The strip is almost a year and a half old, but it easily could be drawn today, with the Arizona Legislature as its inspiration.
Thursday, April 01, 2010
The AZ Lege in a cartoon
From Full Frontal Nerdity (thanks for the heads-up from friend who emailed it to me) -
The strip is almost a year and a half old, but it easily could be drawn today, with the Arizona Legislature as its inspiration.
The strip is almost a year and a half old, but it easily could be drawn today, with the Arizona Legislature as its inspiration.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
If you want to be anonymous, don't sign petitions
First things first - my name is Craig McDermott, and I stand by everything that I've written here. I will apologize for and correct any typos or errors of fact that are pointed out to me and I reserve the right to change a position when new facts become available. However, I do not apologize for holding positions and expressing opinions that some may disagree with or even find to be offensive.
That's politics, folks. Disagreement happens.
On to the main part of the post...
From AZCentral.com -
The issue seems to boil down to balancing the concerns of the signers of the petitions for an anti-gay rights measure who are afraid of being harassed by gay-rights supporters and the concerns of those who want to verify that ballot petitions are legitimate.
On one hand, there is nothing about harassment and threats that is an appropriate part of civic discourse (see the posts about the tea party/Republican types who have been threatening Democrats over health care reform). It isn't appropriate when right-wingers harass, intimidate, and threaten; it isn't appropriate when left-wingers do the same things.
On the other hand, transparency in the political process is vital to preserving our (or any) democracy. People have to be able to trust that the questions and candidates on election ballots are there legitimately.
In Arizona, campaigns regularly check the petitions of opposing candidates, hoping to find grounds to have them disqualified from the ballot. Anonymity would only invite widespread fraud.
In this situation, I'm going to have to side with transparency (hence the opening paragraph of this post).
There are laws on the books to deal with harassment and violence. There is nothing in the First Amendment that protects users of intimidatory tactics from those laws. (IMO, anyway - a judge friend of mine has advised me that under certain circumstances, courts have found that such tactics are protected.)
In summary, there is no public benefit to anonymity, at least not one that outweighs the benefits of transparency.
Oh, and not lost on me is the blatant hypocrisy of the supporters of a public initiative to harass and injure one part of society want that support to be anonymous, out of fear of the possibility that that part of society may want to harass them right back.
That's politics, folks. Disagreement happens.
On to the main part of the post...
From AZCentral.com -
Larry Stickney speaks passionately as he tries to explain why the names of people who signed a 2009 Washington state ballot measure against gay rights should be kept secret.More thorough NY Times coverage of the issue here.
"I had been in the political game for 16 years, but we had no idea the viciousness that we would come under," says Stickney, a former state legislative aide, active opponent of abortion rights and campaign manager for Protect Marriage Washington, who now is involved in a major free-speech case that will come before the U.S. Supreme Court next month.
The issue seems to boil down to balancing the concerns of the signers of the petitions for an anti-gay rights measure who are afraid of being harassed by gay-rights supporters and the concerns of those who want to verify that ballot petitions are legitimate.
On one hand, there is nothing about harassment and threats that is an appropriate part of civic discourse (see the posts about the tea party/Republican types who have been threatening Democrats over health care reform). It isn't appropriate when right-wingers harass, intimidate, and threaten; it isn't appropriate when left-wingers do the same things.
On the other hand, transparency in the political process is vital to preserving our (or any) democracy. People have to be able to trust that the questions and candidates on election ballots are there legitimately.
In Arizona, campaigns regularly check the petitions of opposing candidates, hoping to find grounds to have them disqualified from the ballot. Anonymity would only invite widespread fraud.
In this situation, I'm going to have to side with transparency (hence the opening paragraph of this post).
There are laws on the books to deal with harassment and violence. There is nothing in the First Amendment that protects users of intimidatory tactics from those laws. (IMO, anyway - a judge friend of mine has advised me that under certain circumstances, courts have found that such tactics are protected.)
In summary, there is no public benefit to anonymity, at least not one that outweighs the benefits of transparency.
Oh, and not lost on me is the blatant hypocrisy of the supporters of a public initiative to harass and injure one part of society want that support to be anonymous, out of fear of the possibility that that part of society may want to harass them right back.
More hypocrites running for lege
The Arizona Republic's website has a story up about a member of the Peoria Unified School District Governing Board opposing the temporary sales tax hike question on the ballot in a May special election.
In fact, she is so opposed to it, in spite of the fact that if it fails, PUSD will have to cut another $15 million from its annual budget (on top of existing cuts of $21 million), that she is the treasurer of axthetax.com, the primary political committee formed to oppose the ballot question.
From the article -
The hypocritical part isn't just how as a school board member, elected to guide and advocate for the public schools in her district, she is actively opposing adequate funding for those schools, but in how as a candidate for State House of Representatives, she is stressing her experience as a school board member. (Her campaign website is at dianedouglas.com, but I won't like to it. Use Google.)
...Oh, wait - that part isn't really hypocritical either. She spends all of her time talking about "fiscal responsibility," not "improved education."
So where's the hypocrisy?
Her lege campaign committee (filer ID 201000152) is seeking public funding via Clean Elections. Her website includes a page asking people to send her CE fives.
Fighting against adequate funding for public schools while holding out her hand for public funding of her candidacy for legislature?
Now that's the sort of breathtaking hypocrisy that shows that if she actually wins a seat in the lege, she'll fit right in with the rest of the Republican caucus on West Washington.
BTW - On her website, she touts the endorsements of folks like Joe Arpaio, Andrey Thomas, and Jim Weiers. Even without the stuff listed above, those endorsements alone show that she is unfit for a move to the lege.
In fact, she is so opposed to it, in spite of the fact that if it fails, PUSD will have to cut another $15 million from its annual budget (on top of existing cuts of $21 million), that she is the treasurer of axthetax.com, the primary political committee formed to oppose the ballot question.
From the article -
Note: there is one error in the Rep's piece - her group is AxthetaxAZ.com.Parents are expressing concern and disappointment towards Peoria Unified School District board member Diane Douglas over her opposition to a one-cent sales tax increase as part of axthetax.com.
The district has said it would face a $15 million shortfall should the tax be rejected at the ballot box May 18.
The hypocritical part isn't just how as a school board member, elected to guide and advocate for the public schools in her district, she is actively opposing adequate funding for those schools, but in how as a candidate for State House of Representatives, she is stressing her experience as a school board member. (Her campaign website is at dianedouglas.com, but I won't like to it. Use Google.)
...Oh, wait - that part isn't really hypocritical either. She spends all of her time talking about "fiscal responsibility," not "improved education."
So where's the hypocrisy?
Her lege campaign committee (filer ID 201000152) is seeking public funding via Clean Elections. Her website includes a page asking people to send her CE fives.
Fighting against adequate funding for public schools while holding out her hand for public funding of her candidacy for legislature?
Now that's the sort of breathtaking hypocrisy that shows that if she actually wins a seat in the lege, she'll fit right in with the rest of the Republican caucus on West Washington.
