who peddled this economic malarkey.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Monday, September 28, 2009
Apologize to Joe Wilson
THE PRESIDENT…“There are also those who claim that our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false. The reforms -- the reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: You lie! (Boos.)”
THE PRESIDENT: It's not true.
This interchange ended with the censure of Joe Wilson on the Senate floor, and continual denials that reform would include options for coverage for those here illegally.
It turns out it was a lie. This very coverage has been introduced by a cadre of Democrats no doubt doing the dirty work of the White House, so the President can continue to pretend as though he had no hand in this. Here is the report from the Washington Post this morning: “Fearful that they're losing ground on immigration and health care, a group of House Democrats is pushing back and arguing that any health care bill should extend to all legal immigrants and allow illegal immigrants some access, The Washington Times reported on Monday. The Democrats, trying to stiffen their party's spines on the contentious issue, say it's unfair to bar illegal immigrants from paying their own way in a government-sponsored exchange. Legal immigrants, they say, regardless of how long they've been in the United States, should be able to get government-subsidized health care if they meet the other eligibility requirements.”
The inclusion of legal and illegal immigrants is being proposed by Rep Honda of California, and 20 of his fellow Democrats.
And if this fails - the plan truly is to legitimize their status in this country - even in the face of double digit unemployment for those here legally. Last month in Guadalajara, Mexico, President Obama said that he was "confident" he would get Congress to enact comprehensive immigration reform that included a "pathway to citizenship" for illegal aliens."If anything, this debate underscores the necessity of passing comprehensive immigration reform and resolving the issue of 12 million undocumented people living and working in this country once and for all," Obama said. "That's what I've said from the start. That's what I say tonight."
Who is lying? Who deserves censure? Not Joe Wilson - he deserves an apology!
AUDIENCE MEMBER: You lie! (Boos.)”
THE PRESIDENT: It's not true.
This interchange ended with the censure of Joe Wilson on the Senate floor, and continual denials that reform would include options for coverage for those here illegally.
It turns out it was a lie. This very coverage has been introduced by a cadre of Democrats no doubt doing the dirty work of the White House, so the President can continue to pretend as though he had no hand in this. Here is the report from the Washington Post this morning: “Fearful that they're losing ground on immigration and health care, a group of House Democrats is pushing back and arguing that any health care bill should extend to all legal immigrants and allow illegal immigrants some access, The Washington Times reported on Monday. The Democrats, trying to stiffen their party's spines on the contentious issue, say it's unfair to bar illegal immigrants from paying their own way in a government-sponsored exchange. Legal immigrants, they say, regardless of how long they've been in the United States, should be able to get government-subsidized health care if they meet the other eligibility requirements.”
The inclusion of legal and illegal immigrants is being proposed by Rep Honda of California, and 20 of his fellow Democrats.
And if this fails - the plan truly is to legitimize their status in this country - even in the face of double digit unemployment for those here legally. Last month in Guadalajara, Mexico, President Obama said that he was "confident" he would get Congress to enact comprehensive immigration reform that included a "pathway to citizenship" for illegal aliens."If anything, this debate underscores the necessity of passing comprehensive immigration reform and resolving the issue of 12 million undocumented people living and working in this country once and for all," Obama said. "That's what I've said from the start. That's what I say tonight."
Who is lying? Who deserves censure? Not Joe Wilson - he deserves an apology!
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Baucus Committee confirms cut in Medicare Advantage Benefits.
Baucus Committee confirms cut in Medicare Advantage Benefits.
The Congress Daily confirmed on Wednesday the news that senior benefits under Medicare Advantage Plans would be cut. This confirmation came just a day after Humana was accused of misrepresenting and misleading its Medicare Advantage Policyholders.
"Baucus' mark requires Medicare Advantage plans to competitively bid federal payment rates in an attempt to eliminate overpayments for the private insurers to offer extra benefits traditional Medicare beneficiaries do not receive. The extra benefits will likely be cut under the overhaul.
Republicans claimed the Medicare Advantage cuts run counter to President Obama's assertions that Medicare benefits would not be cut. Democrats parsed their words to keep Obama's promise, arguing Medicare beneficiaries do not receive the extra benefits the private plans offer.
