Wednesday, August 21, 2013

RBB: AZ clemency board director resigns due to misconduct

* RBB = Republicans Behaving Badly 

From the Arizona Republic, written by Craig Harris -
Jesse Hernandez, the ex-chairman and executive director of the state Board of Executive Clemency, suddenly quit last week after an investigation found nine cases of inappropriate behavior, including giving an unqualified female employee he was dating a promotion and $21,340 pay raise, records obtained Wednesday by The Arizona Republic show.

The Republic acquired heavily redacted documents through the Arizona Public Records Law after Gov. Jan Brewer’s Office refused to explain Monday why her appointment abruptly quit Aug. 16.

Brewer appointed Hernandez, a Republican political operative, to the post last year despite having no experience in corrections or criminal justice, according to his resume.

Harris used the phrase "Republican political operative" to describe Hernandez. 

Harris has a gift for understatement.

From Hernandez' LinkedIn profile -



In addition to the stuff listed above, Hernandez was chair of a pro-Russell Pearce political committee during the Pearce recall in 2011 -

 

 And he was a candidate for state senate in 2006 -


A campaign co-chair for Maricopa County Attnorney Bill Montgomery.  From the AZ lege's bio page for Hernandez' appointment -


Maybe Harris should have spelled "operative" with a capital "O"...


Anyway, it could have been worse - Hernandez could have given his girlfriend an entire *job* for which she wasn't qualified, not just a pay raise.

Ya know, kind of like Tom Horne, Arizona's Attorney General.

Tea Party...errrr..."Congressional Republicans" Holding Hearing In Mesa On Thursday

From the Congressional website of Rep. Paul Gosar -
U.S. Congressman Paul Gosar, D.D.S. (AZ-04) joined by Congressmen Matt Salmon (AZ-05), David Schweikert (AZ-06) and Trent Franks (AZ-08), will host a congressional hearing on I.R.S. abuse and E.P.A. overreach. This hearing was previously scheduled for July 1, but was postponed due to the tragic Yarnell Hill Fire.

The hearing will take place Thursday, August 22, 2013 at the Mesa Arts Center (Virginia G. Piper Repertory Theater) in Mesa, Arizona. The hearing starts at 3:30PM and is OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
Attorney General Tom Horne and State Representative Brenda Barton will also offer testimony.

Representatives from Tea Party groups, industry associations and businesses will testify as well.

{snip}

TIME:  3:30PM- 7:30PM (Doors will open at 2:00PM)
LOCATION: Mesa Arts Center
Virginia G. Piper Repertory Theater
1 E. Main St.
Mesa, AZ 85211

Obviously (from the presences of Horne, Barton and tea party groups), the event may be called a "congressional hearing" but in reality will be a "taxpayer-funded campaign event".

Many people will be attending the event (including me), and while I expect that most of us will not be asked to testify (people who will tell the truth aren't on the invitation list), there will be plenty of discussions.

Here's a little light reading from RegBlog from the University of Pennsylvania Program on Regulation - 
Federal regulations from the last ten years, though costly, could potentially generate almost a trillion dollars in net benefits.  Environmental regulations, especially those issued under the Clean Air Act, will likely create the largest benefits.  And, the Obama Administration, through its first four years, may be better than the two previous administrations at enacting beneficial regulations.

Those are some of the key insights from the recently-released draft version of the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) annual Report to Congress on the Benefit and Costs of Federal Regulation.  As required by the Regulatory-Right-To-Know Act, the OMB annually summarizes estimated costs and benefits of major federal regulations and presents the findings to Congress.

In the latest report, the OMB concludes that major federal regulations enacted in the last ten years are expected to produce a net benefit between $109 billion and $743 billion.  Cost estimates range between $57 billion and $84 billion, whereas benefit estimates range from $193 billion to $800 billion.

If you plan to attend Thursday's event, arrive early and bring plenty of water...



Sunday, August 18, 2013

Health care reform: Can improved financial access to health care services also improve geographic access to health care services?

On Friday, Government Executive, essentially a business newspaper for people whose "business" is government agency operations, published an "insider baseball" sort of article.  It relates to areas that are designated as "medically underserved areas" (MUAs).

Federal employees are covered covered under slightly different health insurance reimbursement rules when they work in MUAs.

From the article, written by Eric Katz -
The statute that governs the Federal Employees Health Benefit Program requires OPM to determine which states have “critical shortages of primary care physicians.” Employees in these states -- known as “medically underserved areas” -- receive reimbursement for covered services by any licensed provider in the state.
 The next lines in the article are the ones that caught my attention (emphasis added) -
OPM [the federal Office of Personnel Management, basically the federal government's version of an HR department] calculates which states are underserved using data from the Health and Human Services Departments, as well as the Census Bureau. If at least 25 percent of the state’s population lives in a “primary medical care manpower shortage area” -- as determined by HHS -- the state is considered underserved.

The 12 states that will receive the distinctive consideration in 2014 are Alabama, Arizona, Idaho, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Wyoming.

After first noticing that most of the states listed are "red" states (hey, this is *political* blog, not a *medical* one...), I noticed that most of the states listed, other than Illinois, are known as being very rural.

Which sent my thoughts off on a tangent (hence, this post.  :) )

Health care reform, commonly known as Obamacare, is all about making health care more financially accessible for the average American.

While it is still in its infancy, so to speak, it does seem to set to do just that, notwithstanding the BS storm stirred up by President Obama's haters.

What is doesn't seem set to do, directly anyway, is address the issue of people who face physical/geographic impediments when trying to access health care services.

As noted above, Arizona is one of the states that medically underserved enough so that it is subject to the slightly different reimbursement rules for federal employees.

A map of specific areas within the state that are designated as MUAs, courtesy Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) -


Looking at the map, we can see that most of the MUAs in AZ are rural, Native American tribal lands, or urban areas with high concentrations of racial or ethnic minorities, or high concentrations of poverty.

Obamacare directly addresses some of the economic inequities that raise barriers to access to health care.  The geographic inequities still raise barriers to access to health care.

Take the examples of the municipalities of Scottsdale and Holbrook, here in Arizona.

A search of the license database of the Arizona Medical Board shows 776 licenses issued to medical doctors with a Scottsdale address.  With a population of 219,713 people, that works out to one medical doctor for every 287 residents.

Scottsdale has three general hospitals, with 3.8 hospital beds per 1000 residents.  Additionally, there are a number of other health care facilities, such as assisted living and skilled nursing facilities.