BTW - On her website, she touts the endorsements of folks like Joe Arpaio, Andrey Thomas, and Jim Weiers. Even without the stuff listed above, those endorsements alone show that she is unfit for a move to the lege.
Monday, March 29, 2010
8th Special Session: Welcome Back My Friends To The Show That Never Ends
OK, they're not so "special" any more, but this one is definitely a "show". In fact, it is almost *all* show with no "substance," but that isn't stopping Jan Brewer and the Republicans in the legislature.
On Monday, the opening curtain rose, and some bills were introduced in each chamber for the special session.
HB2002/SB1001 states that federal health care reform infringes on states' rights (much like certain groups used to say about federal civil rights legislation) and giving the Governor the authority to bypass the state's Attorney General Terry Goddard in order to pursue a lawsuit against the health care reform law.
HCM2001/SCM1001 is a postcard to the U.S. Congress demanding that Congress pay all state costs associated with health care reform.
The House versions will be heard in the Appropriations Committee on Tuesday at 9:30 a.m. in HHR1; the Senate versions will be heard in the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday at 9 a.m. in SHR1. The respective chambers' Rules committees will hear the bills shortly after the main committees hear the bills.
Sharp-eyed readers may have noted that the relevant House Bill is numbered 2002, not the expected 2001.
Well, it turns out that one Democrat was quicker on the draw than the House's Republicans were.
HB2001 was introduced by Rep. David Lujan, the House Democratic leader as well as a candidate for Attorney General.
His bill would bar the use of taxpayer monies to fund such a lawsuit as is planned by the Republicans.
In an unsurprising non-development, Lujan's bill hasn't even been referred to committee, much less agendized. In other words, the Rs won't even allow the bill to be discussed, much less publicly voted on.
I signed in to the lege's Request to Speak system, not to speak but simply to comment on the bills. If you have visited the lege and set up a profile and login for the RTS system, you may want to do the same, to at least let the lege's Rs know that there are folks in this state who don't drink the Kool-Aid that they're pouring.
Here's the comment that I entered for both HB2002 and SB1001 -
I'm not sure where the Republicans' priorities are, but they aren't with the American people, and the AZGOP isn't interested in looking out for the average Arizonan.
On Monday, the opening curtain rose, and some bills were introduced in each chamber for the special session.
HB2002/SB1001 states that federal health care reform infringes on states' rights (much like certain groups used to say about federal civil rights legislation) and giving the Governor the authority to bypass the state's Attorney General Terry Goddard in order to pursue a lawsuit against the health care reform law.
HCM2001/SCM1001 is a postcard to the U.S. Congress demanding that Congress pay all state costs associated with health care reform.
The House versions will be heard in the Appropriations Committee on Tuesday at 9:30 a.m. in HHR1; the Senate versions will be heard in the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday at 9 a.m. in SHR1. The respective chambers' Rules committees will hear the bills shortly after the main committees hear the bills.
Sharp-eyed readers may have noted that the relevant House Bill is numbered 2002, not the expected 2001.
Well, it turns out that one Democrat was quicker on the draw than the House's Republicans were.
HB2001 was introduced by Rep. David Lujan, the House Democratic leader as well as a candidate for Attorney General.
His bill would bar the use of taxpayer monies to fund such a lawsuit as is planned by the Republicans.
In an unsurprising non-development, Lujan's bill hasn't even been referred to committee, much less agendized. In other words, the Rs won't even allow the bill to be discussed, much less publicly voted on.
I signed in to the lege's Request to Speak system, not to speak but simply to comment on the bills. If you have visited the lege and set up a profile and login for the RTS system, you may want to do the same, to at least let the lege's Rs know that there are folks in this state who don't drink the Kool-Aid that they're pouring.
Here's the comment that I entered for both HB2002 and SB1001 -
Enough already. If you insist on engaging in partisan posturing, at least do it on the RNC's expense account, not that of the taxpayers of Arizona.That last refers to the latest news from the RNC's financials, which include expenditures on things like visits to a high-priced strip club, complete with leather lesbians, private jets, ritzy hotels, and worse.
Based on today's news, the RNC has far more cash to burn on lost causes than we do.
I'm not sure where the Republicans' priorities are, but they aren't with the American people, and the AZGOP isn't interested in looking out for the average Arizonan.
Republicans, Recess Appointments, and Hypocrisy: Business As Usual
...with the emphasis on "Business"...
Late last week, after the Senate recessed, President Obama made 15 "recess appointments" of executive branch nominees held up by Republicans in the Senate.
Predictably, the Republicans in the Senate screamed about a "lack of respect" for the Senate, blah, blah, blah.
They ignored the fact that their president, George W. Bush, did the same thing nearly 200 times during his terms in office.
While the Senate's Republicans were blocking all 15 nominees, the recess appointment of Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board may be the one generating the most angst.
Mr. Becker has been a lawyer for the AFL-CIO and SEIU.
So naturally, all of the Republicans in the Senate signed off on a letter to President Obama opposing a recess appointment of Becker, saying that Mr. Becker “could not be viewed as impartial, unbiased or objective" because of his union work.
Ummm...where was the outrage and concern for objectivity when Bush used recess appointments to appoint...
- Peter Kirsanow, whose legal practice "focused on representing management in employment-related litigation as well as in contract negotiations, NLRB proceedings, EEO matters, and arbitration." (source: his own bio at the US Commission on Civil Rights, where he's been loyally mucking up things for the Bushies)
- Ronald Meisburg, a lawyer for the mining industry and various industry associations
- Robert J. Battista, known as the worst and most anti-worker NLRB chair ever. More on Battista and R hypocrisy on recess appointments here, from the AFL-CIO
- William B. Cowen, a management attorney and union-buster
- Michael J. Bartlett, a former attorney for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Yep - lots of fairness and objectivity there.
Note: Apparently Craig Becker isn't as popular with the US CofC as Bartlett was - they've come out strongly against his appointment.
What a shock. :)
Late last week, after the Senate recessed, President Obama made 15 "recess appointments" of executive branch nominees held up by Republicans in the Senate.
Predictably, the Republicans in the Senate screamed about a "lack of respect" for the Senate, blah, blah, blah.
They ignored the fact that their president, George W. Bush, did the same thing nearly 200 times during his terms in office.
While the Senate's Republicans were blocking all 15 nominees, the recess appointment of Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board may be the one generating the most angst.
Mr. Becker has been a lawyer for the AFL-CIO and SEIU.
So naturally, all of the Republicans in the Senate signed off on a letter to President Obama opposing a recess appointment of Becker, saying that Mr. Becker “could not be viewed as impartial, unbiased or objective" because of his union work.
Ummm...where was the outrage and concern for objectivity when Bush used recess appointments to appoint...
