Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Segami
Segami's Journal
Segami's Journal
July 12, 2013
How to cook reTHUG Goose recipe....
When he was the executive chef of Virginia’s governor’s mansion, Todd Schneider kept track of what the seven members of the state’s first family liked and didn’t like to eat. Schneider knew that Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) was a brussels sprouts man. He knew that the first lady, Maureen McDonnell, was partial to crab-seasoned popcorn. He knew that everyone liked bananas. “I’m in heaven here,” Schneider told The Richmond Times-Dispatch in a July 2010 interview, while standing in front of a rosemary bush in the gubernatorial garden. Three years later, Todd Schneider is far from heaven. Accused of taking property from the governor’s mansion kitchen, Schneider is facing several charges of embezzlement in Virginia court. At the same time, he has become a key player in the scandal swirling around the McDonnells and Virginia’s Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli.
Revelations about the relationship between the McDonnell family, Cuccinelli, and a prominent political donor and businessman, Jonnie Williams Sr., have been trickling out for weeks. Williams, the CEO of a struggling dietary supplement company called Star Scientific, has given McDonnell tens of thousands of dollars in campaign funds over the years, as well as reportedly tens of thousands of dollars in undisclosed money and other gifts. The undisclosed funds are now at the center of federal and state investigations, according to The Washington Post. According to a court motion filed at the end of April by his attorney, Schneider began providing state and federal authorities with information about Williams’ relationship to the McDonnells over a year ago. On Feb. 10, 2012, Schneider met with agents from the Virginia State Police and the FBI. A month later, on March 8, 2012, Schneider and his attorney again met with the agents, along with Patrick Dorgan, a senior assistant state attorney general.
“[Schneider] described Williams’ efforts to ingratiate himself within the Mansion with gifts Williams had provided the McDonnells, including payments for their daughter’s wedding in the summer of June, 2011, a summer vacation in 2011, and the use of expensive cars and a private jet,” Schneider’s attorney, Steven Benjamin, wrote in the April motion, describing last March’s meeting. “Todd Schneider also discussed the McDonnells’ promotion of Star Scientific products, including the introduction of Anatabloc (a food supplement) to [Medical College of Virginia] doctors at a lunch Todd Schneider cooked at the Mansion on August 30, 2012.” Schneider was dismissed from his job at the governor’s mansion last March, the same month he met with Dorgan and the FBI. Media reports at the time wrote that Schneider left amid a state police investigation into alleged “improprieties involving the kitchen operations at the governor’s mansion,” as a Virginia State Police spokesperson put it to The Washington Post. A year later, in March 2013, Schneider was indicted.
All of this must have been inconceivable when Schneider got his job at the executive mansion in 2010. He had spent decades in the food world, mostly in catering, and claimed ties to food stars like Martha Stewart and Paula Deen and clients like former president Bill Clinton, former vice president Dick Cheney and famed movie director Steven Spielberg. In 2011, he appeared alongside Maureen McDonnell in an appearance on the Lifetime show “The Balancing Act.” He fed the show’s host, Beth Troutman, a cookie, and touted the importance of food in the governor’s mansion. “We’ve made the kitchen the heart of the house,” Schneider said during the appearance. “So it’s great that the governor comes down, the first lady, and we’re like a big family here.”
cont'
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/07/todd_schneider_bob_mcdonnell.php?ref=fpa
SPILLER OF BEANS: Meet The Chef Talking To The FBI About Bob McDonnell
How to cook reTHUG Goose recipe....
When he was the executive chef of Virginia’s governor’s mansion, Todd Schneider kept track of what the seven members of the state’s first family liked and didn’t like to eat. Schneider knew that Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) was a brussels sprouts man. He knew that the first lady, Maureen McDonnell, was partial to crab-seasoned popcorn. He knew that everyone liked bananas. “I’m in heaven here,” Schneider told The Richmond Times-Dispatch in a July 2010 interview, while standing in front of a rosemary bush in the gubernatorial garden. Three years later, Todd Schneider is far from heaven. Accused of taking property from the governor’s mansion kitchen, Schneider is facing several charges of embezzlement in Virginia court. At the same time, he has become a key player in the scandal swirling around the McDonnells and Virginia’s Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli.
Revelations about the relationship between the McDonnell family, Cuccinelli, and a prominent political donor and businessman, Jonnie Williams Sr., have been trickling out for weeks. Williams, the CEO of a struggling dietary supplement company called Star Scientific, has given McDonnell tens of thousands of dollars in campaign funds over the years, as well as reportedly tens of thousands of dollars in undisclosed money and other gifts. The undisclosed funds are now at the center of federal and state investigations, according to The Washington Post. According to a court motion filed at the end of April by his attorney, Schneider began providing state and federal authorities with information about Williams’ relationship to the McDonnells over a year ago. On Feb. 10, 2012, Schneider met with agents from the Virginia State Police and the FBI. A month later, on March 8, 2012, Schneider and his attorney again met with the agents, along with Patrick Dorgan, a senior assistant state attorney general.