Scottsdale is located in heavily populated Maricopa County and is bordered by Phoenix (2263 licensed doctors, multiple hospitals, multiple skilled nursing facilities) and Tempe (111 licensed doctors, 1 hospital, 2 skilled nursing facilities).  It takes less than 20 minutes to drive to the closest areas

In contrast, a search of the same AZ Medical Board database turns up all of two licenses issued to medical doctors in Holbrook, a town of 5,038 people in northeastern Arizona.  That works out to 1 physician for every 2519 residents.  Holbrook has no health care facilities.

Holbrook is located in sparsely Navajo County and the nearest towns for seeking health care services are Snowflake and Taylor, and both are more than 30 minutes away.

Snowflake has no health care facilities and three licensed doctors; Taylor has no health care facilities and no licensed doctors.

Not to be ignored in this is the fact that Scottsdale's median income is more than twice that of Holbrook, meaning that not only are there significantly more people in Scottsdale, the average person in Scottsdale has far more money to spend on health care, and doctor's offices are business operations as well as health care operations.

Interesting factoid:  AZ Medical Board records show that there are more licensed cosmetic surgeons in Scottsdale (6) than there are licensed medical doctors in Holbrook, Snowflake, and Taylor combined (5).

Speculation time:

Now, HCR won't change the basic economics of the health care provider industry as it relates to population density - doctors and other primary care providers will still be concentrated where human population is concentrated.  However, where it could, and should, be able to help with MUAs is to ameliorate the economic disparity.

With the implementation of HCR and its increased financial access to health care insurance (aka - $ for health care), establishing a medical practice in rural or other underserved areas should become a more fiscally feasible proposition.


Snark time:

So why is some of the strongest opposition to Obamacare in Arizona coming from federal and state legislators whose districts have many constituents living in medically underserved areas?  And why do voters in those areas support candidates and officeholders who actively work against their constituents' interests?


Scottsdale demographic data here, courtesy Arizona Department of Health Services.
Holbrook demographic data here, courtesy ADHS.

Data on other AZ municipalities can be found here, also courtesy ADHS.

Information on medically underserved areas from the US Department of Health and Human Services is available here.

Saturday, August 17, 2013

GOP plan for victory in 2016: Preach to the choir

From TheFreeDictionary.com -
preach to the choir - to make one's case primarily to one's supporters; to make one's case only to those people who are present or who are already friendly to the issues.


From the Washington Post, written by Ed O'Keefe -
The Republican National Committee formally decided Friday not to partner with CNN and NBC News for any presidential primary debates during the 2016 election cycle, a rebuke of the networks’ plans to air programs about Hillary Rodham Clinton and an attempt to seize more control of a crucial element of modern-day campaigns.


From Politico, written by James Hohmann -
Speculation that conservative radio talking heads like Mark Levin, Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh could moderate debates has ensured positive coverage of the new push on their programs.

“Put together your own debates with your own moderators, whoever you want, and focus on real Republican issues in these debates rather than whether they’re going to do a Hillary Clinton miniseries or not,” Limbaugh said on his show last week. “In this current modern age, there’s no reason anymore to treat these mainstream media people as mainstream objective and nonaligned reporters.”

Without offering evidence, he speculated that ABC’s George Stephanopoulos coordinated with the Obama campaign to ask Romney about contraception during a primary debate so they could create “the war on women” narrative.

“Wherever you go outside of Fox, you are going up against the Democrat Party with people disguised as journalists,” said Limbaugh. “Why do it?”

I'd mock them for trying to limit their national exposure to just most fervent of their base, but I think it's a brilliant plan.

Of course, I'm a Democrat.  :)

Thursday, August 15, 2013

Doubling down: Bob Thorpe's seatmate, Rep. Brenda Barton, jumps on the social media bigotry bandwagon

I'd say that there must be something in the water in LD6, but it's Arizona - there just isn't much water there or anywhere else in the state.

After news broke that Rep. Bob Thorpe, her seatmate in Legislative District 6, posted some bigoted tweets, got called on it, and responded by deleting the tweets and blocking reporters from viewing his Twitter feed, Rep. Brenda Barton jumped into the fray.

Apparently, she doesn't feel she has been getting enough attention.  A Facebook post from her earlier today (Thursday, August 15) -




She has learned one lesson already though; she has already blocked her Twitter feed -



Note: Regarding the blacked out names of the people who commented on her FB post - the names that are blocked are names I don't recognize; so far as I know, they aren't public figures.  However, John Corey Wentling is a noted gun industry lobbyist.  He's a public figure.

Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Electeds (and wannabes) behaving badly

Just a few quick hits on some names in the news, and in the interest of being fair, some of the people listed will be Democrats (yes, there are Democrats who do things that deserve criticism and even ouster from office)...

...Democrat Bob Filner, currently the mayor of San Diego, CA needs to resign.  Now.

I'm all for forgiving someone for a minor transgression, a character flaw, or something similar that doesn't impact an elected's ability to do his (or her) job.

However, Filner's bad behavior isn't just part of his personal life.  It is part and parcel of the way that he does his job.

And descriptions of the bad behavior legitimately include the word "victims".

It's past time for him to step down.


...Republican Tom Horne, Attorney General of Arizona, needs to join Filner in the unemployment line.

Not for cheating on his wife; that's part of his personal life.

What isn't part of his personal life is his penchant for giving his girlfriends highly-paid jobs funded by the taxpayers.

[Mild Crudeness Alert!]

His desire to get laid doesn't give him the right to screw over the people of Arizona.

[End Mild Crudeness]


...Democrat Anthony Weiner, candidate for mayor in New York City, still is in the habit of Tweeting pics of himself and his reproductive organ to women he has never met (already went for "crude" in this post; time for "clinical" :) ).  Even after leaving Congress in disgrace for doing the same thing.

He shouldn't drop out of the race; the voters of NYC should, electorally speaking, hand him his ass on a platter (which they seem to be set to do).

Simply having to leave office amid scandal didn't help him learn the "don't act like a moron!" lesson, perhaps an outright rejection by the voters will bring it home to Weiner.


...Republican Crystal Nuttle, candidate for the LD29 AZ State Senate seat, was arrested on custodial interference charges for helping another woman remove a child from CPS custody.  Instead of exhibiting penitence for her (alleged) crime, she's exhibiting ego and doubling down on it.  She is insisting that her actions were "justified".