Private plans serve nearly a quarter of the 45 million Medicare beneficiaries. " It is time to stop the sin of lying through omission, and to stop others from telling the truth, A link to the entire article is found here:http://www.nationaljournal.com/congressdaily/hcp_20090923_4295.php
The Congress Daily confirmed on Wednesday the news that senior benefits under Medicare Advantage Plans would be cut. This confirmation came just a day after Humana was accused of misrepresenting and misleading its Medicare Advantage Policyholders.
"Baucus' mark requires Medicare Advantage plans to competitively bid federal payment rates in an attempt to eliminate overpayments for the private insurers to offer extra benefits traditional Medicare beneficiaries do not receive. The extra benefits will likely be cut under the overhaul.
Republicans claimed the Medicare Advantage cuts run counter to President Obama's assertions that Medicare benefits would not be cut. Democrats parsed their words to keep Obama's promise, arguing Medicare beneficiaries do not receive the extra benefits the private plans offer.
Private plans serve nearly a quarter of the 45 million Medicare beneficiaries. " It is time to stop the sin of lying through omission, and to stop others from telling the truth, A link to the entire article is found here:http://www.nationaljournal.com/congressdaily/hcp_20090923_4295.php
Saturday, September 26, 2009
One more Lie
HR 3200 has gone through the week largely unscathed - which is just more proof to me that no one cares what we the people think or want.It doesn’t take long to run into an “uh-oh” moment when reading the House’s “health care for all Americans” bill. Right there on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal.
Yes you read that correctly - The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of “Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage,” the “Limitation On New Enrollment” section of the bill clearly states:
“Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day” of the year the legislation becomes law.
So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won’t be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers , and as people leave jobs or leave insurance plans, those plans will dissolve as those remaining will cause the plan to lose financial viability.
From the beginning, opponents of the public option plan have warned that if the government gets into the business of offering subsidized health insurance coverage, the private insurance market will wither. Drawn by a public option that will be 30% to 40% cheaper than their current premiums because taxpayers will be funding it, employers will gladly scrap their private plans and go with Washington’s coverage.
The nonpartisan Lewin Group estimated in April that 120 million or more Americans could lose their group coverage at work and end up in such a program. That would leave private carriers with 50 million or fewer customers. This could cause the market to, as Lewin Vice President John Sheils put it, “fizzle out altogether.”
What wasn’t known until now is that the bill itself will kill the market for private individual coverage by not letting any new policies be written after the public option becomes law.
The legislation is also likely to finish off health savings accounts, a goal that Democrats have had for years. They want to crush that alternative because nothing gives individuals more control over their medical care, and the government less, than HSAs.
With HSAs out of the way, a key obstacle to the left’s expansion of the welfare state will be removed.
The public option won’t be an option for many, but rather a mandate for buying government care. A free people should be outraged at this advance of soft tyranny.
Washington does not have the constitutional or moral authority to outlaw private markets in which parties voluntarily participate. It shouldn’t be killing business opportunities, or limiting choices, or legislating major changes in Americans’ lives. And oh by the way - under this bill you can go to jail for not having insurance…..
Yes you read that correctly - The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage. Under the Orwellian header of “Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage,” the “Limitation On New Enrollment” section of the bill clearly states:
“Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day” of the year the legislation becomes law.
So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won’t be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers , and as people leave jobs or leave insurance plans, those plans will dissolve as those remaining will cause the plan to lose financial viability.
From the beginning, opponents of the public option plan have warned that if the government gets into the business of offering subsidized health insurance coverage, the private insurance market will wither. Drawn by a public option that will be 30% to 40% cheaper than their current premiums because taxpayers will be funding it, employers will gladly scrap their private plans and go with Washington’s coverage.
The nonpartisan Lewin Group estimated in April that 120 million or more Americans could lose their group coverage at work and end up in such a program. That would leave private carriers with 50 million or fewer customers. This could cause the market to, as Lewin Vice President John Sheils put it, “fizzle out altogether.”
What wasn’t known until now is that the bill itself will kill the market for private individual coverage by not letting any new policies be written after the public option becomes law.
The legislation is also likely to finish off health savings accounts, a goal that Democrats have had for years. They want to crush that alternative because nothing gives individuals more control over their medical care, and the government less, than HSAs.
With HSAs out of the way, a key obstacle to the left’s expansion of the welfare state will be removed.