“[Schneider] described Williams’ efforts to ingratiate himself within the Mansion with gifts Williams had provided the McDonnells, including payments for their daughter’s wedding in the summer of June, 2011, a summer vacation in 2011, and the use of expensive cars and a private jet,” Schneider’s attorney, Steven Benjamin, wrote in the April motion, describing last March’s meeting. “Todd Schneider also discussed the McDonnells’ promotion of Star Scientific products, including the introduction of Anatabloc (a food supplement) to [Medical College of Virginia] doctors at a lunch Todd Schneider cooked at the Mansion on August 30, 2012.” Schneider was dismissed from his job at the governor’s mansion last March, the same month he met with Dorgan and the FBI. Media reports at the time wrote that Schneider left amid a state police investigation into alleged “improprieties involving the kitchen operations at the governor’s mansion,” as a Virginia State Police spokesperson put it to The Washington Post. A year later, in March 2013, Schneider was indicted.
All of this must have been inconceivable when Schneider got his job at the executive mansion in 2010. He had spent decades in the food world, mostly in catering, and claimed ties to food stars like Martha Stewart and Paula Deen and clients like former president Bill Clinton, former vice president Dick Cheney and famed movie director Steven Spielberg. In 2011, he appeared alongside Maureen McDonnell in an appearance on the Lifetime show “The Balancing Act.” He fed the show’s host, Beth Troutman, a cookie, and touted the importance of food in the governor’s mansion. “We’ve made the kitchen the heart of the house,” Schneider said during the appearance. “So it’s great that the governor comes down, the first lady, and we’re like a big family here.”
cont'
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/07/todd_schneider_bob_mcdonnell.php?ref=fpa
July 12, 2013
HYPOCRUMBS: What ever happened to the Christian republican WAR SHOUT that 'Every Life Is Precious'?
Does hypocrisy have no limits? It’s doubtful, but either way, this Texas Republican’s example is hilarious — you may remember Texas State Rep. Jodie Laubenberg as the Republican woman who stated that rape kits prevent pregnancy and “clean the woman out.” This time, as the author of an extreme anti-abortion bill moving through the Texas state legislature, she has stood up for what she calls the “pre-born life” of fetuses, despite her statement in 2007 that fetuses aren’t “people” enough to receive healthcare. Laudenberg already has a record of infamy thanks to her rape kit comments, as previously reported by Addicting Info:
Her dramatic policy reversal on the rights of the unborn, as seen in her new anti-abortion legislation, did not go unnoticed, however. From The Huffington Post:
While the stunning decisions over the past year of Republican politicians has likely made jobs for writers of political satire nearly impossible to come by, we can thank them for one thing — as they continue to demonstrate nearly unthinkable levels of incompetency, voters will (hopefully) take note and repay them at the ballot box for their ineptitude.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/07/11/anti-abortiontexas-rape-kit-republicans-stunning-reversal-on-the-rights-of-the-unborn-video/
.
EXTREME Anti-Abortion Republican Refused Fetuses Healthcare Because ‘THEY'RE NOT BORN YET’
HYPOCRUMBS: What ever happened to the Christian republican WAR SHOUT that 'Every Life Is Precious'?
Rep. Rafael Anchia: "...You Have An ANTI-LIFE Amendment.....Do you realize that this impacts U.S. citizen children in utero who will NOT RECEIVE Pre-Natal Care which increases the incident of low birth-weight babies and birth defects, is that not true...?"
Does hypocrisy have no limits? It’s doubtful, but either way, this Texas Republican’s example is hilarious — you may remember Texas State Rep. Jodie Laubenberg as the Republican woman who stated that rape kits prevent pregnancy and “clean the woman out.” This time, as the author of an extreme anti-abortion bill moving through the Texas state legislature, she has stood up for what she calls the “pre-born life” of fetuses, despite her statement in 2007 that fetuses aren’t “people” enough to receive healthcare. Laudenberg already has a record of infamy thanks to her rape kit comments, as previously reported by Addicting Info:
That led to one of the most outrageous moments of the night. Arguing against the exception for rape victims, Republican Rep. Jodie Laubenberg absurdly claimed that rape victims can be magically cleaned out at hospitals by emergency rape kits. “In the emergency room they have what’s called rape kits where a woman can get cleaned out,” she said, apparently clueless about what rape kits are actually used for. Rape kits are used to collect evidence of the rape. They do not ‘clean out’ women and they certainly do not prevent pregnancy.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/06/24/rape-kits-clean-out-women-says-texas-republican-before-anti-abortion-bill-passes-house/
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/06/24/rape-kits-clean-out-women-says-texas-republican-before-anti-abortion-bill-passes-house/
Her dramatic policy reversal on the rights of the unborn, as seen in her new anti-abortion legislation, did not go unnoticed, however. From The Huffington Post:
Texas State Rep. Jodie Laubenberg (R), the author of the radically anti-abortion bill making its way through the Texas Legislature this week, argued for hours on Tuesday that lawmakers should support her bill because of its strong protections for a person’s “pre-born life.”
