Why hasn't anyone talked about before?
On his show this past Sunday, Steve Kornacki, host of MSNBC's UP w/ Steve Kornacki, outlined Chris Christie’s potential predicament he will find himself in if he plans to run for President in 2016. If Christie declares his candidacy for President after being reelected as NJ Governor this fall, it is extremely likely he would have to resign as governor so that he could raise campaign funds from Wall Street firms.
As a "result of two federal rules, one from the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board dating back nearly two decades and the other from the SEC in 2011, that drastically curb the ability of employees of Wall Street firms to donate to governors seeking federal office and of the uniquely broad appointment powers that come with the New Jersey governorship. Put together, they have the potential to prevent Christie from raising millions of dollars from a cash-rich sector – the financial services industry – that has been particularly enthusiastic about him."
According to a new book written by Dan Balz,“Collision 2012”, Mitt Romney was very concerned about this issue last year when he courted Christie to be his vice-presidential running mate. When Romney asked Christie if he would resign as governor to be on his ticket, Christie laughed not realizing that Romney was serious - when Christie refused Romney turned to Paul Ryan.
Kornacki wrote about all this yesterday on Salon.com, it's an interesting read that New Jerseyan's should take a look at before deciding to vote for Chris Christie again in November, it's a potential game changer. If Christie runs for President and resigns one year after reelection than essentially, voters will be voting for Lt. Governor Kim Guadagon to be NJ's next governor, not Christie!
Showing posts with label Mitt Romney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mitt Romney. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 23, 2013
Friday, January 11, 2013
The House Christie Built
The following Op-Ed appeared yesterday in The Philadelphia Inquirer
By Joshua Henne
Leadership is, among other things, about taking responsibility. House Speaker John Boehner failed on that score when he caved to the tea partyers in his caucus and postponed a promised vote on Superstorm Sandy relief.
But by going off on one of his manufactured rants - this one against the radical elements that call the shots in his party - Gov. Christie also failed the responsibility test. Rather than being accountable for his year's worth of campaigning and keynoting for right-wing Republicans, Christie ducked it. And in an act of stunning hypocrisy, he slammed the very do-nothing GOP House that he was fighting and fund-raising for just a few months before.
There's no doubt Christie cares about those affected by Superstorm Sandy. And there's no doubt he was disgusted by Congress' abandonment of them. However, it's hard to believe he was shocked by it.
After all, these are the same representatives who have been consistent and clear in their opposition to most functions of the federal government. Steve LaTourette, a moderate Ohio Republican who just retired from the House, recently nailed the problem as "the same 40, 50 chuckleheads" who "have screwed this place up." They're simply making good on their promises by behaving in the halls of Congress precisely as they said they would on the campaign trail. Punting on Sandy relief was the inevitable result of a Congress dominated by representatives who simply don't believe in government.
These are the folks Christie crisscrossed the country to put in power. And now he seems as shocked as Capt. Renault finding out about gambling in Casablanca.
Despite what his State of the State address this week would have you believe, Christie didn't become governor the moment he walked alongside President Obama and gave Bruce Springsteen a hug in the wake of Sandy. New Jersey's unemployment hovers around 10 percent, and Yahoo Financial ranked it among the five worst-run states in the Union. A major reason for these sad facts is that Christie is more focused on his national brand than on the people of his state. He has a three-year record of governing recklessly, just as he has campaigned recklessly.
Last summer, after Mitt Romney announced Paul Ryan as his running mate, Christie gave the ticket a full-throated endorsement. Ryan was one of the 67 members of Congress who recently voted against legislation to pay flood insurance claims.
Republican Rep. Steve King of Iowa threatened to vote against Sandy aid for the same reason he opposed Katrina relief - because the recipients might spend the money on "Gucci bags and massage parlors." Last summer, Christie campaigned for King, whose state is home to crucial presidential caucuses - another in a string a choices that put the governor's political ambitions ahead of the interests of New Jersey.
During Sandy and its immediate aftermath, Christie did his state proud. But now he should be held culpable for supporting the right-wingers who are selling out New Jersey and the storm victims. He can go around pointing fingers, but he ought to look in the mirror first.
After all, Christie isn't just another typical politician who thinks he can say one thing and do another. Is he?
Joshua Henne is the spokesman for One New Jersey. He can be found on Twitter at @JoshuaHenne.