The public option won’t be an option for many, but rather a mandate for buying government care. A free people should be outraged at this advance of soft tyranny.
Washington does not have the constitutional or moral authority to outlaw private markets in which parties voluntarily participate. It shouldn’t be killing business opportunities, or limiting choices, or legislating major changes in Americans’ lives. And oh by the way - under this bill you can go to jail for not having insurance…..
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
More Chicago Strong Arm Politics - this time on Health Care
You are either at the table or on the menu according to lobbyists in Washington when it comes to health care. All of the major media have reported that earlier this month, Humana sent a one-page letter to its customers enrolled in its Medicare Advantage plans, which offer private options to Medicare beneficiaries. Humana noted that, because of spending cuts proposed by Democrats, "millions of seniors and disabled individuals could lose many of the important benefits and services that make Medicare Advantage health plans so valuable." The company also urged its customers to contact their Representatives. Fairly tame you would think right? Not to Max Baucus.
Mr. Baucus took it as a declaration of war, and complained to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which ordered Humana to cease and desist. CMS claimed the mailer was "misleading and confusing" and told the company it has opened an official probe as to whether the mailer violated laws about how the insurers that manage Advantage plans are allowed to communicate with their customers, as well as other federal statutes.
"Please be advised that we take this matter very seriously and, based upon the findings of our investigation, will pursue compliance and enforcement actions," CMS concluded, ominously. Humana could be fined or booted from Medicare Advantage altogether.
"It is wholly inappropriate for insurance companies to mislead seniors regarding any subject—particularly on a subject as important to them, and to the nation, as health-care reform," Mr. Baucus said in a statement yesterday, playing the role of Congressional censor. "The health-care reform bill we released last week strengthens Medicare and does not cut benefits covered under the Medicare program—and seniors need to know that."
In fact, the Baucus draft legislation slashes $123 billion over the next decade from Medicare Advantage, which Democrats hate despite the fact that almost one-fourth of beneficiaries have chosen it over traditional fee-for-service Medicare. One reason seniors like it is because private insurers focus on quality and preventive care and try to manage benefits, as opposed to simply paying bills.
A new study from America's Health Insurance Plans, the industry trade group, finds that seniors on Advantage in California spent 30% fewer days in hospitals over fee-for-service patients, based on federal data. These cuts—as Humana correctly noted— could mean that seniors may lose this coverage.
Mr. Baucus doesn't want seniors to be educated about these facts, and obviously he's willing to use his enormous power to punish any private company that doesn't his version of reality. Yesterday, the agency barred all Advantage insurers from providing similar information to their beneficiaries.
This episode neatly shows how all U.S. health care will operate if Mr. Baucus's bill becomes law. They'll have no choice but to support administration policies or the political class will pull out the tire irons and dump their bleeding bodies in the Chicago River.
Humana made the mistake of trying to tell seniors the truth about what will happen to their coverage, after months of supporting health care reform in the hopes they would stay at the table when all those new bodies came in to the insurance market and now they better hire a good team of lawyers. Mr. Baucus and the Obama Administration are out to make Humana an object lesson to the rest of the business class, and that means they won't stop until Humana cries uncle or is ruined.
Mr. Baucus took it as a declaration of war, and complained to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which ordered Humana to cease and desist. CMS claimed the mailer was "misleading and confusing" and told the company it has opened an official probe as to whether the mailer violated laws about how the insurers that manage Advantage plans are allowed to communicate with their customers, as well as other federal statutes.
"Please be advised that we take this matter very seriously and, based upon the findings of our investigation, will pursue compliance and enforcement actions," CMS concluded, ominously. Humana could be fined or booted from Medicare Advantage altogether.
"It is wholly inappropriate for insurance companies to mislead seniors regarding any subject—particularly on a subject as important to them, and to the nation, as health-care reform," Mr. Baucus said in a statement yesterday, playing the role of Congressional censor. "The health-care reform bill we released last week strengthens Medicare and does not cut benefits covered under the Medicare program—and seniors need to know that."
In fact, the Baucus draft legislation slashes $123 billion over the next decade from Medicare Advantage, which Democrats hate despite the fact that almost one-fourth of beneficiaries have chosen it over traditional fee-for-service Medicare. One reason seniors like it is because private insurers focus on quality and preventive care and try to manage benefits, as opposed to simply paying bills.
