July 30, 2017
Jul 30 04:14 Franken, Klobuchar & the ACA, Part II Jul 30 04:19 Throw the bums out, Part II Jul 30 09:41 Fund: "Let's get their attention"
Prior Months: Jan Feb ~ May Jun
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Franken, Klobuchar & the ACA, Part II
Don Davis' article about the Thursday night vote on health care contains quotes from Sen. Franken and Sen. Klobuchar. Specifically, both senators talk about the importance of bipartisanship.
For instance, Sen. Franken said "Tonight's vote will go down in the history books. But we can't rest easy; the fight is far from over. My message to Republicans is come back to the table ... and work with us in a bipartisan way to improve health care for all Americans. If we want to do this the right way, it's the only path forward."
Sen. Franken, the Senate just debated health care. Lots of amendments were offered. Why didn't you offer amendments to improve the bill? It isn't like you didn't have the opportunity. Was it because you didn't want to defend your proposals on the Senate floor? It's one thing to insist on bipartisanship. It's another to not offer any substantive amendments that would fix the ACA.
By comparison, Sen. Klobuchar is quoted as saying "Time to work across the aisle..." Again, Sen. Klobuchar didn't offer any substantive amendments. She just spewed happy talk about working across the aisle. That sounds nice but it isn't a solution. Further, it was the Democrats' ideas that created this crisis. At least she didn't celebrate like Sen. Franken:
While Americans suffer from limited options and high prices, Sen. Franken and Sen. Warren celebrated. Left unanswered in all this is a simple question that the MSM intentionally hasn't asked. When iPads first hit the stores, they flew off the shelves. When Microsoft Office first came out, it flew off the shelves. When FedEx first opened, it didn't take long for Fred Smith to become a billionaire. Here's the unasked question that Democrats haven't answered: if Obamacare policies are so good, why is the individual mandate required to get people to buy health insurance policies? Is it because the product stinks? Is it because the product's price is too expensive?
Democrats have frequently said that the ACA "isn't perfect." (That's understatement.) They're pretending that it's only 1-2 minor tweaks away from being a hot-selling commodity. It isn't. It's a total mess. Democrats have said that insurance companies are bailing from the exchanges because Republicans are trying to destabilize them. They're bailing because they're losing tens of millions of dollars. Thursday night, I sent this constituent email to Sen. Klobuchar:
Sen. Klobuchar, I wish I could say I was surprised that you voted against each Republican health care reform proposal. Unfortunately, your votes were entirely predictable.
On Facebook, you said "We can still put aside partisanship and instead work together on bipartisan solutions that will help every American. That's utterly insulting. When Democrats passed the ACA, Democrats displayed nothing but partisanship. In fact, Harry Reid didn't allow Republican amendments to the bill. At the time, I don't remember you criticizing Sen. Reid for this blatant act of partisanship. Now that Obamacare is a failure and insurance companies are either pulling out of the exchanges or they're demanding huge premium increases, we're being told that bipartisanship is a must.
Why do I think that talk of bipartisanship will disappear the minute Democrats retake the majority? Honestly, I don't care if there's bipartisanship if either party gets this reform right. Right now, I've seen that the Democrats' plan has failed pretty much everyone except those with pre-existing conditions.
It's time you admitted that your ideas failed. Further, it's time for you to move in the Republicans' direction to solve this crisis. That means voting for Republican ideas. The ACA has caused dramatic spikes in premiums while barely increasing the number of people insured.
In short, you've failed. It's time for you to vote with Republicans. Period.
In summarization, the Democrats' plan is failing. That's because Democrats didn't listen to the consumer on what the consumers wanted. Instead, Democrats told their constituents what they'd be forced into getting. Predictably, that top-down approach has failed. People want to have options. The ACA hasn't given people the options that they've had prior to the ACA.
Posted Sunday, July 30, 2017 7:54 AM
No comments.
Throw the bums out, Part II
This SCTimes Our View editorial definitely isn't letting the St. Cloud School Board off the hook for intentionally misleading the public.
For instance, in their editorial, the Times wrote "What's the price of the public's trust? That's the question the St. Cloud school board and administrative leaders foisted upon their constituents Thursday night when the board voted 5-2 to purchase the shuttered Minnesota School of Business site and use it for administrative office space. There is no denying that vote fully contradicts the spirit of a plan to move those administrative offices into a vacated Technical High School. As residents remember, that idea was sparked by a high-powered citizen advisory group that district leadership created and leaned heavily on to earn voter approval last fall to build a new high school."