By Joshua Henne
Leadership is, among other things, about taking responsibility. House Speaker John Boehner failed on that score when he caved to the tea partyers in his caucus and postponed a promised vote on Superstorm Sandy relief.
But by going off on one of his manufactured rants - this one against the radical elements that call the shots in his party - Gov. Christie also failed the responsibility test. Rather than being accountable for his year's worth of campaigning and keynoting for right-wing Republicans, Christie ducked it. And in an act of stunning hypocrisy, he slammed the very do-nothing GOP House that he was fighting and fund-raising for just a few months before.
There's no doubt Christie cares about those affected by Superstorm Sandy. And there's no doubt he was disgusted by Congress' abandonment of them. However, it's hard to believe he was shocked by it.
After all, these are the same representatives who have been consistent and clear in their opposition to most functions of the federal government. Steve LaTourette, a moderate Ohio Republican who just retired from the House, recently nailed the problem as "the same 40, 50 chuckleheads" who "have screwed this place up." They're simply making good on their promises by behaving in the halls of Congress precisely as they said they would on the campaign trail. Punting on Sandy relief was the inevitable result of a Congress dominated by representatives who simply don't believe in government.
These are the folks Christie crisscrossed the country to put in power. And now he seems as shocked as Capt. Renault finding out about gambling in Casablanca.
Despite what his State of the State address this week would have you believe, Christie didn't become governor the moment he walked alongside President Obama and gave Bruce Springsteen a hug in the wake of Sandy. New Jersey's unemployment hovers around 10 percent, and Yahoo Financial ranked it among the five worst-run states in the Union. A major reason for these sad facts is that Christie is more focused on his national brand than on the people of his state. He has a three-year record of governing recklessly, just as he has campaigned recklessly.
Last summer, after Mitt Romney announced Paul Ryan as his running mate, Christie gave the ticket a full-throated endorsement. Ryan was one of the 67 members of Congress who recently voted against legislation to pay flood insurance claims.
Republican Rep. Steve King of Iowa threatened to vote against Sandy aid for the same reason he opposed Katrina relief - because the recipients might spend the money on "Gucci bags and massage parlors." Last summer, Christie campaigned for King, whose state is home to crucial presidential caucuses - another in a string a choices that put the governor's political ambitions ahead of the interests of New Jersey.
During Sandy and its immediate aftermath, Christie did his state proud. But now he should be held culpable for supporting the right-wingers who are selling out New Jersey and the storm victims. He can go around pointing fingers, but he ought to look in the mirror first.
After all, Christie isn't just another typical politician who thinks he can say one thing and do another. Is he?
Joshua Henne is the spokesman for One New Jersey. He can be found on Twitter at @JoshuaHenne.
Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Mr. Burns Explains The Fiscal Cliff
by ANIMATIONonFOX
Still reeling from the presidential election results, Mr. Burns takes a few minutes to explain the upcoming fiscal cliff.
Still reeling from the presidential election results, Mr. Burns takes a few minutes to explain the upcoming fiscal cliff.
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
OBAMA WINS...
President Obama won reelection last night with a decisive victory - he won by a landslide in electoral votes and with 50% of the popular vote and had the coat tails to pick up a few new seats in both the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate - but it's not time to gloat. It's time to move forward and look towards the future, to get this country moving again and working for average Americans.
For those who have opposed President Obama and his policies since his first days in office, enough now with all the birther, socialist, communist, fascist, wealth redistributing, Muslim, atheist, American hating, he's not one of us, nonsense; it's time to work towards a common goal. In his first 4 years in office, Obama extended so many olive branches that the tree had none left.
Remember, it was the Republican Tea partiers and extremists in Congress that rebuffed his every overture in order to make him a "1 term President".
Now let's get things accomplished!
Sunday, November 4, 2012
Paddy Power pays out £400,000 on Obama victory in U.S. Presidential election
If you're a bookie, you don't pay out unless you're absolutely convinced of the outcome of a bet the Irish odds-maker Paddy Power evidently is convinced that President Obama will win re-elction on Tuesday.
From the Paddy Power blog
Paddy Power is paying out to punters who backed Barack Obama to win theUS Presidential election 2012.
There’s still two days to go before America votes and national polls show voters remain largely undecided with nothing more than a sheet of ballot paper between Democrat Obama and Republican rival Mitt Romney.