The bill, HB 2, responds to “the definite death to the 70,000-plus babies who have been aborted in this state,” Laubenberg said during remarks on the House floor. “HB 2 focuses on both the child and the woman.”
But back in 2007, she made the case against treating the unborn as people — at least, when it comes to qualifying for health care services.
During a House debate on an appropriations bill that year, Laubenberg, a staunch conservative, put forward an amendment that would require expectant mothers to wait three months before they could begin receiving prenatal and perinatal care under the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or CHIP, a program that helps cover uninsured children in low-income families.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/09/texas-abortion-bill-author_n_3570588.html
The bill, HB 2, responds to “the definite death to the 70,000-plus babies who have been aborted in this state,” Laubenberg said during remarks on the House floor. “HB 2 focuses on both the child and the woman.”
But back in 2007, she made the case against treating the unborn as people — at least, when it comes to qualifying for health care services.
During a House debate on an appropriations bill that year, Laubenberg, a staunch conservative, put forward an amendment that would require expectant mothers to wait three months before they could begin receiving prenatal and perinatal care under the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or CHIP, a program that helps cover uninsured children in low-income families.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/09/texas-abortion-bill-author_n_3570588.html
While the stunning decisions over the past year of Republican politicians has likely made jobs for writers of political satire nearly impossible to come by, we can thank them for one thing — as they continue to demonstrate nearly unthinkable levels of incompetency, voters will (hopefully) take note and repay them at the ballot box for their ineptitude.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/07/11/anti-abortiontexas-rape-kit-republicans-stunning-reversal-on-the-rights-of-the-unborn-video/
.
July 11, 2013
How much are your private conversations worth to the U.S. government? Turns out, it can be a lot, depending on the technology. In the era of intense government surveillance and secret court orders, a murky multimillion-dollar market has emerged. Paid for by U.S. tax dollars, but with little public scrutiny, surveillance fees charged in secret by technology and phone companies can vary wildly. AT&T, for example, imposes a $325 "activation fee" for each wiretap and $10 a day to maintain it. Smaller carriers Cricket and U.S. Cellular charge only about $250 per wiretap. But snoop on a Verizon customer? That costs the government $775 for the first month and $500 each month after that, according to industry disclosures made last year to Congressman Edward Markey.
Meanwhile, email records like those amassed by the National Security Agency through a program revealed by former NSA systems analyst Edward Snowden probably were collected for free or very cheaply. Facebook says it doesn't charge the government for access. And while Microsoft, Yahoo and Google won't say how much they charge, the American Civil Liberties Union found that email records can be turned over for as little as $25.
Industry says it doesn't profit from the hundreds of thousands of government eavesdropping requests it receives each year, and civil liberties groups want businesses to charge. They worry that government surveillance will become too cheap as companies automate their responses. And if companies gave away customer records for free, wouldn't that encourage uncalled-for surveillance? But privacy advocates also want companies to be upfront about what they charge and alert customers after an investigation has concluded that their communications were monitored. "What we don't want is surveillance to become a profit center," said Christopher Soghoian, the ACLU's principal technologist. But "it's always better to charge $1. It creates friction, and it creates transparency" because it generates a paper trail that can be tracked.
Regardless of price, the surveillance business is growing. The U.S. government long has enjoyed access to phone networks and high-speed Internet traffic under the U.S. Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act to catch suspected criminals and terrorists. More recently, the FBI has pushed technology companies like Google and Skype to guarantee access to real-time communications on their services. And, as shown by recent disclosures about the NSA's surveillance practices, the U.S. intelligence community has an intense interest in analyzing data and content that flow through American technology companies to gather foreign intelligence.
cont'
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57593273/verizon-at-t-get-most-bucks-from-feds-for-wiretaps/
Verizon, AT&T Get MOST BUCKS From Feds For WIRETAPS
How much are your private conversations worth to the U.S. government? Turns out, it can be a lot, depending on the technology. In the era of intense government surveillance and secret court orders, a murky multimillion-dollar market has emerged. Paid for by U.S. tax dollars, but with little public scrutiny, surveillance fees charged in secret by technology and phone companies can vary wildly. AT&T, for example, imposes a $325 "activation fee" for each wiretap and $10 a day to maintain it. Smaller carriers Cricket and U.S. Cellular charge only about $250 per wiretap. But snoop on a Verizon customer? That costs the government $775 for the first month and $500 each month after that, according to industry disclosures made last year to Congressman Edward Markey.