- Peter Kirsanow, whose legal practice "focused on representing management in employment-related litigation as well as in contract negotiations, NLRB proceedings, EEO matters, and arbitration." (source: his own bio at the US Commission on Civil Rights, where he's been loyally mucking up things for the Bushies)
- Ronald Meisburg, a lawyer for the mining industry and various industry associations
- Robert J. Battista, known as the worst and most anti-worker NLRB chair ever. More on Battista and R hypocrisy on recess appointments here, from the AFL-CIO
- William B. Cowen, a management attorney and union-buster
- Michael J. Bartlett, a former attorney for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Yep - lots of fairness and objectivity there.
Note: Apparently Craig Becker isn't as popular with the US CofC as Bartlett was - they've come out strongly against his appointment.
What a shock. :)
The coming week - everybody else edition
As usual, all info gathered from the websites of the relevent political bodies/agencies, except where noted, and subject to change without notice.
...The schedule of activities at the Arizona Legislature was covered in an earlier post here.
...In D.C., both chambers of Congress are in recess/district work period for a couple of weeks.
...Back here in Arizona...
- The Arizona Corporation Commission has a regularly scheduled utilities meeting on Wednesday and Thursday. The agenda is here. The ACC's hearing schedule is here.
- The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors has two regularly scheduled meetings on tap this week.
At Monday's "informal" meeting, the normally quiet agenda has a couple of items of possible controversy - an update and some contractual items regarding the Downtown Court Tower project, and a move to initiate litigation over Sheriff Joe Arpaio's purchase of a really expensive inmate transport bus. AZRepublic coverage of that last item here.
The agenda for Wednesday's "formal" meeting includes an item for a settlement in the case of "Robert Cole v. Maricopa County and Joseph Arpaio."
- The Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project will meet on Thursday. Its agenda is here; its Public Policy Committee meeting agenda is here.
- The Tempe City Council isn't scheduled to hold any regular meetings this week. The Council Calendar of activity is here.
- The Scottsdale City Council isn't scheduled to hold any regular meetings this week. The City's Community Meeting Notice is here.
Also not meeting this week: Arizona Board of Regents, Citizens Clean Elections Commission, Board of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System, Governing Board of Maricopa County Community College District
Later...
...The schedule of activities at the Arizona Legislature was covered in an earlier post here.
...In D.C., both chambers of Congress are in recess/district work period for a couple of weeks.
...Back here in Arizona...
- The Arizona Corporation Commission has a regularly scheduled utilities meeting on Wednesday and Thursday. The agenda is here. The ACC's hearing schedule is here.
- The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors has two regularly scheduled meetings on tap this week.
At Monday's "informal" meeting, the normally quiet agenda has a couple of items of possible controversy - an update and some contractual items regarding the Downtown Court Tower project, and a move to initiate litigation over Sheriff Joe Arpaio's purchase of a really expensive inmate transport bus. AZRepublic coverage of that last item here.
The agenda for Wednesday's "formal" meeting includes an item for a settlement in the case of "Robert Cole v. Maricopa County and Joseph Arpaio."
- The Board of Directors of the Central Arizona Project will meet on Thursday. Its agenda is here; its Public Policy Committee meeting agenda is here.
- The Tempe City Council isn't scheduled to hold any regular meetings this week. The Council Calendar of activity is here.
- The Scottsdale City Council isn't scheduled to hold any regular meetings this week. The City's Community Meeting Notice is here.
Also not meeting this week: Arizona Board of Regents, Citizens Clean Elections Commission, Board of Directors of the Maricopa Integrated Health System, Governing Board of Maricopa County Community College District
Later...
Sunday, March 28, 2010
The coming week - legislative edition
As usual, all info gathered from the website of the Arizona Legislature, except where noted, and subject to change without notice...
The highlight (so to speak) this week looks to be the eighth special session of the lege, called by the Governor to ask for permission to sue the feds over health care reform. More on that set piece here. No bill proposals or committee agendas have been posted for the special session as yet.
Regular session committee work is starting to wind down, and this week's agendas show it - while most committees are meeting, most of their agendas are short ones.
On the House side of the quad -
- Education is meeting on Monday at 10 a.m. in HHR3. Looks quiet so far.
- Rules will meet at 1 p.m. in HHR4. *Not* quiet, but this committee is a rubber stamp. If a measure makes it onto this agenda, it means that the Speaker supports the bill and it will be approved by the committee.
- Natural Resources and Rural Affairs will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR4. The agenda includes consideration of a strike-everything amendment to SB1154, relating to "underground storage tanks". The bill's language hasn't been posted online yet, but the fact sheet written by legislative staff is here. Also on the agenda is SB1349, which mandates that the director of the AZ Department of Administration allow the state parks board to enter into contracts with a "public or private entity or Indian tribes" to operate the state's parks.
- Banking and Insurance will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR5. The agenda is short, but includes SB1348, wreaking all sorts of mischief regarding regulatory rules and rulemaking.
- On Tuesday, Public Employees, Retirement, and Entitlement Reform will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR3. Quiet thus far.
- On Wednesday, Military Affairs and Public Safety will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR3. This one includes SB1070, the Russell Pearce-penned measure to direct law enforcement personnel in Arizona to ignore enforcement of other laws in order to become immigration police, outlaw "sanctuary city" policies, and reduce probable cause requirements for law enforcement officers stopping vehicles and persons, among other things. In short, SB1070 is a potpourri of ugly.
- Health and Human Services will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR4. This may be the longest agenda of the week, outside of the Rules agenda. On the agenda: SB1306 and SB1307, measures written by the Center forTurning Arizona Into A Theocracy Arizona Policy regarding human embryos and human egg providers. Also up: SB1309, relating to expanding parents' rights; SB1314, an exercise in right-wing legislators interfering in family court procedures regarding custody disputes; and SCR1044, a ballot referral of an amendment to the AZ constitution banning the cloning of humans.
- On Thursday, Water and Energy will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR5. Looks quiet so far, but a striker will be offered to HB2561 regarding "groundwater transportation; Big Chino sub-basin." No language posted online as yet.
- Transportation and Infrastructure will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR3. Very quiet so far.
- Judiciary will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR4. This one is full of parting gifts from Jonathan Paton, such as SCR1009, the plan to end Clean Elections in Arizona, and SCR1013, changing the job title of the Secretary of State to "Lieutenant Governor." SCR1013 also removes the requirement for a run-off election if none of the candidates for an executive branch office doesn't gain a majority of the votes in an election. Instead, the legislature would get to choose the occupant of the office, in the event of a tie. Otherwise, the highest vote getter for an office would win that office (I think so anyway - the measure isn't specific on that).
Over on the Senate side -
- Rules will meet on Monday in 1st Floor Caucus Room upon adjournment of the floor session.
- Natural Resources, Infrastructure, and Public Debt will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR109. This one contains SB1445, relating to "groundwater transportation; Big Chino sub-basin." I'm guessing that this measure is a match for the unknown striker listed above, but I have no idea what its real impact will be.
- Judiciary will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1. Looks relatively quiet so far.
- On Tuesday, Commerce and Economic Development will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1. This one contains HB2337, a measure declaring that incandescent light bulbs manufactured and used in Arizona aren't subject to any federal regulation.