But Paddy Power believes it’s a done deal and Obama is a nailed-on certainty to win a second term.
The gutsy call sees Europe’s largest bookmaker put its neck on the line for more than £400,000 (over $650,000). Prior to the decision to pay out, Obama’s odds fell to a low 2/9 and over the past months Paddy Power has seen 75 per cent of money staked go Obama’s way.
A Paddy Power spokesperson said:
Romney gave it a good shot and is doing well in the popular vote, but we suspect he’s had his moment in the sun and is likely to be remembered more for hislegendary gaffes than Presidential potential. The overall betting trend has shown one-way traffic for Obama and punters seemed to have called it 100 per cent correct. Despite Romney appealing to the large evangelical and senior vote, America’s sticking with black and cool.
Paddy Power continues to offer betting right up to and including Election Day. One of the most popular bets on offer is predicting the winning margin of the successful nominee on November 6.
To see Paddy Power’s full range of betting on the American Presidential election click here.
Friday, October 26, 2012
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
It Will Be a Nail Biter But Poll Shows Obama Solid in the Battleground States
From Political Wire
The latest Reuters/Ipsos tracking poll finds President Obama moving slightly ahead of Mitt Romney, 47% to 46%.
However, Obama "maintains a larger advantage in the state-by-state battle that will determine the outcome of the election. Ipsos projects that Obama holds an edge in the most hotly contested states, including Florida, Virginia and Ohio, and is likely to win by a relatively comfortable margin of 322 electoral votes to 206 electoral votes."
Other tracking polls: IBD/TIPP shows Obama up 47% to 45%, Rasmussen shows Romney leading 50% to 46%, Gallup has Romney ahead 51% to 46% and UPI/CVoter has the race tied at 48% to 48%.
The latest Reuters/Ipsos tracking poll finds President Obama moving slightly ahead of Mitt Romney, 47% to 46%.
However, Obama "maintains a larger advantage in the state-by-state battle that will determine the outcome of the election. Ipsos projects that Obama holds an edge in the most hotly contested states, including Florida, Virginia and Ohio, and is likely to win by a relatively comfortable margin of 322 electoral votes to 206 electoral votes."
Other tracking polls: IBD/TIPP shows Obama up 47% to 45%, Rasmussen shows Romney leading 50% to 46%, Gallup has Romney ahead 51% to 46% and UPI/CVoter has the race tied at 48% to 48%.
Monday, October 22, 2012
Reaction to the Third Presidential Debate: Obama Nailed it, Won Debate Hands Down
Reactions from tonight's debate are rolling in and the winner was clearly President Obama.
In a CBS Snap poll released a short while ago has voters believe President Obama won the debate by a resounding margine 53%-23% with 24% calling it a tie while CNN's insta poll has Obama winning the debate 48% - 40% over Mitt Romney. It was certainly a good night for President Obama.
Here is what Political Wire is saying moments after the debate:
In a CBS Snap poll released a short while ago has voters believe President Obama won the debate by a resounding margine 53%-23% with 24% calling it a tie while CNN's insta poll has Obama winning the debate 48% - 40% over Mitt Romney. It was certainly a good night for President Obama.
Here is what Political Wire is saying moments after the debate:
The third and final presidential debate was President Obama's best moment in the campaign so far. He was prepared on every issue and knew Mitt Romney's record of past statements just as well.
Obama succeeded because he conveyed his unique view of the world from the Oval Office. For undecided voters watching, all they probably heard was that he's the commander-in-chief. And that's what Team Obama wanted.
For the most part, Romney made an effort to look presidential by not attacking. He was exceedingly careful and desperately tried not to make a mistake. In fact, despite his rhetoric for the last two years, he now apparently agrees with most of the Obama administration's foreign policy.
As a result, Romney's biggest opponent was not the president, it was his own words. Obama did a brilliant job of bringing up past Romney statements -- on Iraq, on the nation's biggest adversary, on Afghanistan, on Osama bin Laden -- to make him look unprepared for the presidency.
As the debate went on, Romney tried many times to move the international affairs discussion back to the economy where he was more comfortable. It was as if he had only 30 minutes of foreign policy talking points for a 90 minute debate. As a result he seemed to string together random thoughts which often made him sound incoherent.
Obama won the debate hands down.
Bob Schieffer started off doing a good job as moderator, framing questions but still letting the candidates engage each other. But he lost control of the debate as both Romney and Obama often preferred to talk about the economy. It's clear that both candidates know that most voters don't care much about foreign policy.
