Tag Archives: United States Congress

Social Security …would it really be safe with Republicans?

09/14/2010 Nativegrl77

You may have heard about Alan Simpson, the right-wing millionaire and former Republican senator who President Obama (absurdly) appointed to lead the commission making recommendations to Congress about the future of Social Security.

Simpson compares Social Security to welfare, saying recently, “We’ve reached a point now where [Social Security] is like a milk cow with 310 million tits.”

It’s been widely reported that Simpson’s “deficit reduction” commission will make Social Security their prime target — choosing to cut a program that’s in surplus and helps the middle class instead of taking on tax cuts for the rich or wasteful military spending.

Twenty bold members of Congress just signed a letter to President Obama saying they’ll vote against any proposal from Simpson’s commission that cuts Social Security. They deserve our support.

Will you help us get 25,000 “citizen signers” of this letter opposing cuts to Social Security by signing it and inviting your friends? Click here.

These bold members of Congress, led by Progressive Caucus Chair Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), are asking their colleagues to join their letter. Proof that the public is paying attention to this issue will help them immensely.

We’ll also inform the media of our growing number of “citizen signers” so Simpson’s commission knows that these twenty members of Congress are not alone. Sign the letter here.

Simpson’s commission is packed with out-of-touch millionaires and corporate types. Any recommendation they make will lack credibility. But we need to make especially clear to Simpson’s commission, President Obama, and all of Congress that any proposal to cut Social Security is a non-starter.

Can you join together with progressives in Congress to send this message? Click here to add your name — then tell your friends.

Thanks for being a bold progressive,

Julia Rosen, Stephanie Taylor, Adam Green, Forrest Brown, and the rest of the PCCC team

~ Recent Post

Health Care: Insurers target Health Reform

09/14/2010 Nativegrl77

Last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that several insurers had filed requests to raise health insurance premiums above the rate of medical inflation and were blaming the newly-enacted health care law for at least part of that increase. “Aetna Inc., some BlueCross BlueShield plans and other smaller carriers have asked for premium increases of between 1 and 9 percent to pay for extra benefits required under the law, according to filings with state regulators,” the paper noted. “These and other insurers say Congress‘s landmark refashioning of U.S. health coverage, which passed in March after a brutal fight, is causing them to pass on more costs to consumers than Democrats predicted.” “Health care premiums follow underlying costs,” top insurance lobbyist Karen Ignagni insisted during an interview with Fox News. “Costs are going up because providers are charging more, number one…two, people buying coverage individually in a bad economy have decided for their economic reasons they sometimes can no longer afford it, that means the cost to people in the pool goes up because it’s the people who have the highest cost who stay in. And then third, we’re adding new benefits, starting September 23rd, under the legislation, and new benefits follow cost.” The White House immediately disputed these claims and predicted that state regulators could block the increases. “I would have real deep concerns that the kinds of rate increases that you’re quoting…are justified,” said Nancy-Ann DeParle, the White House’s top health official. She said that for insurers, raising rates was “already their modus operandi before the bill” passed. “We believe consumers will see through this,” she said.

COSTS OF NEW BENEFITS IS MINIMAL: While health care costs do follow medical inflation, insurers are overstating the degree to which the health law is contributing to premium increases. Actuaries working for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) had estimated that the cost of the early reforms — policies that eliminate lifetime and limit annual limits, allow older children to stay on as dependents and prohibit insurers from denying coverage to children — would only slightly raise premiums by 1 to 2 percentage points. As the Urban Institute’s Linda Blumberg concludes, “For plans with lifetime maximums of $2 million or higher, removing the limits entirely will tend to increase premiums by less than 1 percent.” Similarly, “[t]he prohibitions against pre-existing condition exclusion periods for children, including denials of coverage due to such conditions, should have little to no impact in the small group market, which already is required to guarantee issue policies” and the effect of extending coverage for young adults on parents’ policies would only increase premiums “from 0.5 to 1.2 percent of premiums, depending upon the participation assumptions made” in the small group market. Generally, the health care law should not contribute more than 3 percent to premium growth, Blumberg said in a phone interview with the Progress Report.