Meanwhile, email records like those amassed by the National Security Agency through a program revealed by former NSA systems analyst Edward Snowden probably were collected for free or very cheaply. Facebook says it doesn't charge the government for access. And while Microsoft, Yahoo and Google won't say how much they charge, the American Civil Liberties Union found that email records can be turned over for as little as $25.
Industry says it doesn't profit from the hundreds of thousands of government eavesdropping requests it receives each year, and civil liberties groups want businesses to charge. They worry that government surveillance will become too cheap as companies automate their responses. And if companies gave away customer records for free, wouldn't that encourage uncalled-for surveillance? But privacy advocates also want companies to be upfront about what they charge and alert customers after an investigation has concluded that their communications were monitored. "What we don't want is surveillance to become a profit center," said Christopher Soghoian, the ACLU's principal technologist. But "it's always better to charge $1. It creates friction, and it creates transparency" because it generates a paper trail that can be tracked.
Regardless of price, the surveillance business is growing. The U.S. government long has enjoyed access to phone networks and high-speed Internet traffic under the U.S. Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act to catch suspected criminals and terrorists. More recently, the FBI has pushed technology companies like Google and Skype to guarantee access to real-time communications on their services. And, as shown by recent disclosures about the NSA's surveillance practices, the U.S. intelligence community has an intense interest in analyzing data and content that flow through American technology companies to gather foreign intelligence.
cont'
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57593273/verizon-at-t-get-most-bucks-from-feds-for-wiretaps/
July 11, 2013
Remaking The Democratic Party
Remember how a the beginning of the year we were gloating about how the Republicans were ripping themselves apart in internecine ideological conflicts? Well, we've stopped laughing about it now. Progressives are happy to support the Administration when it comes to gun control, and climate legislation, and gay rights, and voting rights. But as has been noted, these issues are being exploited by the Third Way establishment to keep Americans reluctantly voting, volunteering, and donating for candidates whose Rubinite economic policies and support of the unconstitutional Police State are gradually destroying this country. The answer isn't Republicans, who are even worse, or Libertarians, who will have us all living in Thunderdome: America subsisting off the flesh of librarians and retirees.
Progressives are getting angry, and not merely because politicians in whom they put their faith and hard work turned around to support some of the very same policies as those we fought to keep out of office. We're getting angry because it means that there are two party establishments that need to be overcome, not one. It's time to remake the Democratic Party and provide the United States with a REAL populist option, and not a Neoliberal imitation of one. To put it simply, we need to embrace the populists with proven track records of fighting for American jobs, and standing against the expansion of surveillance powers. Sherrod Brown, Howard Dean, Elizabeth Warren, Ron Wyden, Jeff Merkley, Alan Grayson, Marcy Kaptur, John Lewis, Jim McGovern, and Bernie Sanders immediately come to mind.
On the other hand, we have those Establishment Democrats who have taken an active role in the dismantling of our industries through free trade, the devastation of our small businesses by big box chains, the collapse of our banking system through Clinton-era deregulation, the corruption of our media outlets through mergers, and the frightening endangerment of our constitutionally-protected liberties through collaboration with the Neocons.
They are not populists. Their policies are hurting America. And though they may be liberal on social issues, so is Lloyd Blankfein, who if asked I'm sure would say that he's fine with gay marriage and gun control. So if we wouldn't vote for Lloyd Blankfein, why would we vote for those who essentially work for him? Cory Booker, for example, is a nice guy. As a public figure he's almost impossible not to like. But he's so close to Wall Street that he makes President Obama look like Robert Reich. We need reformers who dare to dream a little bigger than working within the parameters set by Big Money. We need populists. And those candidates who are not populists, need to be challenged in the primaries.
cont'
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/10/1222610/-Remaking-The-Democratic-Party
July 11, 2013
Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) on Thursday shrugged off White House claims that people challenging the legality of the Obamacare employer mandate delay were "willfully ignorant about past precedent," the Des Moines Register reported.
The Iowa Democrat made waves Wednesday when he said he didn’t understand how the Obama administration had legal authority to order a year’s delay in a requirement that large employers provide health insurance to their full-time workers. That prompted White House spokesman to say later that people questioning the legality of the move were “willfully ignorant about past precedent.”
Harkin laughed off the dispute this morning in a conference call with Iowa reporters. “I may be ignorant, but I’m not willfully so,” he quipped.