A new study from America's Health Insurance Plans, the industry trade group, finds that seniors on Advantage in California spent 30% fewer days in hospitals over fee-for-service patients, based on federal data. These cuts—as Humana correctly noted— could mean that seniors may lose this coverage.
Mr. Baucus doesn't want seniors to be educated about these facts, and obviously he's willing to use his enormous power to punish any private company that doesn't his version of reality. Yesterday, the agency barred all Advantage insurers from providing similar information to their beneficiaries.
This episode neatly shows how all U.S. health care will operate if Mr. Baucus's bill becomes law. They'll have no choice but to support administration policies or the political class will pull out the tire irons and dump their bleeding bodies in the Chicago River.
Humana made the mistake of trying to tell seniors the truth about what will happen to their coverage, after months of supporting health care reform in the hopes they would stay at the table when all those new bodies came in to the insurance market and now they better hire a good team of lawyers. Mr. Baucus and the Obama Administration are out to make Humana an object lesson to the rest of the business class, and that means they won't stop until Humana cries uncle or is ruined.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Chicago's South Side Solution for Health Care
Michelle Obama took up the cry for health care reform in a speech on Friday. “If we want to ensure women have opportunities that they deserve, if we want women to be able to care for their families and pursue things they could never imagine, then we have to reform the system."
Women play a unique and increasingly significant role in families, she said, with eight in 10 mothers reporting they are the ones responsible for choosing their children's doctors. More than 10 percent of women in this country are caring for a sick or elderly relative”. She went on to say: “ There will always be folks who will want things to stay just the way they are," Obama said. "I am here today standing before you as the First Lady of the United States of America because you all didn't settle for the world as it is... Health care is the next step." Her commitment to the most disadvantaged among us must be the result of some change of heart since she certainly demonstrated something different while working for the prestigious University of Chicago Medical Center. Shortly after Barack Obama joined the U.S. Senate in 2005, the medical center promoted Michelle Obama to vice president of community and external relations, and more than doubled her salary.
Mrs. Obama first hatched the UCMC program as the "South Side Health Collaborative. The program placed counselors in the emergency room where Chicago's inner city residents soon began hearing that UCMC's patient dumping program would "dramatically improve health care for thousands of South Side residents" and that the medical center was generously willing to provide "a ride on a shuttle bus to other centers." Likewise, the people who ran the community hospitals to which these unwanted patients were being shuttled began to read claims in local media to the effect that the Urban Health Initiative was good for them as well. Dr. Eric Whitaker, the Blagojevich crony who succeeded Mrs. Obama as Director of the program, repeatedly assured gullible reporters that the impact on these hospitals would be positive: "The initiative actually is improving their bottom lines." The CFOs of those hospitals were no doubt relieved to learn that treating Medicaid and uninsured patients is profitable
The program was so successful in getting rid of unwanted patients that she expanded it, gave it a new name, and hired none other than David Axelrod to sell the program to the public. According to the Sun-Times, "Obama's wife and Valerie Jarrett, an Obama friend and adviser who chaired the medical center's board, backed the Axelrod firm's hiring." Axelrod helped the future First Lady formulate a public relations campaign in which the "Urban Health Initiative" was represented as a boon to the community actuated by the purest of altruistic motives. Even many members of UCMC's medical staff believe the program is nothing more than an "attempt to ensure that the hospital retains only affluent patients with insurance" according to the Washington Post.
Even staunch Obama supporters like Toni Preckwinkle, a former teacher who represents Chicago's 4th Ward and who was an Obama delegate at the Democratic National Convention have trouble with the UCMC model. "It's hard to know whether this is motivated by the interests of the patients or by the financial interests of the medical center." Asked her personal conclusion, by the Chicago Tribune Preckwinkle paused. "They have decided they need to have as many paying patients as possible," she said. "That's all I'm going to say."
Edward Novak, president of Chicago's Sacred Heart Hospital, declined to discuss the center's initiative in particular but dismissed as "bull" attempts to justify such programs as good for patients. "What they're really saying is, 'Don't use our emergency room because it will cost us money, and we don't want the public-aid population,' " Novak said.