Sunday, October 21, 2012
The Obama Endorsements Keep Rolling In; 10 Major Newpapers Have Made Their Choice Thus Far With More On The Way...
With a little more than two weeks to go before the November 6th election, major newspapers from around the country are starting to announce their endorsements for this year's presidential race.
The Akron Beacon Journal, the Denver Post, the Santa Fe New Mexican, the Asheville Citizen-Times, The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Seattle Times, The Sacramento Bee, The Arkansas Times , The Cleveland Plain Dealer, and The Salt Lake Tribune have all endorsed President Obama for re-election thus far with more to come.
Here's what some of these prestigious newspapers had to say aboubt their choice:
*****
UPDATE - Make that 11 major newspapers to endorse a second term for President Obama. The L.A. Times can be added to the list as well.
*****
UPDATE - The Charlotte Observer, North Carolina's largest newspaper, endorsed Barack Obama for another term in today's edition.
The Akron Beacon Journal, the Denver Post, the Santa Fe New Mexican, the Asheville Citizen-Times, The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Seattle Times, The Sacramento Bee, The Arkansas Times , The Cleveland Plain Dealer, and The Salt Lake Tribune have all endorsed President Obama for re-election thus far with more to come.
Here's what some of these prestigious newspapers had to say aboubt their choice:
"What is telling about a presidency is its tilt, its direction, spirit and priorities. Thus, to those who argue the president lacks a plan for a second term: Look at the foundation that has been set. He has used the levers of government to bolster the economy, investing in education, innovation and health care, understanding the essential role of the public sector in competitiveness. Those tasks are not complete. They would continue.
"The president has governed more from the middle than many give him credit. Consider the Republican ideas in health-care reform, or the Race to the Top, or the tax cuts in the stimulus. He has stated his readiness to compromise on long-term deficit reduction. The problem has been Republican resistance to tax increases as part of a realistic and responsible approach.
"That commitment to compromise, or governing, is crucial to addressing other pressing challenges such as illegal immigration and climate change. It has been present in his nominations to the Supreme Court, tapping those who recognize the value of settled law in areas ranging from the Commerce Clause to the rights of women to make choices about their health care." - The Akron Beacon Journel
"A largely intransigent Republican Party shares in the blame, however, particularly because of unwillingness to cede any ground to Obama in the last two years on policies — such as the president's American Jobs Act — that attempt to bolster the economy.
And though there is much in Mitt Romney's résumé to suggest he is a capable problem-solver, the Republican nominee has not presented himself as a leader who will bring his party closer to the center at a time when that is what this country needs.
His comments on the 47 percent of Americans who refuse to "take personal responsibility and care for their lives" were a telling insight into his views and a low point of the campaign.
Obama, on the other hand, has shown throughout his term that he is a steady leader who keeps the interests of a broad array of Americans in mind.
We urge Coloradans to re-elect him to a second term." - The Denver Post
"President Barack Obama has earned four more years.
"He inherited an unholy mess — an economy teetering on the edge of a second Great Depression and two foreign wars top the list of disasters. Slowly, steadily and with his eye fixed firmly on the needs of the country, the president has worked hard every day to improve our collective good. It was President Obama who bailed out the auto industry, salvaging 1.1 million jobs and keeping manufacturing alive in this country. It was President Obama who made the gutsy call to invade a compound in Pakistan, tracking down and killing Osama bin Laden. It was President Obama who finally signed comprehensive health reform so that no American has to fear bankruptcy because of a medical catastrophe. More work remains for a second term."- The Santa Fe New Mexican
"With Obama, we know what we are getting. He has consistently embraced the concept of community. Obama believes we are not just a bunch of individuals but a nation, and that we must work together to address the challenges we face." - The Asheville Citizen-Times
"It was at what Romney thought was a private Republican gathering that he made his now-famous statement that 47 percent of the American people aren't worth doodley squat. After a video turned up on the Internet, Romney eventually made a sort of weaselly defense — "taken out of context," etc. — but it was so insincere that nobody bought it. He wasn't sorry for what he said; he was sorry he got caught. He's not sorry for shipping American jobs to China as a private financial manipulator either. He's sorry that Obama points it out. While Romney was exporting employment, President Obama's stimulus spending was creating and preserving jobs — as many as 3.6 million, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. A substantial number, though not enough to replace the jobs lost in the economic collapse that began under President George W. Bush, who believed, like Romney, in the efficacy of reducing taxes on the very rich, even if that means raising taxes on everybody else.So far I've found just 5 papers that have endorsed Mitt Romney, all from Republican or right-leaning publications; The Dallas Morning News, Las Vegas Review-Journal,Omaha World-Herald, The Tennessean (Nashville) and the Orlando Sentinel.