HOLDING INSURERS ACCOUNTABLE: All premium increases that are significantly above the rate of medical inflation should trigger regulatory review. And while the authority and ability of state insurance commissioners to review and deny unreasonable premium increases varies from state to state, the Affordable Healthcare Act has already distributed millions of dollars to bolster the review process. Last month, HHS sent out $46 million in grant funds to 45 states and the District of Columbia “to help improve the review of proposed health insurance premium increases, take action against insurers seeking unreasonable rate hikes, and ensure consumers receive value for their premium dollars.” The $46 million are part of $250 million in rate review grant dollars authorized by the new health care law. As a result of the program, “15 States and the District of Columbia” are now pursuing additional legislative authority to “create a more robust program for reviewing or requiring advanced approval of proposed health insurance premium increases to ensure that they are reasonable” and “21 States and the District of Columbia” are also expanding “the scope of their current health insurance review.” Later this year, HHS will issue regulations “that will require state or federal review of all potentially unreasonable rate increases filed by health insurers, with the justification for increases posted publicly for consumers and employers” and will “keep track of insurers with a record of unjustified rate increases.” Plans with poor records may be excluded from the exchanges in 2014.

ENCOURAGING STATES TO DO MORE: Independent review of rate hikes is essential because insurers often overstate their premium increases. For instance, just four months ago, independent analysts in California discovered that WellPoint “overstated future medical costs” to justify its 39 percent premium increases in the individual health market and committed numerous other methodological errors. As HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius wrote in a letter to Ignagni last Thursday, “the Administration, in partnership with states, will not tolerate unjustified rate hikes in the name of consumer protections.” “We will not stand idly by as insurers blame their premium hikes and increased profits on the requirement that they provide consumers with basic protections,” she said. Indeed, while the administration’s actions should help states review unreasonable increases, there is very little the federal government can actually do to reign in unreasonable rates; that burden falls to the states. And, given the influence of insurers on some state commissioners and the weak state regulatory structure — 23 states do not review and approve premium changes in the individual market and 5 of those 23 have no rate regulations at all — it’s clear that the federal government needs to find new ways to entice the states to strengthen their rate review processes. Absent a federal rate review process (through the enactment of Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D-CA) rate review legislation), HHS can attach thicker and longer strings to the next round of rate review grants. For instance, the federal government could target the next round of rate review grants “to states that appear the most promising in terms of greater rate review, oversight, and enforcement,” Edwin Park, co-director of health policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities told the Progress Report. “This would include not only states with an existing robust process but those states needing the most help but also the most willing to institute strong rate reviews.” Park says that the federal government can also make it easier to conduct reviews by purchasing systems, establishing common procedures, and help states find actuaries to review insurance rates. Finally, the federal government can work very closely with the states to ensure that insurers with unreasonable increases between now and 2014 are actually excluded from the exchanges and states can of course keep inefficient and costly issuers out of the exchanges.

~ Recent Post

Gallup -1 of 4Bills they say the public agrees with

09/14/2010 Nativegrl77

Among Recent Bills, Financial Reform a Lone Plus for Congress

Most Americans oppose four other prominent legislative acts

by Lydia Saad

PRINCETON, NJ — The financial reform bill President Obama signed into law in July is the most popular of five major pieces of legislation Congress has passed in the past two years — in fact, it is the only one tested in a recent USA Today/Gallup poll that a majority of Americans support.

Six in 10 Americans approve of the legislation to strengthen government regulation of the financial industry. By contrast, a majority disapprove of the 2009 economic stimulus package, the auto industry bailout, healthcare reform, and — most of all — the 2008 banking industry bailout.

Financial reform does best due to a relatively high level of support from Republicans — 42% approve of it — as well as majority support from independents. Independents join Republicans in mostly opposing the other four legislative initiatives tested. Democrats, on the other hand, approve of all five, although to varying degrees.

Of the five legislative acts, healthcare reform and the economic stimulus package are the most politically divisive. By contrast, financial regulatory reform, as well as aid to automakers and banks, sparks more similar reactions from Republicans and Democrats.