The senator said he’s had similar disagreements with previous administrations, Republican and Democratic. He called it part of a “historic clash between the legislative branch and the executive branch” over who has power to implement laws. People shouldn’t make too much of the dustup, he said. “I didn’t agree with the administration on it, but it’s not a dagger to the heart of the Affordable Care Act.”
Harkin added that the employer mandate, now due to take effect in 2015, would affect a relatively small number of employers and Americans. But he said millions of Americans will be able to take advantage of health-insurance exchanges, which are electronic marketplaces that are to open in October under the Affordable Care Act. “That’s a lot more important, quite frankly in my view, than the employer mandate.”
cont'
http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2013/07/11/harkin-quips-i-may-be-ignorant-but-not-willfully-so/article?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+desmoinesregister%2FNews+%28DesMoinesRegister.com+-+NEWS%29&nclick_check=1
Sen. Harkin On Obamacare Delay: ‘I May Be Ignorant, But I’m NOT WILLFULLY SO’
Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) on Thursday shrugged off White House claims that people challenging the legality of the Obamacare employer mandate delay were "willfully ignorant about past precedent," the Des Moines Register reported.
The Iowa Democrat made waves Wednesday when he said he didn’t understand how the Obama administration had legal authority to order a year’s delay in a requirement that large employers provide health insurance to their full-time workers. That prompted White House spokesman to say later that people questioning the legality of the move were “willfully ignorant about past precedent.”
Harkin laughed off the dispute this morning in a conference call with Iowa reporters. “I may be ignorant, but I’m not willfully so,” he quipped.
The senator said he’s had similar disagreements with previous administrations, Republican and Democratic. He called it part of a “historic clash between the legislative branch and the executive branch” over who has power to implement laws. People shouldn’t make too much of the dustup, he said. “I didn’t agree with the administration on it, but it’s not a dagger to the heart of the Affordable Care Act.”
Harkin added that the employer mandate, now due to take effect in 2015, would affect a relatively small number of employers and Americans. But he said millions of Americans will be able to take advantage of health-insurance exchanges, which are electronic marketplaces that are to open in October under the Affordable Care Act. “That’s a lot more important, quite frankly in my view, than the employer mandate.”
cont'
http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2013/07/11/harkin-quips-i-may-be-ignorant-but-not-willfully-so/article?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+desmoinesregister%2FNews+%28DesMoinesRegister.com+-+NEWS%29&nclick_check=1
July 11, 2013
Public Citizen Releases Road Map for States to Achieve Unified, Universal Health Care; Distributes to State Lawmakers Throughout U.S.
Public Citizen, July 10, 2013
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The steps a state would need to take to move toward creating a single-payer health care system are somewhat complicated but are doable, according to a new Public Citizen report that provides states with a road map of how to achieve unified, universal health coverage.
A state could not hope to achieve a pure single-payer system, such as exists in Canada, because of federal programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. But many of the ambitions of a single-payer system can be realized at the state level, the report explains. A state can accomplish much that the Affordable Care Act (ACA), or Obamacare, does not: provide universal care, greatly increase administrative efficiency and control costs.
Public Citizen distributed the report to state lawmakers throughout the country through the state affiliates of Health Care NOW. The report is available (at the link below).
“The facts are simple: We pay far more for health care than any developed country, yet we cover fewer people and get worse results,” said Dave Sterrett, health care counsel for Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division. “It’s time for real change.”
Calling for a universal care system in the United States is often painted as a quixotic pursuit because of incessant fear-mongering by conservatives about the supposed evils of a “government takeover” of health care.
But the report, A Road Map to “Single-Payer”: How States Can Escape the Clutches of the Private Health Insurance System, points out that Americans polled in 2012 were nearly evenly divided when asked if they favored a single-payer system, and this was amid the relentless drumbeat of opposition to the ACA. Evidence suggesting support for the single-payer concept also can be found in Americans’ widespread approval of Medicare, the government-run program that provides nearly universal care to those over 65 at far less cost than care that is reimbursed by private insurance companies.
The first step on a state’s road to a quasi-single payer system is to obtain a waiver from the ACA. This is well within reach because the act includes language that permits a state to receive a waiver from the ACA’s strictures, beginning in 2017. A state can be granted this waiver if it demonstrates that its alternative would provide coverage at least as good, for at least as many people, as the ACA would, and not add costs to the federal budget. For states that receive waivers, the federal government must provide funds to the state that equal what it would spend pursuant to the ACA. A state promising to provide comprehensive, universal care would easily clear this hurdle.