- Appropriations will meet at 1:30 in SHR109. Relatively quiet so far.
- On Wednesday, Healthcare and Medical Liability Reform will meet at 9 a.m in SHR1. Quiet thus far.
- Public Safety and Human Services will meet at 10 a.m. in SHR3. The agenda includes consideration of HB2246, deregulating "consumer" fireworks. if this passes, look for a busy brushfire season in Arizona.
- Veterans and Military Affairs will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR2. Quiet thus far.
- Finance will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR3. This one has a lot of bad on it: a striker to SB2001, letting faculty members at the state's community colleges and universities carry concealed weapons on campus; HB2496, letting people who contribute to school tuition organizations this year by April 15 to claim it on last year's tax returns; a striker to HB2598 (language not yet available) regarding the repeal of photo radar; and HCR2056, phasing out the state's business personal property tax.
- Education Accountability and Reform will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1. This agenda is a long one, but the highlights include HB2663 and HB2664, relating to STOs and tax credits (hint: these don't exactly increase oversight and accountability of STOs).
- Government Institutions will meet on Thursday at 10 a.m. in SHR1. Looks quiet so far.
Floor calendars for Monday have been posted -
House Third Read (final passage) is here; Senate COW is here; Senate Third Read is here.
Later...
The highlight (so to speak) this week looks to be the eighth special session of the lege, called by the Governor to ask for permission to sue the feds over health care reform. More on that set piece here. No bill proposals or committee agendas have been posted for the special session as yet.
Regular session committee work is starting to wind down, and this week's agendas show it - while most committees are meeting, most of their agendas are short ones.
On the House side of the quad -
- Education is meeting on Monday at 10 a.m. in HHR3. Looks quiet so far.
- Rules will meet at 1 p.m. in HHR4. *Not* quiet, but this committee is a rubber stamp. If a measure makes it onto this agenda, it means that the Speaker supports the bill and it will be approved by the committee.
- Natural Resources and Rural Affairs will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR4. The agenda includes consideration of a strike-everything amendment to SB1154, relating to "underground storage tanks". The bill's language hasn't been posted online yet, but the fact sheet written by legislative staff is here. Also on the agenda is SB1349, which mandates that the director of the AZ Department of Administration allow the state parks board to enter into contracts with a "public or private entity or Indian tribes" to operate the state's parks.
- Banking and Insurance will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR5. The agenda is short, but includes SB1348, wreaking all sorts of mischief regarding regulatory rules and rulemaking.
- On Tuesday, Public Employees, Retirement, and Entitlement Reform will meet at 2 p.m. in HHR3. Quiet thus far.
- On Wednesday, Military Affairs and Public Safety will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR3. This one includes SB1070, the Russell Pearce-penned measure to direct law enforcement personnel in Arizona to ignore enforcement of other laws in order to become immigration police, outlaw "sanctuary city" policies, and reduce probable cause requirements for law enforcement officers stopping vehicles and persons, among other things. In short, SB1070 is a potpourri of ugly.
- Health and Human Services will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR4. This may be the longest agenda of the week, outside of the Rules agenda. On the agenda: SB1306 and SB1307, measures written by the Center for
- On Thursday, Water and Energy will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR5. Looks quiet so far, but a striker will be offered to HB2561 regarding "groundwater transportation; Big Chino sub-basin." No language posted online as yet.
- Transportation and Infrastructure will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR3. Very quiet so far.
- Judiciary will meet at 9 a.m. in HHR4. This one is full of parting gifts from Jonathan Paton, such as SCR1009, the plan to end Clean Elections in Arizona, and SCR1013, changing the job title of the Secretary of State to "Lieutenant Governor." SCR1013 also removes the requirement for a run-off election if none of the candidates for an executive branch office doesn't gain a majority of the votes in an election. Instead, the legislature would get to choose the occupant of the office, in the event of a tie. Otherwise, the highest vote getter for an office would win that office (I think so anyway - the measure isn't specific on that).
Over on the Senate side -
- Rules will meet on Monday in 1st Floor Caucus Room upon adjournment of the floor session.
- Natural Resources, Infrastructure, and Public Debt will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR109. This one contains SB1445, relating to "groundwater transportation; Big Chino sub-basin." I'm guessing that this measure is a match for the unknown striker listed above, but I have no idea what its real impact will be.
- Judiciary will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1. Looks relatively quiet so far.
- On Tuesday, Commerce and Economic Development will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1. This one contains HB2337, a measure declaring that incandescent light bulbs manufactured and used in Arizona aren't subject to any federal regulation.
- Appropriations will meet at 1:30 in SHR109. Relatively quiet so far.
- On Wednesday, Healthcare and Medical Liability Reform will meet at 9 a.m in SHR1. Quiet thus far.
- Public Safety and Human Services will meet at 10 a.m. in SHR3. The agenda includes consideration of HB2246, deregulating "consumer" fireworks. if this passes, look for a busy brushfire season in Arizona.
- Veterans and Military Affairs will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR2. Quiet thus far.
- Finance will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR3. This one has a lot of bad on it: a striker to SB2001, letting faculty members at the state's community colleges and universities carry concealed weapons on campus; HB2496, letting people who contribute to school tuition organizations this year by April 15 to claim it on last year's tax returns; a striker to HB2598 (language not yet available) regarding the repeal of photo radar; and HCR2056, phasing out the state's business personal property tax.
- Education Accountability and Reform will meet at 1:30 p.m. in SHR1. This agenda is a long one, but the highlights include HB2663 and HB2664, relating to STOs and tax credits (hint: these don't exactly increase oversight and accountability of STOs).
- Government Institutions will meet on Thursday at 10 a.m. in SHR1. Looks quiet so far.
Floor calendars for Monday have been posted -
House Third Read (final passage) is here; Senate COW is here; Senate Third Read is here.
Later...
Friday, March 26, 2010
Current state of the Republicans: a deep, pervasive snit.
Not talking about the various bricks, threats, and epithets that have been thrown about in recent days.
Nope, that stuff goes beyond being characterized as part of a "snit."
Far beyond.
No, I'm talking about petty stuff, like...
...AZ's senior U.S. Senator John McCain pledging to take his ball and go home because of the House's passage of health care reform.
...AZ House Speaker Kirk Adams removing Rep. Daniel Patterson (D-Tucson) from the House's Military Affairs and Public Safety Committee because Patterson had the audacity to criticize State Senator (and Republican/Nativist hero) Russell Pearce (R-Mesa). Who knew Pearce had such tender sensibilities?
...AZ Senate President Bob Burns shelving a bill to raise the two-year statute of limitations on child sexual abuse claims.
...The Arizona House of Representative basically screwing the thousands of taxpayers who have already done their state tax returns by refusing to conform AZ's tax code to the updates in the federal tax code. The deed was done by adopting an Adams amendment to the routine annual bill to conform to IRS changes. Adams' amendment essentially changed the bill to mandate that the state's tax code *not* conform. Adams' amendment does nothing to affect the federal government; they won't even notice its passage.