Bottom Line

Congress’ approval rating has been stalled at or below 20% for most of this year, down from 39% in March 2009 — and recent Gallup polling finds Americans no happier with the Republicans than with the Democrats in Congress. While some of this may be due to unavoidable fallout from the prolonged economic downturn, it may also represent an accumulation of public discontent with the more prominent spending and policy programs Congress has made law. Wall Street regulatory reform stands alone as a major legislative accomplishment that congressional incumbents would be wise to tout as they campaign for re-election this fall.

Survey MethodsResults for this USA Today/Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted Aug. 27-30, 2010, with a random sample of 1,021 adults, aged 18 and older, living in the continental U.S., selected using random-digit-dial sampling.

For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones (for respondents with a landline telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell phone-only). Each sample includes a minimum quota of 150 cell phone-only respondents and 850 landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas among landline respondents for gender within region. Landline respondents are chosen at random within each household on the basis of which member had the most recent birthday.

Samples are weighted by gender, age, race, education, region, and phone lines. Demographic weighting targets are based on the March 2009 Current Population Survey figures for the aged 18 and older non-institutionalized population living in continental U.S. telephone households. All reported margins of sampling error include the computed design effects for weighting and sample design.

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

View methodology, full question results, and trend data.

For more details on Gallup’s polling methodology, visit http://www.gallup.com/.

~ politics petitions pollution and pop culture

Dick Cheney’s Tax Cut

09/13/2010 Nativegrl77

Nine years ago, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney gave the wealthiest Americans an unneeded tax cut.

To this day, America‘s top income-earners — households making more than $250,000 a year — aren’t paying their fair share in taxes. Letting these tax cuts for the wealthy continue for another decade would saddle middle class Americans, our kids, and our grandkids with an additional $680 billion of debt, largely payable to the Chinese government.1

The Bush-Cheney tax cuts for the wealthy are wrong. Thankfully they’re set to expire this December, unless Republicans in Congress get their way and renew them indefinitely.

With debate set to begin on the Senate floor as early as next week, we don’t have a lot of time to get this right.

Sign my joint petition with Democracy for America urging Congress to let the Bush-Cheney tax cuts for the wealthy expire this year.

Republicans in Congress think we ought to make the Bush-Cheney tax cuts for the wealthy permanent. And they’re using right-wing media to spread deception and bully Democrats facing tough re-election bids into joining their cause.

These elected officials need to know that you — and 69% of Americans recently polled — want the Bush-Cheney tax cuts for the wealthy to expire this year.

There’s a broad and growing consensus that it’s time for the wealthiest among us to pay their fair share in taxes.

Most economists agree, too: It just doesn’t make sense to give each of the 120,000 wealthiest Americans what amounts to, on average, a $3 million tax break over the next decade.2

Sign my joint petition with Democracy for America to end the Bush-Cheney tax cuts for the wealthy.

Some Republicans hope to take back Congress this November by telling Americans that Democrats want to “raise taxes on the middle class” and “hurt small businesses.” Of course these smears don’t contain a shred of truth, but that doesn’t matter.

If the right wing wants to score political points by taking money from our kids and grandkids, and handing it out to the wealthiest Americans, it’s up to us to stop them.

Please, sign our petition today. Copies of the petition signatures will be delivered to each member of Congress ahead of the first key vote.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

-Patrick

Patrick Leahy
U.S. Senator

~ my 2cents ..., ~ Recent Post

wacky Wednesday &some News

09/08/2010 Nativegrl77

President Obama is in Ohio and will give a detailed speech today

The change 53% voted for has been stopped, blocked, scaled back and slowed down by the Republican Political Party.

It is up to those who do lean left of center…even our fellow independents to keep the people leaning right of center informed. It is important to challenge the crap coming out that clearly are lies, on the edge or overtly reflect a nasty rhetoric often spewing fear hate and discrimination. On 10-2-10 will March on DC to show unity as a Nation who believes in our Constitution in every way. It is a march that welcomes everyone that believes in the People, the 14^th Amendment and equality for All people regardless of the race, creed, religious or gender preference. It is a moment needed to let those who practice exclusion to hear those who believe in helping our fellow man.

