Tag Archives: health care
Another Reason To Say “Thanks Obama!”
New Census Data Provides Further Evidence That The ACA Works
Much to the (probable) chagrin of ACA opponents everywhere, more evidence that the law is working came out of census data released this morning. The number of uninsured Americans fell by 8.8 million last year alone, according to the census report. This new data adds to the recently released National Health Interview Survey that found as of early 2015, the national uninsured rate has fallen to a historic low of 9.2 percent bringing the total number of people who have gained insurance under the ACA to 15.8 million.
For a more detailed look at the census insurance data, check out this Center for American Progress column. For now, here are a few key facts from today’s report:
- Every single state saw a drop in their uninsured population. From 2013 to 2014, every state and DC saw their uninsured rates fall significantly.
- States that expanded Medicaid saw a much bigger drop in uninsured rates. States that expanded Medicaid before 2015 saw their uninsured rates drop by an average of 25 percent, while states that did not expand Medicaid saw an average drop of only 13.4 percent.
- Florida and Texas—the two states with the largest uninsured populations—highlight the significant effect Medicaid expansion has on the uninsured rate. Florida’s uninsured population fell by 17 percent last year, but if the state had expanded Medicaid, it could have dropped by an additional 8 percent. Texas would see even bigger gains from Medicaid expansion. The state saw a 13 percent drop in its uninsured rate last year, but if it had expanded Medicaid it could have seen an additional 11.4 percent drop.
The results are clear: the Affordable Care Act is working in every state, but if the 20 states that have so far refused to expand Medicaid took this important step, the impact of the law would be even greater. This new evidence showing the ACA is working comes just in time for the second GOP presidential debate where each of the 11 candidates participating in the main event has promised to repeal the ACA. Be sure to tune into tonight’s debate and follow along with @CAPAction on twitter.
BOTTOM LINE: This most recent census data adds to the ever-growing stockpile of evidence proving that the Affordable Care Act has succeeded in bringing quality, affordable health insurance to millions of Americans. It also serves as further evidence of how out-of-touch the GOP presidential candidates–who still insist on repealing the ACA–remain.
Share this:
Right of Reagan … The Progress Report
Today’s Republicans Are More Extreme Than Their Conservative Idol
In two days, the GOP candidates for president will head to the Reagan Library for their second debate. Most will likely espouse their love of Reagan and try to highlight similarities between the Gipper’s policies and their own. However, as a new report from the Center for American Progress Action Fund shows, today’s candidates are in fact far more extreme than their Republican idol. To be sure, Reagan was no progressive. He has a record that includes initiating failed trickle-down economic programs that only help the wealthy, creating the false narrative of the welfare queen that still exists today, and gutting President Carter’s clean energy and energy efficiency efforts.
But, unlike today’s GOP candidates, he also was not a pure ideologue who was unwilling to negotiate and work across the aisle. His former chief of staff, James Baker, explained it well: “If Reagan told me once, he told me fifteen thousand times—I’d rather get 80 percent of what I want than go over the cliff with my flags flying.” In practice, this philosophy meant that President Reagan adopted moderate, bipartisan stances on several important policy positions – positions that the current presidential contenders would find abhorrent. Over the course of his presidency:
- Reagan provided a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. In 1986, Reagan supported and signed the Simpson-Mazzoli Act, which provided a pathway to citizenship for 2.7 million undocumented immigrants. Current GOP candidates oppose a pathway to citizenship for 11 million undocumented immigrants, though creating such a pathway would boost the U.S. economy by $1.2 trillion over 10 years.
- Reagan stood up to the National Rifle Association, or NRA, to establish background checks. He strongly supported the establishment of national background checks for gun purchases, as well as a ban on assault weapons. Current GOP candidates wouldn’t dare stand up to the NRA as most act to preserve their ‘A’ rating from the organization. Sens. Rubio, Cruz, Paul, and Graham have blocked legislation to expand background checks.