...Arizona's Governor becoming so incensed at the passage of a health care reform package that could help poor and working families gain adequate health insurance coverage, an enactment that took place mere days after she did away with the state's KidsCare program, that she issued a call for an 8th Special Session of the legislature. She wants to ask them for permission to use scarce state resources to sue the federal government over HCR, because Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard won't do her bidding.
The Republican Party - Formerly the "Party of No"; now the "Party of Pissy"...
Nope, that stuff goes beyond being characterized as part of a "snit."
Far beyond.
No, I'm talking about petty stuff, like...
...AZ's senior U.S. Senator John McCain pledging to take his ball and go home because of the House's passage of health care reform.
...AZ House Speaker Kirk Adams removing Rep. Daniel Patterson (D-Tucson) from the House's Military Affairs and Public Safety Committee because Patterson had the audacity to criticize State Senator (and Republican/Nativist hero) Russell Pearce (R-Mesa). Who knew Pearce had such tender sensibilities?
...AZ Senate President Bob Burns shelving a bill to raise the two-year statute of limitations on child sexual abuse claims.
...The Arizona House of Representative basically screwing the thousands of taxpayers who have already done their state tax returns by refusing to conform AZ's tax code to the updates in the federal tax code. The deed was done by adopting an Adams amendment to the routine annual bill to conform to IRS changes. Adams' amendment essentially changed the bill to mandate that the state's tax code *not* conform. Adams' amendment does nothing to affect the federal government; they won't even notice its passage.
...Arizona's Governor becoming so incensed at the passage of a health care reform package that could help poor and working families gain adequate health insurance coverage, an enactment that took place mere days after she did away with the state's KidsCare program, that she issued a call for an 8th Special Session of the legislature. She wants to ask them for permission to use scarce state resources to sue the federal government over HCR, because Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard won't do her bidding.
The Republican Party - Formerly the "Party of No"; now the "Party of Pissy"...
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Republican Congressional leader targeted for violence
It looks as if House Republican whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) has had his district office shot at*, perhaps by supporters of HCR angered by his vocal opposition to the recently enacted measure.
Or not. From the Richmond, VA Police Department press release on their preliminary investigation (emphasis mine) -
However, while it is still early in the investigation and different information could come to light, the preliminary results don't cast Cantor in a good light. The wave of vitriol and violence that is sweeping the country is something to be taken seriously; all Cantor seems to take seriously is the fact that the Rs who have whipped up the frenzy are now unable to rein it in, to save for the next time they want to use the Tea Party types.
I am not normally a Bible-quoter (OK, not ever :) ), but there is one quote that works here. I didn't actually know it was from the Bible when I Googled it to make sure I got it right.
From Hosea 8 -
Later...
Or not. From the Richmond, VA Police Department press release on their preliminary investigation (emphasis mine) -
A Richmond Police detective was assigned to the case. A preliminary investigation shows that a bullet was fired into the air and struck the window in a downward direction, landing on the floor about a foot from the window. The round struck with enough force to break the windowpane but did not penetrate the window blinds. There was no other damage to the room, which is used occasionally for meetings by the congressman.
To summarize - the Richmond PD thinks that someone fired a gun up in the air, and the bullet fell to Earth, and the shooter knew not where.
To be sure, any violence or threats of violence against people because of their political positions is despicable and should be immediately denounced by all civil members of society, no matter the political persuasion of the would-be domestic terrorists.However, while it is still early in the investigation and different information could come to light, the preliminary results don't cast Cantor in a good light. The wave of vitriol and violence that is sweeping the country is something to be taken seriously; all Cantor seems to take seriously is the fact that the Rs who have whipped up the frenzy are now unable to rein it in, to save for the next time they want to use the Tea Party types.
I am not normally a Bible-quoter (OK, not ever :) ), but there is one quote that works here. I didn't actually know it was from the Bible when I Googled it to make sure I got it right.
From Hosea 8 -
7. When they sow the wind, they shall reap the whirlwind* - as much as I am loathe to link to a Fox News story, all of the responsible MSM sites had updated their stories on this topic to reflect the Richmond PD's press release.
Later...
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
"Hell No You Can't!!" immortalized
When his career in office is over, this may or may not be the way Boehner *wants* to be remembered, but it *will* be...
And the descent continues...
Earlier today, I wrote a post about a march/rally to thank Congressman Harry Mitchell for his vote on health care reform that took place in Tempe yesterday. During the march, a woman collapsed and needed to be resuscitated and hospitalized, and in the post I linked to an AZRepublic article on the woman/march.
At one point, the story was open to commenting on the Rep's website. That lasted approximately three hours, and then the editors of the Rep had to close comments and pull down those that had already been submitted.
In that few hours, what should have been a "feel good" piece about someone surviving an acute illness brought out some seriously vicious trolls, who hijacked the thread and turned it into an outlet for hate and bile.
For example (bolding and italics utilized solely to indicate separate quotes):
They should have let her die just to prove a point. Fricken hilarious! (commenter DISSONANT)
Ironically, people this woman's age are going to be the ones screwed the worst by the plan. She'll eventually be hauled off to a corner somewhere so she can die a9lone with dignity. (commenter AngryPatriot)
Thinking it was the Grim Reaper, she became gripped with terror when she saw that giant sickle coming for her.
Lo and behold, it was just one of her comrade's red flags flapping in the breeze. (commenter GannettStockChart)
Too bad it wasn't obama, pelosi, and reid having the heart attacks with no one there to help them. That would be great! (commenter demsrslime)
YOU WANTED YOUR HEALTH CARE PREMIUMS TO DOUBLE AND GET LESS CARE ?? WHY?? YOU MUST NOT BE VERY SMART THEN AGAIN YOU PROBABLY VOTED FOR THE (inappropriate term) IN THE WHITE HOUSE ALSO, MAY I THANK YOU FOR THE MESS YOU PUT THIS COUNTRY IN NOW (commenter GLSSSMAN33, who's got a confederate flag as his avatar)
"The woman, who was not identified, collapsed during a rally to celebrate U.S. Rep. Harry Mitchell's vote in favor of health care legislation"
------------------
Karma. (commenter FailRail)
And that's just a sampling from the first couple of pages of comments, which were all that I got to save before the Rep's editors pulled them down.
Any questions about how ugly this summer is going to be?
The last time things were this bad, which perhaps not so coincidentally was immediately after the last serious attempt at health care reform, Timothy McVeigh, perhaps egged on by extremist rhetoric from right wing talk radio (Rush and his ilk were already going strong) and Republican so-called leaders in Congress, blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City and murdered over 160 men, women, and children.
I fervently hope it doesn't get that far, but my hopes won't be enough to stop that from happening.
The R "leadership", if it ever again wants to be considered part of civil society, will denounce the vandalism, violence, and violent rhetoric that their tea partiers have embraced, and do so in clear, unambiguous terms.
I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen, and I can't recommend that anybody else do so, either.