I'm guessing that she isn't going to drop out of the race (based on her "it was justified" position), but it should make next year's race interesting to cover.


...Republican Bob Thorpe, LD6 State Representative, posted some bigoted tweets earlier this week, and when called on it, did not respond by apologizing or even simply "clarifying" his tweets.  Nope, he just deleted them and blocked some reporters from viewing his Twitter feed.

I expect that I will soon join the reporters on Thorpe's social media version of an enemies list for this, but here are the tweets in question (posted Monday) -




I do think his tweets are bigoted, but you decide for yourself.

He was called out for the tweets today by a couple of D members of the AZ House, Reps. Martin Quezada and Mark Cardenas.  The conversations are short, perhaps due to the deletion of the original tweets.  However, they make more sense when you look at the above picture first.



To be fair to Thorpe, he doesn't confine his bigotry to ethnic and racial minorities; he advocates shooting environmentalists, too.

And given his history, don't expect Thorpe to change his attitudes or even to withdraw from public life.



Monday, August 12, 2013

TN Judge Orders Baby's Name Changed Because The Name Offended The Judge's Religious Sensibilities

From TalkingPointsMemo, written by Tom Kludt (emphasis added) -
A judge in Tennessee ordered that a 7-month-old baby's name be changed from "Messiah," prompting the mother to challenge the ruling.

Jaleesa Martin and the father of the baby were attending a child support hearing Thursday in Cocke County, Tenn. to settle a dispute over Messiah's last name. It was there that Child Support Magistrate Lu Ann Ballew took the liberty to hand down a ruling on the boy's first name, too.

"The word Messiah is a title and it's a title that has only been earned by one person and that one person is Jesus Christ," Judge Ballew said, according to t.v. station WBIR. Ballew said the child could go by "Martin DeShawn McCullough," which includes both the mother and father's names.

Forgive my ignorance of legal precedents and other niceties, but -

1. What was the judge's legal foundation for her order, changing the baby's first name?  And what was her legal foundation for going beyond the scope of the specific matter before the court (paternity and last name)?

2. Am I the only one who actually sees a bigger issue here? Like say a judge placing her personal religious beliefs/sensibilities above civil society's laws?

This judge should be an *ex-* judge, and soon.
 
Notes:
The Tennessee Courts' biographical webpage for this judge actually doesn't contain any information on her, though while the article above cites her court as being in Cocke County, the bio page states that her court is in Jefferson County.  Not sure what is going on there.
Also, not sure how the judge will feel when she finds out that the name she finds so offensive to her personal religious sensibilities is actually a name that is quickly rising in popularity (courtesy the Social Security Administration) - 
 

Sunday, August 11, 2013

Candidate and Committee update

Most of this has been covered elsewhere this week; this is mostly just a compilation.

Federal level -

No new candidates to report as of this writing, but on Channel 12's Sunday Square Off this morning, the panelists did speculate/rumor-spread (not that I've ever done such things :) ) that AZ House Speaker Andy Tobin will enter a race for a seat in Congress.


State level -

...Christine Jones, a former GoDaddy exec, has entered the contest for the Republican nomination for governor.  She should bring a lot of money into the race, but until she shows otherwise, she's presumed to be a wealthy dilettante looking to buy an elected office.

She joins the following in the race for the R nomination -

Hugh Hallman, former mayor of Tempe

Andrew Thomas, disgraced and disbarred former Maricopa County Attorney

Ken Bennett, currently AZ Secretary of State

Doug Ducey, currently AZ Treasurer

Al Melvin, currently an AZ state senator

Others rumored to be interested, but nothing official yet:  Scott Smith, mayor of Mesa; Steve Pierce/Andy Tobin, senator/representative from LD1 (neither may go for it, and almost certainly both won't go for it, but one of them may go for it); Jan Brewer, the term-limited incumbent, who keeps making noises about challenging AZ's term limits law.

...Speaking of wealthy dilettantes looking to buy an elected office, news broke this week that Wil Cardon, a 2012 Republican candidate for US Senate, is going to enter the Republican primary for AZ Secretary of State.  The linked article states that Cardon filed his paperwork on Tuesday, but nothing is on the AZSOS' website as yet.

In 2012, Cardon spent millions of his family's money to challenge Jeff Flake, the eventual general election winner, coming in second place in the Republican primary.  Sounds good for a political newbie, until you realize that it wasn't exactly a "close" second -



Cardon joins the following in the race for the Republican nomination for SOS -

Steve Montenegro, currently a member of the AZ House

Justin Pierce, currently a member of the AZ House

Michele Reagan, currently a member of the AZ Senate


...Effie Carlson, a Scottsdale businesswoman, has entered the race for one of the House seats from LD23.  Don't know much about her, but since I live in Scottsdale (though not in the LD23 part), I expect to hear more in the coming months.

...Trey Terry, a former campaign operative for the likes of Mitt Romney, Jesse Kelly, and Paul Babeu, has entered the race for an AZ House seat from LD8 (Pinal County).


Maricopa County level -

Nothing new to report as of this writing.  There will be news, eventually.  A number of JP and constable seats are up for election in 2014, as is a two-year term for County Assessor (the previous assessor was appointed to fill a JP vacancy).  In addition, there are occasional rumors that the current County Attorney, Bill Montgomery, may throw his hat in the ring for the R nod for Attorney General.  If he does so, that will put a higher-profile county race on the ballot.


Local level -

...In Tempe, one Matthew Papke has filed for a 2014 run for City Council.  Gun nut/tea party type.

Nothing new to report for Scottsdale or Mesa municipal elections.





Saturday, August 10, 2013

Vent time: False equivalency

...Not that I've ever been accused of being overly eloquent or tactful, but this is definitely not going to be a post for those with tender sensibilities...

When it comes to assessing bad behavior, one of the favorite rhetorical conceits of two major political demographic groups in the US, the politically conservative and the politically lazy, is that of equating bad behavior by individual Democrats with the bad behavior of Republican elected officials, party apparatchiks, and their base.

The politically conservative do it because they understand that using the bad behavior of individual Ds to tar Ds as a group might serve to diminish the impact of the tarring of individual Rs with the bad behavior of Rs as a group.

The politically lazy do it because it's easier than actually observing and analyzing actions and policies for themselves.  You know, actually being civically engaged.

Early this past week, former president George W. Bush went into a hospital for a heart-related procedure (he had a stent put in to unblock an artery).  He received well wishes from people across the political spectrum and across the world (Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin chimed in...just not at the same time :) ).