Achieving integration between a state system and Medicare and Medicaid would be more difficult because the law does not permit a broad waiver from these programs. But the law does provide ample room for the administration of these programs within a state to be altered to align billing systems and prices. This would allow Medicare and Medicaid to appear to providers and patients to be almost seamlessly integrated with a state system, although this strategy would require a state to dedicate resources to reconcile claims with the federal government.
The other major legal hurdle for a state to overcome is posed by the 1974 Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), which forbids states from regulating employer benefits plans. But a small body of case law provides grounds for cautious optimism that the hurdles of ERISA can be overcome. A state could insulate its system from being struck down on ERISA grounds by legislating alternative funding options, such as payroll, income or sales taxes.
The final major hurdle is determining how to pay for a universal care system. Transitioning from a system largely financed by employer and employee-paid insurance premiums to one likely financed by some combination of taxes would be challenging.
But the transition should not hurt employers or residents in the long run, the report concludes. A proposed system in Vermont, for instance, would significantly expand both the quality of benefits and the number of people covered. Yet Vermont’s plan would cost slightly less than the state’s current system, according to analysis commissioned by the state.
“Single-payer in the United States has been scorned but never tested,” said Lisa Gilbert, director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division. “We’re looking for a few pioneering states with the courage and fortitude to let common sense prevail over the insanity of our current patchwork system. Once they succeed, we expect most opposition to single-payer and our reliance on privately insured health care to become historical relics.”
http://www.citizen.org/road-map-to-single-payer-health-care-report
Report – “A Road Map to ‘Single-Payer’” (21 pages):
http://www.citizen.org/documents/road-map-to-single-payer-health-care-re…
This very useful Public Citizen report on steps toward single payer at the state level serves two important functions:
1) Although the Affordable Care Act is providing a few beneficial tweaks to the financing of our health care system, by now it is obvious that, by building on our dysfunctional, fragmented system, intolerable health care injustices will be perpetuated. Yet Congress itself is currently so dysfunctional that it is impossible to get them to consider a vastly superior alternative – a single payer Improved Medicare for All. For those who cannot wait until we are able to elect a sane supermajority in Congress, this report provides suggestions on how some single payer principles could be applied at the state level. Although that pathway is rugged and cannot lead all the way to single payer, at least it would provide more improvement than we are seeing with the Affordable Care Act. There is plenty in this report to keep health justice activists very busy on the state level.
2) The far more important conclusion to be drawn from this report is that states acting alone cannot establish a bona fide single payer system. There are too many major barriers that would prevent states from totally replacing their fragmented financing infrastructure. Under current federal laws, limitations imposed on states would not allow them to capture many of the more effective benefits of the single payer model. Although states could come much closer to universal coverage, their systems would still perpetuate many of the inefficiencies and inequities that exist today. Without the power of a public, single payer monopsony (a single buyer), improving allocation of our resources would be much more difficult. Although states could improve billing functions, that captures only a very small portion of the profound administrative waste in our system. Any savings on a state level would be very modest and would not be enough to pay for the elimination of uninsurance and underinsurance. Total health care costs would increase even more, when costs are already intolerable.
The lesson? We cannot let up in the least in our efforts to educate the nation on the imperative of a single payer national health program. To be unequivocally clear, that’s NATIONAL.
cont'
http://pnhp.org/blog/2013/07/10/how-states-can-get-close-to-a-single-payer-system/
How States Can Get Close to a SINGLE-PAYER System
This entry is from Dr. McCanne's Quote of the Day, a daily health policy update on the single-payer health care reform movement. The QotD is archived on PNHP's website.
Public Citizen Releases Road Map for States to Achieve Unified, Universal Health Care; Distributes to State Lawmakers Throughout U.S.
Public Citizen, July 10, 2013
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The steps a state would need to take to move toward creating a single-payer health care system are somewhat complicated but are doable, according to a new Public Citizen report that provides states with a road map of how to achieve unified, universal health coverage.
A state could not hope to achieve a pure single-payer system, such as exists in Canada, because of federal programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. But many of the ambitions of a single-payer system can be realized at the state level, the report explains. A state can accomplish much that the Affordable Care Act (ACA), or Obamacare, does not: provide universal care, greatly increase administrative efficiency and control costs.
Public Citizen distributed the report to state lawmakers throughout the country through the state affiliates of Health Care NOW. The report is available (at the link below).
“The facts are simple: We pay far more for health care than any developed country, yet we cover fewer people and get worse results,” said Dave Sterrett, health care counsel for Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division. “It’s time for real change.”
Calling for a universal care system in the United States is often painted as a quixotic pursuit because of incessant fear-mongering by conservatives about the supposed evils of a “government takeover” of health care.