At one point, the story was open to commenting on the Rep's website. That lasted approximately three hours, and then the editors of the Rep had to close comments and pull down those that had already been submitted.
In that few hours, what should have been a "feel good" piece about someone surviving an acute illness brought out some seriously vicious trolls, who hijacked the thread and turned it into an outlet for hate and bile.
For example (bolding and italics utilized solely to indicate separate quotes):
They should have let her die just to prove a point. Fricken hilarious! (commenter DISSONANT)
Ironically, people this woman's age are going to be the ones screwed the worst by the plan. She'll eventually be hauled off to a corner somewhere so she can die a9lone with dignity. (commenter AngryPatriot)
Thinking it was the Grim Reaper, she became gripped with terror when she saw that giant sickle coming for her.
Lo and behold, it was just one of her comrade's red flags flapping in the breeze. (commenter GannettStockChart)
Too bad it wasn't obama, pelosi, and reid having the heart attacks with no one there to help them. That would be great! (commenter demsrslime)
YOU WANTED YOUR HEALTH CARE PREMIUMS TO DOUBLE AND GET LESS CARE ?? WHY?? YOU MUST NOT BE VERY SMART THEN AGAIN YOU PROBABLY VOTED FOR THE (inappropriate term) IN THE WHITE HOUSE ALSO, MAY I THANK YOU FOR THE MESS YOU PUT THIS COUNTRY IN NOW (commenter GLSSSMAN33, who's got a confederate flag as his avatar)
"The woman, who was not identified, collapsed during a rally to celebrate U.S. Rep. Harry Mitchell's vote in favor of health care legislation"
------------------
Karma. (commenter FailRail)
And that's just a sampling from the first couple of pages of comments, which were all that I got to save before the Rep's editors pulled them down.
Any questions about how ugly this summer is going to be?
The last time things were this bad, which perhaps not so coincidentally was immediately after the last serious attempt at health care reform, Timothy McVeigh, perhaps egged on by extremist rhetoric from right wing talk radio (Rush and his ilk were already going strong) and Republican so-called leaders in Congress, blew up the federal building in Oklahoma City and murdered over 160 men, women, and children.
I fervently hope it doesn't get that far, but my hopes won't be enough to stop that from happening.
The R "leadership", if it ever again wants to be considered part of civil society, will denounce the vandalism, violence, and violent rhetoric that their tea partiers have embraced, and do so in clear, unambiguous terms.
I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen, and I can't recommend that anybody else do so, either.
A "Thank you Harry" march, with a little good karma mixed in
There was a rally and march in Tempe on Tuesday to thank Congressman Harry Mitchell for his "yes" vote on health care reform. Well over 100 people attended to show their gratitude, and hundreds more passers-by shouted or honked to show their unity with the marchers.
The day was filled with smiles, especially when we found out that the planned anti-Harry rally planned by tea partiers and Jan Brewer and scheduled for Harry Mitchell Park in Tempe had fizzled out due to the sprinkles of rain in the Valley at the time.
The one dark note was when a woman who was marching in support of Harry collapsed near 6th St. and Mill Ave. She was unresponsive, even after CPR and multiple defibrillations, and everyone present was praying for her.
Apparently, those prayers helped. Probably not as much as a knowledgeable bystander, well-equipped and -trained EMTs, and highly-skilled doctors and nurses, but still... :)
From AZCentral.com -
The day was filled with smiles, especially when we found out that the planned anti-Harry rally planned by tea partiers and Jan Brewer and scheduled for Harry Mitchell Park in Tempe had fizzled out due to the sprinkles of rain in the Valley at the time.
The one dark note was when a woman who was marching in support of Harry collapsed near 6th St. and Mill Ave. She was unresponsive, even after CPR and multiple defibrillations, and everyone present was praying for her.
Apparently, those prayers helped. Probably not as much as a knowledgeable bystander, well-equipped and -trained EMTs, and highly-skilled doctors and nurses, but still... :)
From AZCentral.com -
An unsung hero saved the life of the 65-year-old woman who collapsed at a political rally on Mill Avenue on Tuesday in Tempe, a spokesman for the Tempe Fire Department said.
When she collapsed, an anonymous bystander began chest compressions immediately, before paramedics arrived.
"These chest compressions being performed likely contributed to her survival," said Tempe Fire spokesman Mike Reichling.
Keep the as-yet-unidentified victim in your thoughts and prayers during what is sure to be a long recovery.
Congressman Mitchell's response to a letter regarding health care reform
Last week, I (as well as many others) contacted Congressman Harry Mitchell to urge him to vote for the health care reform bill before the House (and on Sunday, he did!! THANK YOU!!).
His reply came through today.
The response, via email -
Dear [cpmaz]
Thank you for contacting me regarding health insurance reform legislation, H.R. 4872. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts with me on this important issue.
After more than a year of hearing from health care professionals, insurers, patients, and tens of thousands of passionate and concerned Arizonans both for and against reform, it has become clear to me that we cannot sustain the path that we are on. Rapidly rising health care costs are burdening Arizona families, hurting the economy, and slowing our recovery.
Arizonans are losing their health insurance when they get sick, and being denied the ability to purchase new coverage if they've previously seen a doctor. Insurance companies are literally refusing to sell policies to individuals who have previously seen a doctor for high cholesterol, diabetes or even acne.
Small businesses, which make up 73 percent of Arizona 's businesses, are facing a full-blown crisis. Since 2000, health-insurance premiums for small businesses have risen 130 percent, and insurers are warning that they will go up another 15 percent this year. In other words, a premium that cost $4,500 per employee in 2008 - and $4,800 last year - will cost $5,500 per employee this year. As a result, employers are being forced to choose between hiring workers and paying for health insurance costs.
At the same time, families who have insurance, and are already struggling with skyrocketing premiums, are being forced to pay a hidden tax to pay for those without insurance who show up at emergency rooms and get treated despite their inability to pay. It is estimated that the average American family is already paying an extra $1,100 a year in premiums to pay for costs associated with treating the uninsured, a cost that will only continue to grow.
After more than a year of careful review, I believe that this legislation will address many of the key issues plaguing our current health care system. While I understand that this package is not perfect and I don't approve of some of the procedures that were proposed to advance the bill, I strongly believe that the status quo is unsustainable and the time for reform is now.
While I have been heartened by the many thoughtful questions, comments and suggestions I have received over the course of this debate from both sides, as a former high school government teacher, I have been extremely disappointed by much of the extremist rhetoric and blatantly false statements that some have injected into this discussion. The use of swastikas does not help foster a civil discussion on a serous issue, nor does it honor the memory of the millions victims who died in concentration camps. But perhaps even more insidious, millions of dollars have been spent to spread misconceptions about what reform will mean, ultimately distracting many from engaging in meaningful conversations.
I would like to take this opportunity to briefly explain what reform would mean for you and clear up some of the most egregious rumors about reform. For more detailed information, I encourage you to visit my web site at: www.mitchell.house.gov.