Women play a unique and increasingly significant role in families, she said, with eight in 10 mothers reporting they are the ones responsible for choosing their children's doctors. More than 10 percent of women in this country are caring for a sick or elderly relative”. She went on to say: “ There will always be folks who will want things to stay just the way they are," Obama said. "I am here today standing before you as the First Lady of the United States of America because you all didn't settle for the world as it is... Health care is the next step." Her commitment to the most disadvantaged among us must be the result of some change of heart since she certainly demonstrated something different while working for the prestigious University of Chicago Medical Center. Shortly after Barack Obama joined the U.S. Senate in 2005, the medical center promoted Michelle Obama to vice president of community and external relations, and more than doubled her salary.
Mrs. Obama first hatched the UCMC program as the "South Side Health Collaborative. The program placed counselors in the emergency room where Chicago's inner city residents soon began hearing that UCMC's patient dumping program would "dramatically improve health care for thousands of South Side residents" and that the medical center was generously willing to provide "a ride on a shuttle bus to other centers." Likewise, the people who ran the community hospitals to which these unwanted patients were being shuttled began to read claims in local media to the effect that the Urban Health Initiative was good for them as well. Dr. Eric Whitaker, the Blagojevich crony who succeeded Mrs. Obama as Director of the program, repeatedly assured gullible reporters that the impact on these hospitals would be positive: "The initiative actually is improving their bottom lines." The CFOs of those hospitals were no doubt relieved to learn that treating Medicaid and uninsured patients is profitable
The program was so successful in getting rid of unwanted patients that she expanded it, gave it a new name, and hired none other than David Axelrod to sell the program to the public. According to the Sun-Times, "Obama's wife and Valerie Jarrett, an Obama friend and adviser who chaired the medical center's board, backed the Axelrod firm's hiring." Axelrod helped the future First Lady formulate a public relations campaign in which the "Urban Health Initiative" was represented as a boon to the community actuated by the purest of altruistic motives. Even many members of UCMC's medical staff believe the program is nothing more than an "attempt to ensure that the hospital retains only affluent patients with insurance" according to the Washington Post.
Even staunch Obama supporters like Toni Preckwinkle, a former teacher who represents Chicago's 4th Ward and who was an Obama delegate at the Democratic National Convention have trouble with the UCMC model. "It's hard to know whether this is motivated by the interests of the patients or by the financial interests of the medical center." Asked her personal conclusion, by the Chicago Tribune Preckwinkle paused. "They have decided they need to have as many paying patients as possible," she said. "That's all I'm going to say."
Edward Novak, president of Chicago's Sacred Heart Hospital, declined to discuss the center's initiative in particular but dismissed as "bull" attempts to justify such programs as good for patients. "What they're really saying is, 'Don't use our emergency room because it will cost us money, and we don't want the public-aid population,' " Novak said.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Party of Unification - Focused on Division
Its time to stop already. No one cares anymore that Joe Wilson was not polite, and no one with half a brain believes it was racially motivated. There is absolutely no objective data available to support that position. There is less division along race lines than there EVER has been. Were that not so the Presidential election would have seen the same kind of opposition and division. This is smoke and mirrors, intentionally designed to keep everyone talking about racism accusations rather than the issues.
Issues like the Baucus plan released yesterday which even other Democratic Senators are saying will levy a huge tax on the middle class. (SenatorWarnsHugeTaxHike) They sure don’t want focus on the facts as reported by The Hill that: “The new costs would be fully offset by reductions in Medicare spending and by generating new revenue from an excise tax on health insurance companies that sell plans that cost more than $21,000 for families and more than $8,000 for individuals. Insurers, pharmaceutical companies, medical-device makers, clinical laboratories and hospitals would also pay fees.” Let me see if I can get that one straight, the costs for the plan to provide care would be fully covered by increased costs to those providing services, reducing the services provided? Does that really make sense to ANYONE? No wonder Snowe bailed on that one.
They want the focus off the fact that- with Olympia Snowe refusing to support the bill, and the reconciliation process not likely given the death of Senator Kennedy and the illness of Senator Byrd - David Axelrod has called in favors in Massachusetts. The Mass State Senate will debate today whether to vote to change State Law back to allow the appointment of a Senator until a special election can be held in January. Remember that they changed this bill during the Kerry campaign while a Republican was Governor to insure that Kerry’s seat would not be filled with a Republican appointee.