However, many of the online stories received comments that were something other than "well wishes".  Most of the comment threads contain postings that wish continued ill health or even death upon Bush.  Other postings are milder, but indicate a distinct lack of sympathy for him.

One person who I deeply respect and care for, someone who is highly intelligent and (usually) highly perceptive, took in all of this on Tuesday morning and whipped off an email expressing outrage, and...wait for it...that the hate-filled expressions of anonymous individuals on the internet is proof that Democrats as a group are as filled with hate as Republicans as a group.

I spent the rest of Tuesday morning trying to come up with a response that was appropriately reasoned and thoughtful.

Then Tuesday afternoon hit, and nothing I could come up with was going to top the reality that is the state of "discourse" among the Republicans.

From Talking Points Memo, written by Perry Stein -
As President Barack Obama spoke in Phoenix Tuesday about responsible home ownership, hundreds of people stood outside protesting his policies, many shouting and carrying racially charged chants and signs.

"Bye Bye Black Sheep," the protestors shouted at one point, a reference to the president's skin color, according to the Arizona Republic.

Another protestor carried a sign that said "Impeach the Half-White Muslim!"

“He’s 47 percent Negro,” one protestor shouted.

“We have gone back so many years,” Judy Burris told the Republic. “He’s divided all the races. I hate him for that.”

Just a couple of points here, and this is where things get a little blunt.

1.  There are those who will try to claim that the bigotry shown by the protesters at the President's appearance in Ahwatukee was an isolated event that is hardly reflective of the demeanor and actions of Republican elected officials.  They will be lying.

2.  The anonymous rantings of morons on the internet don't reflect upon the entirety of Democrats in America any more than they reflect upon the entirety of Republicans.

3.  We (meaning Democrats) have our share of, oh, what's the technical term?  Oh yeah - freakin' loons at the fringes, as well as officeholders who bring great shame to their offices.  So do the Republicans.  The difference being that where we marginalize our loons and power abusers, they lionize theirs.

And when one (or more) of ours steps out of line, we call them on it - witness the sexual harassment complaints lodged against Democrat Bob Filner, mayor of San Diego, and the growing calls, by Democrats, for him to resign from office.

Compare this to the thunderous silence from the Right over the revelations surrounding AZ Attorney General Tom Horne and his pattern of giving his girlfriends taxpayer-funded jobs.

4.  Enough already.  I consider myself to be a pretty even-keeled kind of guy, but the next person who pontificates on how Democrats and Republicans are the same is going to hear three words from me. 

Bullshit.  Prove it.


And when they don't prove it, and they won't, I'm going to look them in the eye, call them a liar, turn my back upon them, and walk away.

Tuesday, August 06, 2013

President Obama Speaks on Restoring Security to Homeownership




Text courtesy The White House -

THE PRESIDENT:  Hey!  Hello, Phoenix!  (Applause.)  Hello, Arizona!  (Applause.)  It is --
AUDIENCE MEMBER:  We love you, Obama!
THE PRESIDENT:  I love you back.  It is good to be here.  (Applause.) 
I want to say thank you to the Thunder for hosting us here today.  (Applause.)  Well, we are so glad to be here.  I want you to give it up for somebody who’s been fighting for homeowners and working families every single day, who’s with me today -- Secretary Shaun Donovan, Secretary of HUD.  There he is right there.  Give him a big round of applause.  (Applause.)  We’ve got Congressman Ed Pastor who’s here as well.  (Applause.)  We’ve got your Mayor, Greg Stanton, here.  (Applause.)  Doing an outstanding job.  And to all the mayors and state legislators and tribal leaders who are here today, thank you.  (Applause.) 
Give Jorge a big round of applause for his introduction.  (Applause.)  To your superintendent, Dr. Kenneth Baca.  (Applause.)  Your principal, Dr. Anna Battle.  (Applause.)  And I appreciate everybody at Desert Vista for having me here today.  (Applause.)  It is good to see the students are pretty enthusiastic about being back in school.  (Laughter.)  I’m not sure I would have been that enthusiastic starting on the 6th.  (Laughter.) 
And I know this isn’t your typical school -- second day of school.  So I want to give a special shout-out to the new seniors, class of 2014.  (Applause.)  You are aware that you’re not finished yet.  (Laughter.)  Senior year, that’s sometimes tempting.  I want you all to stay focused.
Over the past couple weeks, I have been --
AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Happy birthday, Mr. President!
THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much.  Thank you.  (Applause.)  It was my birthday two days ago.  (Laughter.)  Got some singers here.
AUDIENCE:  Happy birthday to you, happy birthday to you, happy birthday, Mr. President.  (Applause.)
THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you.  (Applause.)  I am now 52, and Michelle says that I don’t look a day over 51.  (Laughter.)
So over the last few weeks, I’ve been visiting towns all across the country, talking about what we need to do to secure a better bargain for the middle class -- a national strategy to make sure that everybody who works hard has a chance to succeed in the 21st century economy.
And I think people in Arizona especially understand the challenges that are out there, because for the past four and a half years, together, we fought our way back from a devastating recession that cost millions of jobs for Americans.  A lot of folks lost their homes; a lot of folks lost their savings.  And what the recession showed was the long erosion of middle-class security that had been taking place for decades. 
But we fought back.  We took on a broken health care system. We took on a housing market that was in free fall.  We invested in new technologies to reverse our addiction to foreign oil.  We changed a tax code that had become tilted a little bit too much in favor of the wealthiest Americans at the expense of working families.  (Applause.)  We saved the auto industry.  We’ve now got GM that plans to hire a thousand new workers right next door in Chandler to make sure we’re building some of the best cars in the world right here in the United States of America.  (Applause.) 
Our businesses have created 7.3 million new jobs over the past 41 months.  We now sell more products made in America to the rest of the world than ever before.  Our exports are way up.  We produce more renewable energy than ever before, more natural gas than anybody else.  Health care costs have been growing at the slowest rate in 50 years.  And our deficits are coming down at the fastest rate in 60 years.  So we’re making progress.  (Applause.)
So thanks to the efforts of a lot of people like you, we’ve cleared away the rubble of the financial crisis.  We’re starting to lay the foundation for more stable, more durable economic growth.  But as any middle-class family will tell you, we’re not yet where we need to be.  Because even before the crisis hit, we had lived through a decade where a few at the top were doing better and better, but most families were working harder and harder just to get by. 
And reversing this trend should be -- must be -- Washington’s highest priority.  It’s my highest priority.  (Applause.)  I want to make sure that in America, it doesn’t matter what you look like, where you come from, who you love -- you should be able to make it when you try.  You should be able to make it.  (Applause.) 
Now, unfortunately, for the last year or so, we’ve had an endless parade of distractions and political posturing and phony scandals that shift focus away from what do we need to do to shore up middle-class families and create ladders of opportunity for folks to get into the middle class.  And as Washington heads towards another budget debate, the stakes could not be higher. 
And that’s why I’m traveling around, laying out my ideas for how we have to build the cornerstones of what it means to be middle class:  a good job with good wages; a home to call your own; a good education;  affordable health care that’s there for you when you get sick; a secure retirement even if you’re not rich; the opportunity -- the ladders of opportunity for people to earn their way into the middle class, to work their way out of poverty.  Those are the elements that I think all of us believe in, but right now we're not delivering as much as we should on those promises.
Now, last Tuesday, I went to Tennessee to talk about the first cornerstone, which is how do we make sure that we're creating good middle-class jobs here in the United States of America.  Today I've come to Phoenix to talk about the second component, which is the most tangible cornerstone that lies at the heart of the American Dream, at the heart of middle-class life -- and that's the chance to own your own home.  (Applause.) The chance to own your own home. 
  