But the report, A Road Map to “Single-Payer”: How States Can Escape the Clutches of the Private Health Insurance System, points out that Americans polled in 2012 were nearly evenly divided when asked if they favored a single-payer system, and this was amid the relentless drumbeat of opposition to the ACA. Evidence suggesting support for the single-payer concept also can be found in Americans’ widespread approval of Medicare, the government-run program that provides nearly universal care to those over 65 at far less cost than care that is reimbursed by private insurance companies.
The first step on a state’s road to a quasi-single payer system is to obtain a waiver from the ACA. This is well within reach because the act includes language that permits a state to receive a waiver from the ACA’s strictures, beginning in 2017. A state can be granted this waiver if it demonstrates that its alternative would provide coverage at least as good, for at least as many people, as the ACA would, and not add costs to the federal budget. For states that receive waivers, the federal government must provide funds to the state that equal what it would spend pursuant to the ACA. A state promising to provide comprehensive, universal care would easily clear this hurdle.
Achieving integration between a state system and Medicare and Medicaid would be more difficult because the law does not permit a broad waiver from these programs. But the law does provide ample room for the administration of these programs within a state to be altered to align billing systems and prices. This would allow Medicare and Medicaid to appear to providers and patients to be almost seamlessly integrated with a state system, although this strategy would require a state to dedicate resources to reconcile claims with the federal government.
The other major legal hurdle for a state to overcome is posed by the 1974 Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), which forbids states from regulating employer benefits plans. But a small body of case law provides grounds for cautious optimism that the hurdles of ERISA can be overcome. A state could insulate its system from being struck down on ERISA grounds by legislating alternative funding options, such as payroll, income or sales taxes.
The final major hurdle is determining how to pay for a universal care system. Transitioning from a system largely financed by employer and employee-paid insurance premiums to one likely financed by some combination of taxes would be challenging.
But the transition should not hurt employers or residents in the long run, the report concludes. A proposed system in Vermont, for instance, would significantly expand both the quality of benefits and the number of people covered. Yet Vermont’s plan would cost slightly less than the state’s current system, according to analysis commissioned by the state.
“Single-payer in the United States has been scorned but never tested,” said Lisa Gilbert, director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division. “We’re looking for a few pioneering states with the courage and fortitude to let common sense prevail over the insanity of our current patchwork system. Once they succeed, we expect most opposition to single-payer and our reliance on privately insured health care to become historical relics.”
http://www.citizen.org/road-map-to-single-payer-health-care-report
Report – “A Road Map to ‘Single-Payer’” (21 pages):
http://www.citizen.org/documents/road-map-to-single-payer-health-care-re…
This very useful Public Citizen report on steps toward single payer at the state level serves two important functions:
1) Although the Affordable Care Act is providing a few beneficial tweaks to the financing of our health care system, by now it is obvious that, by building on our dysfunctional, fragmented system, intolerable health care injustices will be perpetuated. Yet Congress itself is currently so dysfunctional that it is impossible to get them to consider a vastly superior alternative – a single payer Improved Medicare for All. For those who cannot wait until we are able to elect a sane supermajority in Congress, this report provides suggestions on how some single payer principles could be applied at the state level. Although that pathway is rugged and cannot lead all the way to single payer, at least it would provide more improvement than we are seeing with the Affordable Care Act. There is plenty in this report to keep health justice activists very busy on the state level.
2) The far more important conclusion to be drawn from this report is that states acting alone cannot establish a bona fide single payer system. There are too many major barriers that would prevent states from totally replacing their fragmented financing infrastructure. Under current federal laws, limitations imposed on states would not allow them to capture many of the more effective benefits of the single payer model. Although states could come much closer to universal coverage, their systems would still perpetuate many of the inefficiencies and inequities that exist today. Without the power of a public, single payer monopsony (a single buyer), improving allocation of our resources would be much more difficult. Although states could improve billing functions, that captures only a very small portion of the profound administrative waste in our system. Any savings on a state level would be very modest and would not be enough to pay for the elimination of uninsurance and underinsurance. Total health care costs would increase even more, when costs are already intolerable.
The lesson? We cannot let up in the least in our efforts to educate the nation on the imperative of a single payer national health program. To be unequivocally clear, that’s NATIONAL.
cont'
http://pnhp.org/blog/2013/07/10/how-states-can-get-close-to-a-single-payer-system/
July 11, 2013
Some have claimed that Americans don't care about the revelations that the NSA is conducting massive surveillance on our private communications. But Oliver Stone isn't buying it.
In a video produced with the ACLU, Director Oliver Stone shares some of his reflections on the NSA spying program and the disastrous legacy of unchecked government abuse of power. All Americans should stand up for our civil liberties at this critical moment in history, he says-- by asking our representatives in Congress to roll back the surveillance state.
Sign the petition to Congress here:
https://www.aclu.org/secure/stopnsa?m..