"Americans are divided already; Obama at least wants to try to bring them together. The gap would widen under the elitist Romney, and even if he ever felt inclined to cease the class warfare and gender warfare his party wages, the party wouldn't let him. The choice this year is between a level-headed, well-intentioned, middle-of-the-roader and a political adventurer dominated by really nasty reactionaries. An easy choice, we believe." - The Arkansas Times
*****
UPDATE - Make that 11 major newspapers to endorse a second term for President Obama. The L.A. Times can be added to the list as well.
*****
UPDATE - The Charlotte Observer, North Carolina's largest newspaper, endorsed Barack Obama for another term in today's edition.
Salt Lake Tribune Endorses Obama For Another Term; States Too Many Mitts
"...Therefore, our endorsement must go to the incumbent, a competent leader who, against tough odds, has guided the country through catastrophe and set a course that, while rocky, is pointing toward a brighter day. The president has earned a second term. Romney, in whatever guise, does not deserve a first."
If the Salt Lake Tribune, the leading newspaper in Utah, doesn't think Mitt Romney is quailfied to be President what makes anyone think he can actually do a better job than President Obama? The Salt Lake Tribune, with very precise reasoning, lets the world know why Mitt Romney is the wrong choice to be the next president of the United Stated:
Nowhere has Mitt Romney’s pursuit of the presidency been more warmly welcomed or closely followed than here in Utah. The Republican nominee’s political and religious pedigrees, his adeptly bipartisan governorship of a Democratic state, and his head for business and the bottom line all inspire admiration and hope in our largely Mormon, Republican, business-friendly state.
But it was Romney’s singular role in rescuing Utah’s organization of the 2002 Olympics from a cesspool of scandal, and his oversight of the most successful Winter Games on record, that make him the Beehive State’s favorite adopted son. After all, Romney managed to save the state from ignominy, turning the extravaganza into a showcase for the matchless landscapes, volunteerism and efficiency that told the world what is best and most beautiful about Utah and its people.
Sadly, it is not the only Romney, as his campaign for the White House has made abundantly clear, first in his servile courtship of the tea party in order to win the nomination, and now as the party’s shape-shifting nominee. From his embrace of the party’s radical right wing, to subsequent portrayals of himself as a moderate champion of the middle class, Romney has raised the most frequently asked question of the campaign: "Who is this guy, really, and what in the world does he truly believe?"In short, this is the Mitt Romney we knew, or thought we knew, as one of us.
The evidence suggests no clear answer, or at least one that would survive Romney’s next speech or sound bite. Politicians routinely tailor their words to suit an audience. Romney, though, is shameless, lavishing vastly diverse audiences with words, any words, they would trade their votes to hear.
More troubling, Romney has repeatedly refused to share specifics of his radical plan to simultaneously reduce the debt, get rid of Obamacare (or, as he now says, only part of it), make a voucher program of Medicare, slash taxes and spending, and thereby create millions of new jobs. To claim, as Romney does, that he would offset his tax and spending cuts (except for billions more for the military) by doing away with tax deductions and exemptions is utterly meaningless without identifying which and how many would get the ax. Absent those specifics, his promise of a balanced budget simply does not pencil out.
If this portrait of a Romney willing to say anything to get elected seems harsh, we need only revisit his branding of 47 percent of Americans as freeloaders who pay no taxes, yet feel victimized and entitled to government assistance. His job, he told a group of wealthy donors, "is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."
Where, we ask, is the pragmatic, inclusive Romney, the Massachusetts governor who left the state with a model health care plan in place, the Romney who led Utah to Olympic glory? That Romney skedaddled and is nowhere to be found.And what of the president Romney would replace? For four years, President Barack Obama has attempted, with varying degrees of success, to pull the nation out of its worst financial meltdown since the Great Depression, a deepening crisis he inherited the day he took office.