Since Thursday night's vote, the citizenry has peppered Board Chairman Dahlgren and Vice-Chair von Korff with questions that don't flatter either man. As for most of the questions, most focus their attention on things like "District leadership warmly embraced that idea, which very likely helped convince some voters to support building a new high school - which still only passed by less than 1 percent."
I'm determined to finish these men's political careers. They've slithered to explanations like Chairman Dahlgren's "The recommendation of the committee was taken under advisement and was presented as one possible option. No action was ever taken by the board and no person has the authority to make decisions or promises on behalf of the board. It would take an action by the majority of the board to do so. That did not occur here and if there is any misunderstanding within the committee, it is certainly that - a misunderstanding."
With all due respect to Chairman Dahlgren, I certainly don't know that it's a misunderstanding. Based on the recent slipperiness of the Board, it might easily be an intentional deception. I certainly won't give Chairman Dahlgren the benefit of the doubt.
We sit on the board as fiduciaries to fulfill the constitutional obligation to educate the children of our respective communities. As much as we respect your recommendation to make the move to Tech work, it has become clear that the plan is unworkable,' Von Korff stated. 'We're not looking at the (Minnesota School of Business) alternative because we don't care about you, the (mayor), or the neighborhood, or the (city). The plan to move into Tech is unworkable, and if we were to spend more than ($12 million) to execute this plan, we would be justly crucified for wasting education."
Indeed, the entire deal popped up so quickly on the public's radar screen that even key members of the high-profile advisory committee were surprised and had to communicate their displeasure via a letter.
At this point, why shouldn't residents think that this deal "popped up" at the last minute to avoid public scrutiny? The public didn't have the opportunity to question the Board. They didn't have the opportunity to check whether the Tech estimates were inaccurate. After the Board's blink-and-you'll-miss-it hearing, there isn't much trust left in the reservoir.
At this point, the best option for the citizenry is to throw these bums out. They're arrogant but they aren't trustworthy.
Posted Sunday, July 30, 2017 4:19 AM
No comments.
Fund: "Let's get their attention"
In this article , John Fund proposes how to get the Democrats' attention and support to fix the ACA. Fund first explained that "Back in 2009, when ObamaCare was being debated, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) was able to insert a provision requiring all members of Congress and their staffs to get insurance through the ObamaCare health exchanges. 'The more that Congress experiences the laws it passes, the better,' said Grassley."
Fund then wrote that "During a congressional recess in August 2013, President Obama personally ordered the Office of Personnel Management, which supervises federal employment issues, to interpret the law so as to retain the generous congressional benefits. This overturned the intent of the provision Grassley added to the law."
This is doubly underhanded. First, "the taxpayer-funded federal health insurance subsidies dispensed to members of Congress and their personal staffs, which now range from $6,000 to $12,000 a year and cover about 70 percent of the cost of insurance premiums," were restored through President Obama's executive action. Second, Congress didn't need to vote to exempt themselves from the laws they passed for others. This video explains things nicely:
One of the first reforms promised in Newt Gingrich's Contract with America was to "require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply to Congress." There's no other way to say this. President Obama, through his executive action, proved that he wanted Congress and his staff to be exempt from the punishment they've inflicted on others.
This paragraph is interesting:
Vitter believed his approach would be the best way to get the attention of Congress. "Many Americans are seeing their health coverage dropped by employers, and they are then forced into the exchanges," he told me in 2013. "If Congress is forced into them on the same terms, it will be more likely to fix Obamacare's problems for others."
In this post , I asked this series of questions:
If Obamacare policies are so good, why is the individual mandate required to get people to buy health insurance policies? Is it because the product stinks? Is it because the product's price is too expensive?
Publicly, President Obama and the DC Democrats have told us that the ACA is the best thing since sliced bread. Privately, they exempted themselves from the pain caused by the ACA. At the 1996 Republican National Convention, J. C. Watts famously said that "Character is doing the right thing even when no one is watching."
President Obama and Congress have flunked that test pretty badly. Here's hoping that President Trump gives these hypocrites a triple dose of accountability during their August recess. They deserve it.
Posted Sunday, July 30, 2017 9:41 AM
No comments.