Oliver Stone on NSA SPYING: Do We Control The Government, Or DOES IT CONTROL US?
Some have claimed that Americans don't care about the revelations that the NSA is conducting massive surveillance on our private communications. But Oliver Stone isn't buying it.
In a video produced with the ACLU, Director Oliver Stone shares some of his reflections on the NSA spying program and the disastrous legacy of unchecked government abuse of power. All Americans should stand up for our civil liberties at this critical moment in history, he says-- by asking our representatives in Congress to roll back the surveillance state.
Sign the petition to Congress here:
https://www.aclu.org/secure/stopnsa?m..
July 11, 2013
The 54-year-old Grammy winning singer was admitted to a hospital in Dallas on Sunday, with his rep saying he suffered complications from a "recently acquired viral cardiomyopathy." The condition leads to a weakening and enlarging of the heart muscle, making it more difficult for the heart to pump blood to the rest of the body.
The music legend -- who had been scheduled to perform at a canceled show Wednesday at the Deadwood Mountain Grand Casino in Deadwood, SD.
The doctors treating critically ill Randy Travis spoke out for the first time Wednesday about the country star's condition and revealed that he was in congestive heart failure due to a viral respiratory illness that put him in the hospital on Sunday.
Travis remains in critical condition in a Dallas, TX hospital. Earlier, Drs. William Gray and Michael Mack of the Baylor Health Care System released a video, saying, "[Travis'] condition has stabilized and he has shown signs of improvement" while being treated for viral cardiomyopathy.
A statement released Tuesday by the singer's publicity company also revealed that Travis had undergone placement of an IMPELLA peripheral left ventricular assist device to help improve his circulatory function.
http://www.etonline.com/news/135837_Randy_Travis_Hospitalized/index.html
Randy Travis Suffers STROKE
The 54-year-old Grammy winning singer was admitted to a hospital in Dallas on Sunday, with his rep saying he suffered complications from a "recently acquired viral cardiomyopathy." The condition leads to a weakening and enlarging of the heart muscle, making it more difficult for the heart to pump blood to the rest of the body.
The music legend -- who had been scheduled to perform at a canceled show Wednesday at the Deadwood Mountain Grand Casino in Deadwood, SD.
UPDATE: Randy Travis' publicist tells ET: "As a complication of his congestive heart failure, Mr. Randy Travis has suffered a stroke and is currently undergoing surgery to relieve pressure on his brain."
The doctors treating critically ill Randy Travis spoke out for the first time Wednesday about the country star's condition and revealed that he was in congestive heart failure due to a viral respiratory illness that put him in the hospital on Sunday.
Travis remains in critical condition in a Dallas, TX hospital. Earlier, Drs. William Gray and Michael Mack of the Baylor Health Care System released a video, saying, "[Travis'] condition has stabilized and he has shown signs of improvement" while being treated for viral cardiomyopathy.
A statement released Tuesday by the singer's publicity company also revealed that Travis had undergone placement of an IMPELLA peripheral left ventricular assist device to help improve his circulatory function.
http://www.etonline.com/news/135837_Randy_Travis_Hospitalized/index.html
July 10, 2013
-snip
Abby Martin: Who was administering the surveillance?
Russell Tice: Thats a good question,..I don't know the answer to that.....Umm, it looked like, the plugging in of these phone numbers was being done in the evenings at NSA. So almost, it was like being done on the sly even so that most NSA employees did not know what was going on. Now a high-level person at NSA told me this was being directed from the Vice President's office....that would be Vice President Dick Cheney. Now I don't know that for sure but thats what I was told from a very senior person at NSA.
Abby Martin talks to Russell Tice, former intelligence analyst and original NSA whistleblower, about how the recent NSA scandal is only scratches the surface of a massive surveillance apparatus, citing specific targets the he saw spying orders for including former senators Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama.
Is The NSA BLACKMAILING Obama?
-snip
Abby Martin: Who was administering the surveillance?
Russell Tice: Thats a good question,..I don't know the answer to that.....Umm, it looked like, the plugging in of these phone numbers was being done in the evenings at NSA. So almost, it was like being done on the sly even so that most NSA employees did not know what was going on. Now a high-level person at NSA told me this was being directed from the Vice President's office....that would be Vice President Dick Cheney. Now I don't know that for sure but thats what I was told from a very senior person at NSA.
Abby Martin talks to Russell Tice, former intelligence analyst and original NSA whistleblower, about how the recent NSA scandal is only scratches the surface of a massive surveillance apparatus, citing specific targets the he saw spying orders for including former senators Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama.
Profile Information
Member since: Tue May 13, 2008, 03:07 AMNumber of posts: 14,923