The cliché, “When the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few” is an important statement right about now because big corporations made big bets against the people for other folks who were definitely rich or getting richer but ran out of luck; the government in our case had to step in and up to help All Americans because free trade was not going to correct the bets because the casino shut itself down. The economic collapse that happened was an opportunity to change the failed way things were done in order to move into the 21^st Century

I have been listening, reading and hearing comments about President Obama having taken great first steps toward change but hasn’t gone far enough to sedate or fulfill the promises he made to special interest groups during his campaign. First, what special interest groups is the Media talking about that is upset because libs are definitely apart of the Democratic Party. The negative comments are becoming bold, louder and more frequent but they are coming from the right, the more extreme of our society the group of people being stirred to cause physical damage. We can blame the Media for the selective misinformation they all give viewers. It is now quite obvious that ratings are so important that reports leave out parts of a story instead of giving all angles or even having a guest to rebut the opinions of the host, commentators.

Change takes time… It takes a Congress with courage to create and pass laws that should be for the greater good that covers all Americans.

**Environmentalist… like Phil Radford, exec director/Greenpeace USA stated among other things,” Obama is missing in action” as it relates to global warming …in an article written by Bryan Walsh from Time Magazine. I am willing to say that Congress is a partner that President Obama has had to fight with since coming into office and those who have been paying attention it was not just with Republicans it was, has and still is with democrats. This President and his administration needs support to move the US into the 21^st Century to a Green economy… It takes courage to admit we need to do what is right for our children and generations to come by keeping and or voting more democrats into office in November people.

**Immigration/SB1070 …Do you “look” undocumented? This week, the Arizona state legislature approved an anti-immigrant bill that essentially gives police the right to profile people based on race. It will also give natives the right to sue local law enforcement if, in their opinion, not enough is being done to hunt down undocumented immigrants.

Reasonable Suspicion, what does that mean?

Any legislation forth coming needs to be comprehensive immigration reform. The public needs to accept the complicit relationship of the past and correct it and move into the 21st Century; this can only happen if we vote more Dems into office -November is a national election as far as i am concerned. What happens in November will impact the future of All Americans

read the article by Prernal Lal…stay informed

**Gay/Lesbian leaders… are starting to make comments about Obama not going far enough on don’t ask/don’t tell but today he announced he will enact federal benefits for same sex couples …moving too slow? too little too late? come on, People of colour know what being impatient means. This is yet another issue that will be stopped in its tracks if we do not vote more Dems into office people. If do not get Dems out to Vote in November the progress made thus far; even if some feel it is not enough, just think what will happen if Republicans gain control and do what they have threatened all along. We all know republicans feel they have the corner on what “family values” are and push this as apart of their agenda if they gain control. The governing they plan will definitely not include same sex marriage contrary to what most Democrats feel should be an issue of equality.

**Health-care -liberals… are impatient and talking about how they put Obama in office and threatening a change in 2012 … this is unacceptable for me because the new law covers those with children up to 26 which is college age and will save money for so many parents; it is not a welfare program. It stops discrimination against women and allows those who have debilitating deceases the right to see a doctor without their insurance companies saying you are not worthy of being helped. Health Care Reform is in itself is a Jobs Bill and who would not be for a new law that gives more access to health care while creating more jobs to the public. It will and that is something more members of the Democratic Party in Congress should be letting the public know.

**Wall Street … flexed their muscles to show Obama who really is in charge of the market … bad behavior needs to be regulated with a big R and ten months the Obama Admin and Congress passed legislation to regulate Wall Street that should continue to be adjust to hold those who still place bets against the people of the United States.

The fact is change will happen. The President can’t do it all himself, we need to call, write and March 10-2-10 to let Congress know what We the People voted for a change we can believe in but some folks left of center just do not understand that this change will take time, support and pushing our Congress to get the job done.

The notion that the President is to blame for the scaled back legislation that was passed in the Senate is ridiculous. It is a combination of the 60rule, filibuster and the lack of Political will of the Democratic Party to push the envelope. I think conservadems need to be shoved into a box but the real solution to the inability to get substantial bills through that will not only help ALL Americans and our economy is simply getting out and voting for the Mid-term elections.

This is a moment that is just as important as the 2008 elections people because without more Dems in Congress the change we all want will continue to be scaled back by Republicans.

Other News …

CSPAN …

Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen (Ret.) Briefing on Gulf Oil Spill