They want to water down the focus on ACORN and the cloud of scandal hanging over it right now, or the fact that our current President has been an ardent supporter. The scandal has intensified to the point where ACORN has announced it will undergo an “Independent Review”. The Independent Review will be performed by individuals selected by the ACORN advisory board according to ACORN’s website. That advisory board includes : John Podesta, President and CEO, Center for American Progress; Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, Board Member, RFK Foundation, former MD Lt. Governor; Andrew Stern, International President, Service Employees International Union; Henry Cisneros, Executive Chairman, Cityview; along with a few others including major financial supporters of ACORN projects. How objective and independent will a review board picked by the SEIU be?
They want no attention on the latest Rasmussen Poll. The poll released on Monday revealed that although Health care reform had rebounded after President Obama’s speech to Congress - one week later, opposition to his health care reform plan has reached a new high of 55%. The latest Rasmussen Reports daily tracking poll shows that just 42% now support the plan, matching the low first reached in August.
And they sure don’t want the focus on the people who surround this administration including the czars and people like Arne Duncan. Arne Duncan like Obama and Ayers, is an alumnus of the Chicago political machine. Arne Duncan made news last year with his plan for Pride Campus, a proposal for a Chicago public school that would be "deliberately welcoming of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) teens." Pride Campus, which would have curriculum focused on teaching "the history of all people who have been oppressed and the civil rights movements that have led to social justice and queer studies." The gay-friendly school, to be called "Pride Campus," was quietly put on hold after Duncan's appointment as secretary of education was announced.
I agree - it’s much better to keep us focused on racism and incivility rather than all this other petty stuff…………...
Issues like the Baucus plan released yesterday which even other Democratic Senators are saying will levy a huge tax on the middle class. (SenatorWarnsHugeTaxHike) They sure don’t want focus on the facts as reported by The Hill that: “The new costs would be fully offset by reductions in Medicare spending and by generating new revenue from an excise tax on health insurance companies that sell plans that cost more than $21,000 for families and more than $8,000 for individuals. Insurers, pharmaceutical companies, medical-device makers, clinical laboratories and hospitals would also pay fees.” Let me see if I can get that one straight, the costs for the plan to provide care would be fully covered by increased costs to those providing services, reducing the services provided? Does that really make sense to ANYONE? No wonder Snowe bailed on that one.
They want the focus off the fact that- with Olympia Snowe refusing to support the bill, and the reconciliation process not likely given the death of Senator Kennedy and the illness of Senator Byrd - David Axelrod has called in favors in Massachusetts. The Mass State Senate will debate today whether to vote to change State Law back to allow the appointment of a Senator until a special election can be held in January. Remember that they changed this bill during the Kerry campaign while a Republican was Governor to insure that Kerry’s seat would not be filled with a Republican appointee.
They want to water down the focus on ACORN and the cloud of scandal hanging over it right now, or the fact that our current President has been an ardent supporter. The scandal has intensified to the point where ACORN has announced it will undergo an “Independent Review”. The Independent Review will be performed by individuals selected by the ACORN advisory board according to ACORN’s website. That advisory board includes : John Podesta, President and CEO, Center for American Progress; Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, Board Member, RFK Foundation, former MD Lt. Governor; Andrew Stern, International President, Service Employees International Union; Henry Cisneros, Executive Chairman, Cityview; along with a few others including major financial supporters of ACORN projects. How objective and independent will a review board picked by the SEIU be?
They want no attention on the latest Rasmussen Poll. The poll released on Monday revealed that although Health care reform had rebounded after President Obama’s speech to Congress - one week later, opposition to his health care reform plan has reached a new high of 55%. The latest Rasmussen Reports daily tracking poll shows that just 42% now support the plan, matching the low first reached in August.
And they sure don’t want the focus on the people who surround this administration including the czars and people like Arne Duncan. Arne Duncan like Obama and Ayers, is an alumnus of the Chicago political machine. Arne Duncan made news last year with his plan for Pride Campus, a proposal for a Chicago public school that would be "deliberately welcoming of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) teens." Pride Campus, which would have curriculum focused on teaching "the history of all people who have been oppressed and the civil rights movements that have led to social justice and queer studies." The gay-friendly school, to be called "Pride Campus," was quietly put on hold after Duncan's appointment as secretary of education was announced.
I agree - it’s much better to keep us focused on racism and incivility rather than all this other petty stuff…………...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)