We've got a lot of young people here who are thinking about college, they're going to get a higher education, they're going to find a job, they're going to find somebody they love, they're going to want to own a home.  And the reason they will is because a home is the ultimate evidence that here in America, hard work pays off, that responsibility is rewarded.
I think about my grandparents’ generation.  When my grandfather served in World War II, he fought in Patton's Army -- when he got back, this country gave him a chance to go to college on the G.I. Bill, but it also gave him the chance to buy his first home with a loan from the FHA.  To him, and to generations of Americans before and since, a home was more than just a house. It was a source of pride and a source of security.  It was a place to raise kids, to put down roots; a place where you could build up savings for college, or to start a business, or to retire with some security.
And buying a home required responsibility on everybody’s part.  You had to save up to buy a home.  And then banks were supposed to give you a fair deal, with terms you could understand, and buyers were supposed to live within their means and make sure that they could make their payments.  So in that earlier generation, houses weren’t for flipping around, they weren’t for speculation -- houses were to live in, and to build a life with.
And unfortunately, over time, responsibility too often gave way to recklessness.  You had reckless lenders who sold loans to people they knew couldn’t afford them.  And let's face it, we also had some reckless buyers who knew they couldn’t afford them and still took out loans.  And all this created a housing bubble. And especially in some places like Arizona, it was devastating  when that bubble finally burst -- triggered a recession.  Millions of Americans who had done everything right were hurt badly by the actions of other people.  Housing prices plummeted.
By the time I took office, home values had fallen almost 20 percent from the year before.  New housing starts had fallen nearly 80 percent from their peak.  Hundreds of thousands of construction workers had lost their jobs.  A record number of people were behind on their mortgage payments.  And a lot of people here in Phoenix, they saw that devastation.  This was part of Ground Zero for the housing bubble bursting.
So less than a month after I took office, I came here to Arizona and I laid out steps to stabilize the housing market and help responsible homeowners get back on their feet.  And the truth is it's been a long, slow process.  The housing market is so big that it was going to take some time to heal when it got hurt that badly.  It's taken longer than any of us would like.  But during that time, we helped millions of Americans save an average of $3,000 each year by refinancing at lower rates.  We helped millions of responsible homeowners stay in their homes, which was good for their neighbors because you don't want a bunch of foreclosure signs in your neighborhood.
Where Congress wouldn’t act, we went ahead and acted, so over the past few years, we had the Department of Justice stand up for buyers who had been discriminated against or conned by predatory lending.  And we won a settlement that gave more money to victims of discrimination in one year than in the previous 23 years combined.  (Applause.)
   
We worked with states to force big banks to repay more than $50 billion to more than 1.5 million families -- largest lending settlement in history.  (Applause.)  We extended the time that folks who had lost their jobs could delay their payment on their mortgages while they kept looking for work.  We cracked down on the bad practices that led to the crisis in the first place.  I mean, you had some loans back there in the bubble that were called “liar’s loan.”  Now, something that's called a liar's loan is probably a bad idea.  (Laughter.) 
So because of all these actions we've been taking, our housing market is beginning to heal.  Home prices are rising at the fastest pace in seven years.  Sales are up nearly 50 percent. Construction is up nearly 75 percent.  New foreclosures are down by nearly two-thirds.  Millions of families have been able to come up for air -- they’re no longer underwater on their mortgages.  (Applause.)
   
And just like the crisis hit Phoenix very hard, thanks to some great leadership here locally, Phoenix has also led one of the biggest comebacks in the country.  (Applause.)  So you should be proud of what you've done here.  Home prices in Phoenix have risen by nearly 20 percent over the last year.  New home sales are up by more than 25 percent.
This morning, right before I came here, I visited Erickson Construction -- (applause.)  We've got some Erickson folks here. And they were explaining how right when the bubble hit, Erickson shrank to less than a hundred workers.  Today they're employing 580 people -- and they’re hiring even more people -- (applause)  -- because the housing market is bouncing back.
   