For individuals with insurance, including the 469,000 residents of Arizona 's Fifth District who currently receive health care coverage from an employer, this legislation will enable you to keep it, and prevent your insurer from dropping you if you get sick. It will also require insurers to allow young adults, up to 26 years of age, to remain on their parents' health care plans if they so choose.
The legislation will also ultimately slow the rapidly accelerating growth of insurance premiums by spurring greater competition between health insurers and offering more choice to consumers. Specifically, the legislation will establish insurance exchanges through which businesses and individuals can comparison shop for insurance policies that best meet their needs. While more complex, these exchanges would function, in a sense, like the system many travelers currently use to purchase airline tickets online. Just as the airlines bid for your travel business, health insurers will bid for your insurance business.
To participate in an exchange, insurers will have to meet certain minimum standards. Most notably, insurers will no longer be allowed to refuse to cover someone because of a pre-existing condition, or place a cap on annual or lifetime coverage. Members of Congress and federal employees have long had access to a system like this, and it has worked well. So well, in fact, that Congress is frequently, and I believe correctly, criticized for giving itself better quality and more affordable health care than countless Americans.
The legislation will also help small businesses, including the more than 17,800 in the Fifth District, who have been among the hardest hit by the present health insurance system. Currently, without a large number of employees, businesses cannot negotiate bulk, competitive rates with insurance companies. Reform will enable small businesses to combine or "pool" their purchasing power, and then comparison-shop for competitive rates via an insurance exchange. Approximately 15,700 small businesses in Arizona 's Fifth District would qualify for tax credits for up to 50 percent of the cost of insurance coverage.
Furthermore, this package will improve and strengthen Medicare for seniors that have been squeezed by rising costs of care and prescription drugs. So much so, the bill has been endorsed by the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP). Among other things, the legislation will fill the "donut-hole" in Medicare Part D, the prescription drug benefit, helping the 10,100 seniors in Arizona's Fifth District who are forced to pay full drug costs because they fall into it. The legislation would further improve Medicare by eliminating out-of-pocket expenses for preventative services in Medicare. This package does not, as some have alleged, weaken Medicare. As someone who is over 65 and depends on Medicare myself, I would not vote for it if it did.
The package does not contain any so-called "death panels" or government takeovers of health care. It does not contain a public option, does not dismantle the private insurance industry, and does not provide benefits for illegal immigrants. In fact, the legislation explicitly prohibits illegal immigrants from receiving health insurance. The package also maintains the current ban on federal funding for abortion, and maintains TRICARE for veterans.
According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the bill would reduce federal budget deficits by $138 billion from 2010 - 2019 and by $1.2 trillion over the next decade. CBO's analysis is available online at: www.cbo.gov.
The reconciliation package that was approved by the House in conjunction with the underlying health care legislation addresses several of the concerns I had with the Senate bill. Specifically, it closes the prescription drug donut hole for seniors, and eliminates special deals like the "Cornhusker Kickback." Moreover, in the wake of the state legislature's decision to kick kids off state health insurance -- risking billions in federal matching funds and killing over 42,000 jobs -- the legislation will help Arizona bridge its budget gap by providing it with an additional $2.5 billion for Medicaid funding.
Finally, I have received a number of inquiries about tort reform and the ability to purchase insurance across state lines. While these are primarily issues of state law, the reform package will allow the federal government to play a constructive role for states that are interested in pursuing either of these ideas. Under the legislation, states will be able to enter into agreements to facilitate the purchase of coverage across state lines. Reform will also provide incentives to states to create pilot tort reform programs. I would encourage those interested in reforming Arizona 's tort laws to contact their state legislators as well as the Governor.
Again, thank you for taking the time to write. For more information about this issue, I invite you to visit my web site at www.mitchell.house.gov.
Sincerely,
Harry E. Mitchell
Member of Congress
His reply came through today.
The response, via email -
Dear [cpmaz]
Thank you for contacting me regarding health insurance reform legislation, H.R. 4872. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts with me on this important issue.
After more than a year of hearing from health care professionals, insurers, patients, and tens of thousands of passionate and concerned Arizonans both for and against reform, it has become clear to me that we cannot sustain the path that we are on. Rapidly rising health care costs are burdening Arizona families, hurting the economy, and slowing our recovery.
Arizonans are losing their health insurance when they get sick, and being denied the ability to purchase new coverage if they've previously seen a doctor. Insurance companies are literally refusing to sell policies to individuals who have previously seen a doctor for high cholesterol, diabetes or even acne.
Small businesses, which make up 73 percent of Arizona 's businesses, are facing a full-blown crisis. Since 2000, health-insurance premiums for small businesses have risen 130 percent, and insurers are warning that they will go up another 15 percent this year. In other words, a premium that cost $4,500 per employee in 2008 - and $4,800 last year - will cost $5,500 per employee this year. As a result, employers are being forced to choose between hiring workers and paying for health insurance costs.
At the same time, families who have insurance, and are already struggling with skyrocketing premiums, are being forced to pay a hidden tax to pay for those without insurance who show up at emergency rooms and get treated despite their inability to pay. It is estimated that the average American family is already paying an extra $1,100 a year in premiums to pay for costs associated with treating the uninsured, a cost that will only continue to grow.
After more than a year of careful review, I believe that this legislation will address many of the key issues plaguing our current health care system. While I understand that this package is not perfect and I don't approve of some of the procedures that were proposed to advance the bill, I strongly believe that the status quo is unsustainable and the time for reform is now.
While I have been heartened by the many thoughtful questions, comments and suggestions I have received over the course of this debate from both sides, as a former high school government teacher, I have been extremely disappointed by much of the extremist rhetoric and blatantly false statements that some have injected into this discussion. The use of swastikas does not help foster a civil discussion on a serous issue, nor does it honor the memory of the millions victims who died in concentration camps. But perhaps even more insidious, millions of dollars have been spent to spread misconceptions about what reform will mean, ultimately distracting many from engaging in meaningful conversations.
I would like to take this opportunity to briefly explain what reform would mean for you and clear up some of the most egregious rumors about reform. For more detailed information, I encourage you to visit my web site at: www.mitchell.house.gov.
For individuals with insurance, including the 469,000 residents of Arizona 's Fifth District who currently receive health care coverage from an employer, this legislation will enable you to keep it, and prevent your insurer from dropping you if you get sick. It will also require insurers to allow young adults, up to 26 years of age, to remain on their parents' health care plans if they so choose.
The legislation will also ultimately slow the rapidly accelerating growth of insurance premiums by spurring greater competition between health insurers and offering more choice to consumers. Specifically, the legislation will establish insurance exchanges through which businesses and individuals can comparison shop for insurance policies that best meet their needs. While more complex, these exchanges would function, in a sense, like the system many travelers currently use to purchase airline tickets online. Just as the airlines bid for your travel business, health insurers will bid for your insurance business.