In the first months of his presidency, Obama acted decisively to stimulate the economy. His leadership was essential to passage of the badly needed American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Though Republicans criticize the stimulus for failing to create jobs, it clearly helped stop the hemorrhaging of public sector jobs. The Utah Legislature used hundreds of millions in stimulus funds to plug holes in the state’s budget.
The president also acted wisely to bail out the auto industry, which has since come roaring back. Romney, in so many words, said the carmakers should sink if they can’t swim.
Obama’s most noteworthy achievement, passage of his signature Affordable Care Act, also proved, in its timing, his greatest blunder. The set of comprehensive health insurance reforms aimed at extending health care coverage to all Americans was signed 14 months into his term after a ferocious fight in Congress that sapped the new president’s political capital and destroyed any chance for bipartisan cooperation on the shredded economy.
Obama’s foreign policy record is perhaps his strongest suit, especially compared to Romney’s bellicose posture toward Russia and China and his inflammatory rhetoric regarding Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Obama’s measured reliance on tough economic embargoes to bring Iran to heel, and his equally measured disengagement from the war in Afghanistan, are examples of a nuanced approach to international affairs. The glaring exception, still unfolding, was the administration’s failure to protect the lives of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans, and to quickly come clean about it.
In considering which candidate to endorse, The Salt Lake Tribune editorial board had hoped that Romney would exhibit the same talents for organization, pragmatic problem solving and inspired leadership that he displayed here more than a decade ago. Instead, we have watched him morph into a friend of the far right, then tack toward the center with breathtaking aplomb. Through a pair of presidential debates, Romney’s domestic agenda remains bereft of detail and worthy of mistrust.
Therefore, our endorsement must go to the incumbent, a competent leader who, against tough odds, has guided the country through catastrophe and set a course that, while rocky, is pointing toward a brighter day. The president has earned a second term. Romney, in whatever guise, does not deserve a first.
Friday, October 19, 2012
Obama defines Romnesia
Have you been diagnosed with Romnesia? Don't worry because there's a cure for that...
Thursday, October 18, 2012
Mitt Romney's Condescending Views Toward Wome
Tuesday night, President Obama won the debate and laid out the clear choice in this election. Americans saw a strong, steady and decisive president with a vision and plan to move this country forward. And when Mitt Romney tried to mislead voters -- which was pretty often -- the President exposed the real Romney.
Romney was shifty when it came to women's issues. He gave an awkward and dishonest answer about his refusal to stand up for legislation that helps women fight back when they don't receive equal pay for equal work. While the President talked about women as breadwinners for American families, Romney talked about them as resumes in a "binder." Romney also didn't tell the truth about his plan to take away women's access to affordable contraception by repealing Obamacare, or his support of an extreme proposal to put employers in charge of whether female employees can get contraception through their insurance plan. Today, his campaign called the issue of birth control "peripheral" for most women. Um, ok.
(barackobama.com)
Romney was shifty when it came to women's issues. He gave an awkward and dishonest answer about his refusal to stand up for legislation that helps women fight back when they don't receive equal pay for equal work. While the President talked about women as breadwinners for American families, Romney talked about them as resumes in a "binder." Romney also didn't tell the truth about his plan to take away women's access to affordable contraception by repealing Obamacare, or his support of an extreme proposal to put employers in charge of whether female employees can get contraception through their insurance plan. Today, his campaign called the issue of birth control "peripheral" for most women. Um, ok.
(barackobama.com)
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Letter: ROMNEY-RYAN PLAN ENDS MEDICARE AND MEDICAID
As an elder law attorney and former Monmouth County Surrogate, I am very concerned about the Republican threat to Medicare and Medicaid.
In 2011 and 2012 Paul Ryan presented budgets to Congress (which every Republican lawmaker signed and Governor Romney endorsed) ending Medicare as we know it and substituting in its place a “voucher” program. This means government no longer pays for medical expenses but gives each senior money to purchase private insurance based on the amount he/she can pay and their pre-existing condition. If you want better care than your stipend allows, you’ll pay more out of your own pocket or go without. The Congressional Budget Office calculates the immediate effect at $6,400.00 per person. Also, seniors will pay 100% for prescriptions in the “donut hole” ($2,840 to $4,550) where Medicare now pays 50% and 100% in 2020.