So that's one of the things about housing.  It's not just important for the person who owns the house; our economy is so impacted by everything that happens in housing.  Consumers feel better when their home values are in a better place, so they're more willing to spend.  A lot of people who want to start a business, their savings may be locked up in their house.  Construction workers, contractors, suppliers, carpet makers, all these folks are impacted by the housing industry.
So we've made progress, and that's helped to move the economy forward.  But we've got to build on this progress.  We're not where we need to be yet.  We've got to give more hardworking Americans the chance to buy their first home.  (Applause.)  We have to help more responsible homeowners refinance their mortgages, because a lot of them still have a spread between the rates they're paying right now on their mortgage and what they could be getting if they were able to refinance.
And we’ve got to turn the page on this kind of bubble-and-bust mentality that helped to create this mess in the first place.  (Applause.)  We got to build a housing system that is durable and fair and rewards responsibility for generations to come.  That's what we’ve got to do.  (Applause.)
So I’ve already put forward a bunch of ideas that will help accomplish that.  And, look, the fact of the matter is Congress hasn’t enacted all of them, so I’d like you to encourage members of Congress to take some of these actions.  (Applause.)
But like the other actions that we’ve taken, these will not help the neighbors down the street who bought a house that they couldn’t afford, and then walked away from it and left a foreclosed home behind.  We don't want to help speculators who bought multiple homes just to make a quick buck. 
What we want to do is put forward ideas that will help millions of responsible, middle-class homeowners who still need relief.  And we want to help hardworking Americans who dream of owning their own home fair and square, have a down payment, are willing to make those payments, understand that owning a home requires responsibility.  And there are some immediate actions we could take right now that would help on that front, that would make a difference.  So let me just list a couple of them.
Number one:  Congress should pass a good, bipartisan idea to allow every homeowner the chance to save thousands of dollars a year by refinancing their mortgage at today’s rates.  (Applause.) We need to get that done.  We’ve been talking about it for a year and a half, two years, three years.  There’s no reason not to do it.  (Applause.) 
Step number two:  Now that we’ve made it harder for reckless buyers to buy homes that they can’t afford, let’s make it a little bit easier for qualified buyers to buy the homes that they can afford.  (Applause.)  So Shaun Donovan has been working with the finance industry to make sure we’re simplifying overlapping regulations; we’re cutting red tape for responsible families who want to get a mortgage but keep getting rejected by the banks.  We need to give well-qualified Americans who lost their jobs during the crisis a fair chance to get a loan if they’ve worked hard to repair their credit.
And step three is something that you don’t always hear about when it comes to the housing market, and that is fixing our broken immigration system.  It would actually help our housing market.  (Applause.)
It’s pretty simple:  When more people buy homes and play by the rules, home values go up for everybody.  And according to one recent study, the average homeowner has already seen the value of their home boosted by thousands of dollars just because of immigration.  And the good news is, with the help of your Senators, John McCain and Jeff Flake, the Senate has already passed a bipartisan immigration bill.  It’s got the support of CEOs and labor and law enforcement.  (Applause.)   This could help homeownership here.
So I want you to encourage Republicans in the House of Representatives to stop dragging their feet.  Let’s go ahead and get this done.
     
Step number four:  We should address the uneven recovery by rebuilding the communities hit the hardest by the housing crisis, including many right here in Arizona.  Let’s put construction back -- construction workers back to work repairing rundown homes, tearing down vacant properties so that the value of homes in those surrounding areas start picking up.  We can put people to work right now and improve the remaining housing stock that's out there.  (Applause.)  Places that are facing a longer road back from the crisis should have their country’s help to get back on their feet.
Step five:  We should make sure families that don’t want to buy a home or can’t yet afford to buy one still have a decent place to rent.  (Applause.)   It’s important for us to encourage homeownership, but a lot of people rent and there’s nothing wrong with renting.  And we got to make sure that we are creating affordable opportunities when it comes to rental properties.
In the run-up to the crisis, banks and governments too often made everybody feel like they had to own a home, even if they weren’t ready and didn't have the payments.  That’s a mistake we should not repeat.  Instead, let’s invest in affordable rental housing.  Let’s bring together cities and states to address local barriers that drive up rents for working families.  (Applause.)
  
So if we help more Americans refinance their homes, if we help qualified families get a mortgage, we reform our immigration system, we rebuild the hardest-hit communities, we make sure that folks have a decent place to rent if they're not yet able to buy -- all these steps will give more middle-class families the chance to either buy their own home now or eventually buy their own home.  It's going to give more relief to responsible homeowners.  It gives more options to families who aren’t yet ready to buy.  All that is going to improve the housing market and will improve the economy.
But -- and this is the last key point I want to make -- as home prices rise, we can’t just re-inflate another housing bubble.  I hope everybody here in Arizona learned some hard lessons from what happened.  Housing prices generally don't just keep on going up forever at the kind of pace it was going up.  It was crazy.  So what we want to do is something stable and steady. And that's why I want to lay a rock-solid foundation to make sure the kind of crisis we went through never happens again.  We've got to make sure it doesn't happen again.  (Applause.)
  
And one of the key things to make sure it doesn't happen again is to wind down these companies that are not really government, but not really private sector -- they're known as Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.  For too long, these companies were allowed to make huge profits buying mortgages, knowing that if their bets went bad, taxpayers would be left holding the bag.  It was “heads we win, tails you lose.”  And it was wrong.  And along with what happened on Wall Street, it helped to inflate this bubble in a way that ultimately killed Main Street.
So the good news is, right now there’s a bipartisan group of senators working to end Fannie and Freddie as we know them.  And I support these kinds of reform efforts.  And they're following four core principles for what I believe this reform should look like. 
First, private capital should take a bigger role in the mortgage market.  I know that sounds confusing to folks who call me a socialist -- I think I saw some posters there on the way in. (Laughter.)  But I actually believe in the free market.  And just like the health care law that we put in place, Obamacare -- (applause) -- which, by the way, if you don't have health insurance or you're buying it at exorbitant rates on the individual market, starting on October 1st, you can join a marketplace and be part of a pool that gives you much lower premiums, saves you a lot of money.  (Applause.)
But in the same way that what we did with health care was to set up clear rules for insurance companies to protect consumers, make it more affordable, but still built on the private marketplace, I believe that our housing system should operate where there's a limited government role and private lending should be the backbone of the housing market.  And that includes, by the way, community-based lenders who view their borrowers not as a number, but as a neighbor.  So that's one principle.
A second principle is we can't leave taxpayers on the hook for irresponsibility or bad decisions by some of these lenders or Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.  (Applause.)  We've got to encourage the pursuit of profit, but the era of expecting a bailout after you pursue your profit and you don't manage your risk well -- well, that puts the whole country at risk.  And we're ending those days.  We're not going to do that anymore.  (Applause.)
The third principle is we should preserve access to safe and simple mortgage products like the 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage.  That’s something families should be able to rely on when they're making the most important purchase of their lives.  (Applause.)
  
Number four, we've got to keep housing affordable for first-time homebuyers -- like all these young people.  When they're ready to buy a house, we've got to make sure it's affordable.  Families who are working to climb their way into the middle class, we've got to do what we can to make housing affordable.  And that means we've got to strengthen the FHA so it gives today’s families the same kind of chance it gave my grandparents to buy a home, and it preserves those rungs on the ladder of opportunity. 
And we've got to support, as I said, affordable rental housing.  And, by the way, we've also got to keep up our fight against homelessness.  (Applause.)  The Mayor of Phoenix has been doing a great job here in Phoenix on that front.  We've got to continue to improve it.  (Applause.)
   