- Reagan signed the Montreal Protocol, a multilateral international treaty to reduce pollution. In the face of scientific research showing that chemical gasses were depleting the protective ozone layer, Reagan signed the Montreal Protocol, an international treaty that phased out nearly 100 of these dangerous gases, many of which are also greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. Current GOP candidates either deny that climate change is real or ignore the science behind it and have strenuously opposed the Obama administration’s effort to regulate pollution.
- Reagan negotiated with the Soviet Union to reduce nuclear proliferation. As president, Reagan signed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty with the Soviet Union, eliminating an entire category of nuclear missiles. Current GOP candidates have adopted an unyielding stance on national security, especially as it relates to President Obama’s recent deal with Iran. Mike Huckabee threatened to topple Iran using military force, and many of the other candidates also have stated that they would not uphold the current Iran nuclear deal.
- Reagan grew the federal government through deficit spending. Despite his public image as the champion of small government, Reagan tripled the national debt, increased the federal workforce by about 324,000 workers, doubled the U.S. Department of Education’s budget, and created a new federal agency, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Current GOP candidates have embraced uncompromising positions on the federal budget, opposing any deficit spending, even in the face of pressing national need. Sen. Cruz demonstrated astounding fiscal irresponsibility, costing the economy $20 billion by orchestrating the government shutdown in 2013.
- Reagan closed tax loopholes favoring the wealthy and raised taxes to reduce the federal deficit. In fact, he raised taxes 7 out of his 8 years in office and has said that tax loopholes “sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying ten percent of his salary, and that’s crazy.”
To be clear, Reagan was no progressive hero, but at times he was able to mix pragmatism with conservatism, something the current GOP candidates refuse to do. As the Washington Post puts it, despite their proclaimed love of Reagan, current GOP candidates “actually represent a break from core aspects of his approach to the presidency.”
BOTTOM LINE: Regardless of what the GOP candidates say in Wednesday’s debate, the reality is their positions are far to the right of Reagan’s actions on a number of critical issues. Despite the folklore, it is hard to imagine any of these candidates claiming fidelity to Reagan and his principles in a way that the 40th president could embrace.
Share this:
Leaving Children Behind … CAP
Congressional Republicans’ Education Bills Could Harm Our Most At-Risk Students
This week House and Senate Republicans are working to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)—also known as No Child Left Behind. Reauthorization of our largest K-12 education law presents a rare opportunity for Congress to ensure that all students—regardless of zip code, background, or family income levels—can receive a quality public education. Unfortunately, this afternoon the House passed H.R. 5 its version of the reauthorization bill that cuts federal funding from our most at-risk students and brings us a step backwards to the days when our most underserved communities were ignored.
This letter, written by the Leadership Council on Civil and Human Rights and signed by more than 50 other organizations, outlines how H.R. 5—also known as the Student Success Act—undermines important federal protections for some of our most vulnerable students.
The most egregious provision included in the House bill is a “portability” provision, which eliminates the targeting of federal funding to schools and districts with the highest concentrations of students living in poverty. That means federal funding that goes to schools with the most low-income students would flow out of those districts and into richer districts. This could cause the most impoverished districts to experience a federal resource cut as large as 74 percent, while the most affluent districts could receive an average of more than $290 dollars per student. The graph below shows how harmful that could be and more on portability can be found here.
The Senate is also working on its considerably more moderate version of ESEA reauthorization this week, known as the Every Child Achieves Act. The Senate’s bill takes important steps to curb over testing and maintains investments in research-based innovation. This afternoon the Senate also adopted an important amendment that allows schools to use Title 1 funds to create fiscal assistance teams designed to help schools spend their money efficiently.
The Senate bill does considerably more to help vulnerable students, but more should be done to ensure it fulfills its role as a civil rights law. And the bill is far from final. As it stands the Senate bill does not include a portability provision, but a portability amendment will be considered soon, which brings the potential damage one step closer to reality.
BOTTOM LINE: The opportunity to receive a quality public education should not be determined by a child’s zip code. HR 5, passed by House today, is a major step backward to a time when federal funding was inequitably distributed and our most vulnerable communities were ignored.
Share this:
I lost my sister, husband, and mother
 |
||||||||||||||||||
|
Be a Seed for Change 
You must be logged in to post a comment.