If that were not enough to cause concern, their budget cuts $800 billion from Medicaid. Nursing homes will not be getting the funding necessary to cover their occupants. Moreover, with more people living longer and less families able to care for loved ones there will be no place for them to go. The effects will be devastating.
Republicans argue these programs will go bankrupt if they don’t change. That hasn’t happened in 47 years If the wealthy paid their fair share of taxes and Congress stopped raiding these programs, that won’t happen.
Vote for President Obama and other Democratic candidates. Save Medicare and Medicaid. Our future depends on it!
PATRICIA A. BENNETT
In 2011 and 2012 Paul Ryan presented budgets to Congress (which every Republican lawmaker signed and Governor Romney endorsed) ending Medicare as we know it and substituting in its place a “voucher” program. This means government no longer pays for medical expenses but gives each senior money to purchase private insurance based on the amount he/she can pay and their pre-existing condition. If you want better care than your stipend allows, you’ll pay more out of your own pocket or go without. The Congressional Budget Office calculates the immediate effect at $6,400.00 per person. Also, seniors will pay 100% for prescriptions in the “donut hole” ($2,840 to $4,550) where Medicare now pays 50% and 100% in 2020.
If that were not enough to cause concern, their budget cuts $800 billion from Medicaid. Nursing homes will not be getting the funding necessary to cover their occupants. Moreover, with more people living longer and less families able to care for loved ones there will be no place for them to go. The effects will be devastating.
Republicans argue these programs will go bankrupt if they don’t change. That hasn’t happened in 47 years If the wealthy paid their fair share of taxes and Congress stopped raiding these programs, that won’t happen.
Vote for President Obama and other Democratic candidates. Save Medicare and Medicaid. Our future depends on it!
PATRICIA A. BENNETT
Monday, October 15, 2012
A Tired War on Health Reform
The following op-ed on ObamaCare & Regressive Republicans, written by Joshua Henne, ran last week in The Philadelphia Inquirer.
- by Joshua Henne
In his bid to unseat Sen. Bob Menendez (D., N.J.), Republican candidate Joe Kyrillos has twisted himself into such a pretzel on the issue of health care that he might need a doctor himself after Election Day.
Since last spring, Kyrillos has consistently hammered Menendez for his support of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. But he has a problem here: You see, Kyrillos himself was for Obamacare - before he was against it.
A longtime supporter of Mitt Romney, Kyrillos is on record touting the universal health-care coverage plan that Romney signed as governor of Massachusetts. When he was serving as the New Jersey chairman of Romney's 2008 presidential campaign, Kyrillos boasted that Romney had enacted "legislation that would provide private health insurance to every Massachusetts citizen" and could "do for the nation what he did for Massachusetts."
"Romneycare" was the foundation of Obamacare - especially when it comes to the mandate that individuals purchase health insurance, a feature of both plans that was devised by the conservative Heritage Foundation. Jonathan Gruber, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist, helped write both Romneycare and Obamacare. There was a time when Romney himself said his plan, including the mandate, should be a model for the nation. Kyrillos endorsed this notion just a few short years ago.
Petty pandering
Now, however, Kyrillos is disparaging the Affordable Care Act for no reason other than the fact that President Obama made it a reality. While voters have become accustomed to such craven political maneuvering, Kyrillos' flip-flop is a particularly bad example. It's also a petty pander to the base of his party, calculated to garner right-wing support rather than do what's best for the people of New Jersey.
The Supreme Court's ruling upholding the Affordable Care Act should have closed the book on such bickering. But Kyrillos and his cohorts continue fighting Obamacare simply because of its Democratic origins. And this is not a theoretical dorm-room discussion: While they snipe from the sidelines, real lives are at stake.
Obamacare's benefits are clear. Families are more secure because they can't be denied coverage due to preexisting conditions, or be forced into bankruptcy due to an illness. Two and a half million young adults under 26 now have coverage under their parents' plans, and more than 5.5 million senior citizens and disabled people have saved nearly $4.5 billion on prescriptions under the law.
Consumer savings
Meanwhile, the Affordable Care Act requires that insurance companies spend at least 80 percent of their premiums on patient care, not executive bonuses or corporate retreats. Those failing to meet this threshold must write checks to their customers for the difference, and they have already provided $1.1 billion in rebates. Moreover, insurance companies must submit a justification for public review if they want to raise premiums by 10 percent or more, which has helped save consumers an estimated $1 billion.