Since I took office, we helped bring one in four homeless veterans off the streets.  (Applause.)  We should be proud of that.  Here in Phoenix, thanks to the hard work of everyone from Mayor Stanton to the local United Way to US Airways, you’re on track to end chronic homelessness for veterans, period, by 2014. (Applause.)
But we've got to keep going, because nobody in America, and certainly no veteran, should be left to live on the streets.  (Applause.)
So here's the bottom line:  Put all these principles together, that's going to protect our entire economy and it will improve the housing market not just here in Phoenix, but throughout the state and throughout the country.
We're also going to need to make sure, though, that we're protecting individual homeowners.  We've got to give them the tools that they can protect themselves.  So we've got a Consumer Finance Protection Bureau that we created.  (Applause.)  And it's laying down new rules of the road that everybody can count on when they’re shopping for a mortgage.  They’re designing a new, simple mortgage form that will be in plain English, so you can actually read it without a lawyer -- (applause) -- although, you may still want a lawyer obviously.  I'm not saying you don't.  I'm just saying you'll be able to read it.  (Laughter.)  There won't be a lot of fine print.  That way you know before you owe. (Laughter and applause.)
And the Senate finally confirmed Richard Cordray as the head of this -- head watchdog for the CFPB.  (Applause.)  So he's out there aggressively protecting consumers and homeowners. 
When it comes to some of the other leaders we need to look out for the American people, the Senate still has a job to do.  Months ago, I nominated a man named Mel Watt to be our nation’s top housing regulator.  He is an outstanding member of Congress. And during that time, he was on the Housing Committee -- worked with banks, worked with borrowers to protect consumers, to help responsible lenders provide credit.  He is the right person for the job.  Congress and the Senate should give his nomination an up or down vote without any more obstruction or delay.  We don't have time for those kinds of games.  (Applause.)
So I want to be honest with you.  No program or policy is going to solve all the problems in a multi-trillion dollar housing market.  The housing bubble went up so high, the heights it reached before it burst were so unsustainable, that we knew it was going to take some time for us to fully recover.  But if we take the steps that I talked about today, then I know we will restore not just our home values, but also our common values.  We’ll make owning a home a symbol of responsibility, not speculation -- a source of security for generations to come, just like it was for my grandparents.  I want it to be just like that for all the young people who are here today and their children and their grandchildren.  (Applause.)
And if we stay focused on middle-class security and opportunities to get into the middle class, if we take the strategy that I'm laying out for the entire economy -- for jobs and housing and education, health care, retirement, creating ladders of opportunity -- then we will secure that better bargain for all Americans, where hard work is once again rewarded with a shot at a middle-class life, which means more Americans will know the pride of that first paycheck.  More Americans will know the satisfaction of flipping the sign to “Open” on their own business.  More Americans will know the joy of scratching the child’s height on the door of their new home -- with pencil, of course.  (Laughter.) 
We can do all this if we work together.  And it won’t be easy.  But if we take just a few bold steps -- and if Washington will just end the gridlock, set aside the slash-and-burn partisanship -- (applause) -- actually try to solve problems instead of scoring political points, our economy will grow stronger a year from now, five years from now, 10 years from now. (Applause.)
And as long as I've got the privilege to serve as your President, that's what I'm going to be fighting for.
Thank you very much, everybody.  God bless you.  (Applause.)

Monday, August 05, 2013

Split District: LD9

Legislative District 9 encompasses a significant part west Tucson, the Catalina Foothills and part of Marana, all in Pima County (southern AZ to out-of-state readers :) ).


In terms of voter registration, the district is competitive, with a slight D lean - 43146 Democrats, 38065 Republicans, and 34988 Independents.  The 2012 figures were similar.

As a result of the 2012 elections, the district is one of three districts in the state to send a delegation to the state capitol that has a partisan split.  Democrat Steve Farley is the state senator from LD9, while Democrat Victoria Steele and Republican Ethan Orr are the state representatives from the district.

Other district-related data, relating to the 2012 elections (general election; primary election):

- In the 2012 presidential election, Barack Obama won the district by slightly more than 8% of the vote; he lost the state by slightly more than 9%.

- In the 2012 US Senate race, Richard Carmona won the district by more than 15%; he lost the state by slightly more than 3%.

- In the 2012 AZ House race, Steele received 44609 votes and Orr received 42626, winning the two House seats; Democrat Mohur Sidwa received 40034 to end up in third place.  In the primaries, Orr was the only candidate on the ballot in the R primary while in the D primary, Steele (11661 votes) and Sidwa (11490) won the Democratic nominations, with Dustin Cox coming in third place with 9500 votes.

-,In the 2012 AZ Senate race, Farley received 49818 votes to Republican Tyler Mott's total of 39562.  Each candidate was unopposed in their respective party primaries.


Orr is one of the Republicans who voted for Medicaid restoration in this year's budget, but it doesn't look as if he is being targeted for a primary challenge yet (though the threats are there).  Just the opposite, in fact; Republicans are running away from the district as fast as they can find a district where the general election is decided in the Republican primary.

To whit: former legislator Terri Proud, once a resident of LD9, has picked up her carpetbags and moved over to LD11 in her effort to return to the lege.


Evan Wyloge and Hank Stephenson of the Arizona Capitol Times have a more focused piece, on the website of the Arizona Center for Investigative Media.

Sunday, August 04, 2013

Obamacare: At least the Republicans are consistent. (Part 1)

...Consistently *dishonest*, but consistent nonetheless...

The Republican/corporate opposition to health care reform (HCR), known as Obamacare, has a three-step strategy for generating public opposition to HCR:

Step 1.  Lie.

Step 2.  Lie some more..

Step 3.  If steps 1 and 2 don't produce a satisfactory amount of public opposition to health care insurance coverage for the vast majority of Americans, lie even more.


The latest (renewed) GOPer lie "talking point" is to claim that Congress is "exempt" from the provisions.


Dranias is a senior operative at the corporate lobbying firm "free market think tank", while the person who retweeted Dranias' updates, Antenori, is one of the leaders of efforts to turn back Medicaid restoration via the ballot.

The story that Dranias links to, from Politico.com, is here.

I'm guessing that Dranias (and Antenori) are hoping that people don't actually read the story that they cite in support of their contention that Congress is exempt from the provisions of Obamacare.