To participate in an exchange, insurers will have to meet certain minimum standards. Most notably, insurers will no longer be allowed to refuse to cover someone because of a pre-existing condition, or place a cap on annual or lifetime coverage. Members of Congress and federal employees have long had access to a system like this, and it has worked well. So well, in fact, that Congress is frequently, and I believe correctly, criticized for giving itself better quality and more affordable health care than countless Americans.
The legislation will also help small businesses, including the more than 17,800 in the Fifth District, who have been among the hardest hit by the present health insurance system. Currently, without a large number of employees, businesses cannot negotiate bulk, competitive rates with insurance companies. Reform will enable small businesses to combine or "pool" their purchasing power, and then comparison-shop for competitive rates via an insurance exchange. Approximately 15,700 small businesses in Arizona 's Fifth District would qualify for tax credits for up to 50 percent of the cost of insurance coverage.
Furthermore, this package will improve and strengthen Medicare for seniors that have been squeezed by rising costs of care and prescription drugs. So much so, the bill has been endorsed by the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP). Among other things, the legislation will fill the "donut-hole" in Medicare Part D, the prescription drug benefit, helping the 10,100 seniors in Arizona's Fifth District who are forced to pay full drug costs because they fall into it. The legislation would further improve Medicare by eliminating out-of-pocket expenses for preventative services in Medicare. This package does not, as some have alleged, weaken Medicare. As someone who is over 65 and depends on Medicare myself, I would not vote for it if it did.
The package does not contain any so-called "death panels" or government takeovers of health care. It does not contain a public option, does not dismantle the private insurance industry, and does not provide benefits for illegal immigrants. In fact, the legislation explicitly prohibits illegal immigrants from receiving health insurance. The package also maintains the current ban on federal funding for abortion, and maintains TRICARE for veterans.
According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the bill would reduce federal budget deficits by $138 billion from 2010 - 2019 and by $1.2 trillion over the next decade. CBO's analysis is available online at: www.cbo.gov.
The reconciliation package that was approved by the House in conjunction with the underlying health care legislation addresses several of the concerns I had with the Senate bill. Specifically, it closes the prescription drug donut hole for seniors, and eliminates special deals like the "Cornhusker Kickback." Moreover, in the wake of the state legislature's decision to kick kids off state health insurance -- risking billions in federal matching funds and killing over 42,000 jobs -- the legislation will help Arizona bridge its budget gap by providing it with an additional $2.5 billion for Medicaid funding.
Finally, I have received a number of inquiries about tort reform and the ability to purchase insurance across state lines. While these are primarily issues of state law, the reform package will allow the federal government to play a constructive role for states that are interested in pursuing either of these ideas. Under the legislation, states will be able to enter into agreements to facilitate the purchase of coverage across state lines. Reform will also provide incentives to states to create pilot tort reform programs. I would encourage those interested in reforming Arizona 's tort laws to contact their state legislators as well as the Governor.
Again, thank you for taking the time to write. For more information about this issue, I invite you to visit my web site at www.mitchell.house.gov.
Sincerely,
Harry E. Mitchell
Member of Congress
Jan Brewer: Channelling her inner Marie Antoinette
Who knew that Brewer was such a Francophile?
On the other hand, perhaps Brewer isn't a Francophile and was just looking for the historical figure who was most openly disdainful of her society's most impoverished members.
If that is the case, then the Governor has made the perfect choice for her political inspiration.
From AZCentral.com -
Now, the health insurance reform act that was signed into law this week could go a long way toward ameliorating some of the effects (and here) of Brewer's and the legislative Republicans' jihad against Arizona's social infrastructure. However, that measure won't go into complete effect until 2014; until then, Brewer will continue railing against health care for all (like she already has, here, here, here, and here).
The Brewer campaign's new slogan -
"Let them eat cake."
It's a classic, isn't it?
P.S. - the scary part is that as bad for Arizona that Brewer is and has been, she may be the least bad among the R pretenders/contenders for their nomination.
We need Terry Goddard.
On the other hand, perhaps Brewer isn't a Francophile and was just looking for the historical figure who was most openly disdainful of her society's most impoverished members.
If that is the case, then the Governor has made the perfect choice for her political inspiration.
From AZCentral.com -
That was then, this is now . . . Gov. Jan Brewer held a news conference Thursday to complain about the plans for federal health-care reform. That gave reporters a chance to ask about the budget she signed that day, which among other things removed health care from an estimated 310,000 adults and nearly 40,000 children.Note: Her State of the State address can be found here. The relevent quote is on page 13 of the .pdf, approximately halfway down the page.
Asked what those hundreds of thousands of people should do when they get sick, Brewer said this: "If they need health care, they'll be able to go to health clinics and present themselves at emergency rooms."
Not everyone agrees with that sentiment, of course. We were reminded of some stern words we heard back in January from a top Arizona official:
"We must decrease visits to high-cost settings like emergency rooms - and encourage those receiving state services to take personal responsibility for their own health."
The occasion for those remarks? The 2010 State of the State Address. The speaker, of course, was Gov. Jan Brewer.
Now, the health insurance reform act that was signed into law this week could go a long way toward ameliorating some of the effects (and here) of Brewer's and the legislative Republicans' jihad against Arizona's social infrastructure. However, that measure won't go into complete effect until 2014; until then, Brewer will continue railing against health care for all (like she already has, here, here, here, and here).
The Brewer campaign's new slogan -
"Let them eat cake."
It's a classic, isn't it?
P.S. - the scary part is that as bad for Arizona that Brewer is and has been, she may be the least bad among the R pretenders/contenders for their nomination.
We need Terry Goddard.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Chairman of AZ Democratic Party on the wave of vandalism and intimidation
From an email -
Chairman Bivens calls on Republicans to renounce violence and pledge to end inflammatory rhetoricI appreciate Don Bivens' call, but given McCain's rightward lurch politically, I don't expect him to risk alienating his base by telling them to behave like civilized and mature adults.
PHOENIX -- Arizona Democratic Party Chairman Don Bivens today called on elected Republican leaders in Arizona to strongly and immediately denounce all acts or threats of violence and inflammatory rhetoric being perpetuated in response to Sunday's health-insurance reform vote in Congress.
A disturbing incident Monday in Tucson prompted Bivens' call. Early that morning, a window was shattered at the office of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., possibly by a pellet gun. Giffords voted for the deficit-reducing package of reforms that includes prohibiting insurance companies from putting lifetime caps on insurance claims or dropping people because of pre-existing conditions.
"Threats and vandalism undermine the democratic process and have no place in our policy discussions," Bivens said. "They run counter to the fundamental freedoms our country was founded upon.
"I call upon elected Republican leaders -- especially Gov. Brewer and Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl -- to immediately and unequivocally denounce any acts or threats of violence or inflammatory rhetoric associated with anti-health-reform protests.
"In light of what has already occurred in Arizona, I urge all those speaking at Friday's McCain-Palin rally in Tucson to lead their supporters in denouncing any future violence and curtailing the inflammatory rhetoric. Their failure to do so would constitute a tacit approval of these disturbing tactics," Bivens said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)