In Camden, the law is already helping Project HOPE's federally qualified health center provide services to low-income and at-risk patients. Project HOPE is on the front lines, delivering care in one of America's most economically depressed cities, and 49 percent of its patients are uninsured. Obamacare is giving it more tools to deliver high-quality, cost-effective primary care, including electronic record-keeping to efficiently track results. The center also received a grant to construct a new facility, which will increase patient access and preventive care. And with new funding, health centers are being held to higher standards in the services they provide.
But if Kyrillos had his way, none of this would be possible for Project HOPE or the people and communities they serve. Regressive candidates like him are vowing to refight a stale political battle to put the insurance companies back in charge; Kyrillos has even promised to be "the 51st senator to vote to repeal Obamacare." After Election Day, he can only hope that Obamacare covers contorting oneself on the campaign trail as a preexisting condition.
- by Joshua Henne
In his bid to unseat Sen. Bob Menendez (D., N.J.), Republican candidate Joe Kyrillos has twisted himself into such a pretzel on the issue of health care that he might need a doctor himself after Election Day.
Since last spring, Kyrillos has consistently hammered Menendez for his support of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. But he has a problem here: You see, Kyrillos himself was for Obamacare - before he was against it.
A longtime supporter of Mitt Romney, Kyrillos is on record touting the universal health-care coverage plan that Romney signed as governor of Massachusetts. When he was serving as the New Jersey chairman of Romney's 2008 presidential campaign, Kyrillos boasted that Romney had enacted "legislation that would provide private health insurance to every Massachusetts citizen" and could "do for the nation what he did for Massachusetts."
"Romneycare" was the foundation of Obamacare - especially when it comes to the mandate that individuals purchase health insurance, a feature of both plans that was devised by the conservative Heritage Foundation. Jonathan Gruber, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist, helped write both Romneycare and Obamacare. There was a time when Romney himself said his plan, including the mandate, should be a model for the nation. Kyrillos endorsed this notion just a few short years ago.
Petty pandering
Now, however, Kyrillos is disparaging the Affordable Care Act for no reason other than the fact that President Obama made it a reality. While voters have become accustomed to such craven political maneuvering, Kyrillos' flip-flop is a particularly bad example. It's also a petty pander to the base of his party, calculated to garner right-wing support rather than do what's best for the people of New Jersey.
The Supreme Court's ruling upholding the Affordable Care Act should have closed the book on such bickering. But Kyrillos and his cohorts continue fighting Obamacare simply because of its Democratic origins. And this is not a theoretical dorm-room discussion: While they snipe from the sidelines, real lives are at stake.
Obamacare's benefits are clear. Families are more secure because they can't be denied coverage due to preexisting conditions, or be forced into bankruptcy due to an illness. Two and a half million young adults under 26 now have coverage under their parents' plans, and more than 5.5 million senior citizens and disabled people have saved nearly $4.5 billion on prescriptions under the law.
Consumer savings
Meanwhile, the Affordable Care Act requires that insurance companies spend at least 80 percent of their premiums on patient care, not executive bonuses or corporate retreats. Those failing to meet this threshold must write checks to their customers for the difference, and they have already provided $1.1 billion in rebates. Moreover, insurance companies must submit a justification for public review if they want to raise premiums by 10 percent or more, which has helped save consumers an estimated $1 billion.
In Camden, the law is already helping Project HOPE's federally qualified health center provide services to low-income and at-risk patients. Project HOPE is on the front lines, delivering care in one of America's most economically depressed cities, and 49 percent of its patients are uninsured. Obamacare is giving it more tools to deliver high-quality, cost-effective primary care, including electronic record-keeping to efficiently track results. The center also received a grant to construct a new facility, which will increase patient access and preventive care. And with new funding, health centers are being held to higher standards in the services they provide.
But if Kyrillos had his way, none of this would be possible for Project HOPE or the people and communities they serve. Regressive candidates like him are vowing to refight a stale political battle to put the insurance companies back in charge; Kyrillos has even promised to be "the 51st senator to vote to repeal Obamacare." After Election Day, he can only hope that Obamacare covers contorting oneself on the campaign trail as a preexisting condition.
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Monday, October 8, 2012
Why Obama Now
In a charmingly animated video, Lucas Gray, one of the artists behind the Simpsons and Family Guy illustrates why, with words from President Obama, trickle down economics is a failed experiment. - Addicting Info
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)