The story doesn't support their contention.  Instead, it clearly points out that Congress is *required* to participate in HCR.

From the story, written by John Bresnahan and Jake Sherman (emphasis added) -
Lawmakers and staff can breathe easy — their health care tab is not going to soar next year.

The Office of Personnel Management, under heavy pressure from Capitol Hill, will issue a ruling that says the government can continue to make a contribution to the health care premiums of members of Congress and their aides, according to several Hill sources.

{snip}
The problem was rooted in the original text of the Affordable Care Act. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) inserted a provision which said members of Congress and their aides must be covered by plans “created” by the law or “offered through an exchange.” Until now, OPM had not said if the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program could contribute premium payments toward plans on the exchange. If payments stopped, lawmakers and aides would have faced thousands of dollars in additional premium payments each year. Under the old system, the government contributed nearly 75 percent of premium payments.

In essence, members of Congress and their aides have health insurance coverage through their employers (you know, *us*) and after the implementation of Obamacare, will still have health insurance coverage through their employers.  And in both instances ("before" and "after"), there is an employer contribution toward defraying the cost of the insurance coverage.

Hardly an "exemption".

FactCheck.org has a full explanation, dated May 3, 2013 - 
Q: Is it true that there are bills in Congress that would exempt members and their staffs and families from buying into “Obamacare”?
A: No. Congress members and staffers will be required to buy insurance through the exchanges on Jan. 1. But reportedly there is concern about whether federal contributions to premiums can continue without a change.


FULL QUESTION
Is it true that there are bills in the House and Senate that will exempt members and their staff and families from buying into Obamacare?
FULL ANSWER
Several readers have asked us about Congress attempting to exempt itself from the requirements of the Affordable Care Act. A few said that a Facebook post claimed that President Barack Obama, Sen. Harry Reid and Democrats in Congress were trying to “get themselves exempted from Obamacare,” in the words of one reader.
But there is no bill in Congress calling for an exemption from the health care law. In fact, members of Congress and their staffs face additional requirements that most Americans don’t have to meet.
Under the health care law, their insurance coverage will have to switch from the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, the group of private insurance plans that cover 8 million federal employees and retirees, to the exchanges created by the law. Those exchanges are meant for those who buy coverage on their own, the currently uninsured and small businesses. Members of Congress and their staffs would be the only employees of a large employer in the exchanges, which are set to begin offering insurance in January.
So, why is the false “exempt” claim making the Facebook rounds? There is reportedly concern on Capitol Hill that the Office of Personnel Management, which administers the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, won’t be able to smoothly transition members and their staffs into an exchange. The concern, as a Roll Call story explained, was that the government wouldn’t be able to make contributions toward the federal employees’ premiums, at least at the beginning of 2014. That would mean employees would pick up the whole tab for their insurance policies. Right now, the government pays 72 percent of premiums on average.

The “exempt” claims were sparked by a Politico report on April 24 that said secret talks were being held by lawmakers to change the requirement to get insurance through the exchanges because of this concern. The headline on the story said “Lawmakers, aides may get Obamacare exemption.”
After the story was published, a spokesman for Sen. Harry Reid said there hadn’t been any discussions to exempt Congress from “provisions that apply to any employees of any other public or private employer offering health care.” And Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman of California told Politico that lawmakers and their staffs will indeed get insurance through the exchanges. “[T]he federal government will offer them health insurance coverage that they obtained through the exchanges because we want to get the same health care coverage everybody else has available to them,” he said.
We contacted the Office of Personnel Management and received this statement from an administration official: “Members of Congress will not receive anything that is not available to the public. The law doesn’t allow them to get insurance from FEHB, they are going to get insurance on the market place, just like uninsured individuals and small businesses.”
We can’t say what did or didn’t happen in any secret meetings. But we can say that no bill has been introduced to exempt members of Congress from the Affordable Care Act — and they were never exempt in the first place. Even if, hypothetically, Congress were to nullify the provision requiring members and their staffs to get insurance on the exchanges, it still wouldn’t amount to an exemption from the law. Lawmakers and staffers would be subject to the mandate to have health insurance or pay a fine, just as everyone else is.
The law provides a few exemptions from the requirement to have insurance, but only for those who earn too little to file taxes, those with financial hardships, those who can’t find affordable coverage, and some religious groups that qualify for Social Security exemptions, mainly Mennonite or Amish.
An Old Falsehood
Bogus claims about Congress being “exempt” date back to early 2010, when different health care bills were still being debated. Some Republicans claimed that Americans, except for members of Congress, would be forced into the government-run “public option” (which wasn’t part of the final bill that became law) or state-based exchanges (which are part of the law).
As we said previously, members of Congress get private health insurance through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, which actually served as a model for the exchanges. Federal workers pick from among many health plans. The exchanges would operate in the same way — like a marketplace for those shopping for private insurance.
But some Republicans pushed the idea that if the exchanges were good enough for other Americans, they should be good enough for Congress. So, an amendment by Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa was added to the Senate bill requiring that the federal government offer only health plans that were part of an exchange to members of Congress and their staffs. The law’s final language on this, written by Sen. Tom Coburn, says that: “the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are — (I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or (II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act.”
Congressional “staff” is defined as “all full-time and part-time employees employed by the official office of a Member of Congress, whether in Washington, DC or outside of Washington, DC.” As we reported before, Coburn said the provision wouldn’t apply to those working for committees or leadership staff, and a Congressional Research Service report agreed that could be the case.
In other words, the Affordable Care Act places on lawmakers and their staffs additional requirements that don’t pertain to other Americans with work-based insurance.
– Lori Robertson

Sources

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Public Law 111–148. 111th Congress
The Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program. OPM.gov. accessed 3 May 2013.
Ethridge, Emily. “Health Insurance Anxiety on Capitol Hill.” 25 Apr 2013.
Robertson, Lori. “Congress Exempt from Health Bill?” FactCheck.org. 20 Jan 2010.
Jackson, Brooks. “Health Care for Members of Congress?” FactCheck.org. 25 Aug 2009.
Bresnahan, John and Jake Sherman. “Lawmakers, aides may get Obamacare exemption.” Politico. 24 Apr 2013.
Baker, Sam. “Dems won’t seek ObamaCare exemption.” The Hill. 25 Apr 3013.
Henig, Jess. “More Malarkey About Health Care.” FactCheck.org. 19 Apr 2010.