Monday, October 29, 2018
Star-Telegram Endorses O'Rourke In Texas Senate Race
The two largest newspapers in Texas (The Dallas Morning News and the Houston Chronicle) have already endorsed Beto O'Rourke over incumbent Ted Cruz in the U.S. Senate race. Now the state's third largest newspapers joins them in supporting O'Rourke -- the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.
Here's what their editorial board had to say:
U.S. Rep. Beto O’Rourke and U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz represent the hard left and right of American politics.
Neither stands in the middle ground, where the real work is done to lead America.
But only O’Rourke seems interested in making deals or finding middle ground. That is why the El Paso Democrat would make the best senator for Tarrant County’s future, and the future of Texas.
O’Rourke’s “new way” campaign against politics-as-usual has drawn attention, and also money.
But much of what he says, particularly about immigration and healthcare, sounds like what Texas business conservatives used to say before the emergence of New York Republican Donald Trump.
U.S. Sen. John Cornyn says we shouldn’t deport Dreamer students over their parents’ mistakes. Former Gov. Rick Perry, now energy secretary, has said a border wall “doesn’t make sense.” President George W. Bush endorsed a path to legal status for those who came illegally but worked peacefully, supported the economy and showed good character.
These are the same Texas values that O’Rourke now defends.
Texas House Speaker Joe Straus wanted to beef up spending on public schools and find a “Texas solution” to improve healthcare coverage under the Affordable Care Act.
O’Rourke now champions both.
Cruz and O’Rourke both support free trade, which is essential for success in Fort Worth and Texas. Our city is emerging as a leading global distribution center, and Mexico is Texas’ No. 1 trade partner.
But O’Rourke would have more room to oppose the president’s questionable trade and tariff decisions, which threaten Texas.
O’Rourke raised eyebrows here when he called for further review of the locally built Lockheed Martin Aeronautics F-35 fighter jet. But he also says the plane is essential to protect the U.S.’s air superiority, and said he will protect jobs.
This endorsement did not come without some disagreement. Cruz is closer to Texas’ and Tarrant County’s views on issues related to faith and values, and also on energy policy.
But Cruz was elected with no experience in any council or legislature, and it shows. His intransigence prevents him from currying support or negotiating deals to help Texas.
This Editorial Board has recommended conservative Republicans such as George W. Bush and Mitt Romney for president, along with U.S. Sens. John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison.
But Cruz does not measure up. This office needs a reset.
The Star-Telegram Editorial Board endorses Beto O’Rourke for U.S. senator..
Sunday, October 28, 2018
Another Mass Shooting While Congress Does Nothing
America suffered another mass shooting on Saturday. This time it was in Pittsburg, where 46 year-old anti-semite Robert Bowers (armed with an AR-15 assault rifle and several handguns) shot 17 people (four police officers and 13 civilians) -- killing 11 of them.
Sadly, this is not an unusual occurrence in the United States. While most mass shootings (where at least 4 people are shot) do not make the national news, they happen on an almost daily basis. In the first 300 days of this year, there have been at least 294 mass shootings. That's 0.98 mass shootings per day -- or about 29.4 every month. This doesn't happen nearly as often in any other developed nation, and there is no rational reason why it should be happening here.
What is our government doing to stop (or at least reduce) these mass shootings? NOTHING!
Donald Trump is useless. He said after the shooting that we must stop the hate in this country -- completely ignoring the fact that he has increased that hate by his own actions and rhetoric. He has demonized groups that don't fit his white patriarchal mold, and encouraged racists, bigots, and white supremacists -- and doesn't seem to be interested in curbing his own hate speech.
Trump also suggested that the answer is more guns -- inferring that less people would have been killed if there had been guns inside the affected synagogue. That shows he doesn't understand the problem. There are too many guns already in this country (more than one in circulation for every person in the country). More guns is not the answer.
What is the reaction from the Republican-controlled Congress. Just useless "thoughts and prayers", and more nonsense about this not being the time to discuss doing something. They will do nothing because they have been bought and paid for by the gun manufacturers and their lobbying group (the NRA).
Our politicians whine about Second Amendment rights. But they ignore the things that could be done without violating the Second Amendment -- things like making gun laws stricter, banning assault-style weapons and huge ammo magazines, and closing the loopholes in our background check law. A majority of Americans support the first two, and an overwhelming majority supports the third (between 80% and 90%).
Action could be taken by Congress that, while it couldn't prevent all gun deaths, could significantly reduce those deaths.They won't act though, and that's why they should be voted out of power.
Voter Opinion Of Trump Is A Big Factor In The Election
Pundits have been debating for weeks about whether voter feelings about Donald Trump is a big factor in this election (even though he's not on the ballot). The results of this poll show that the approval/disapproval of Trump is important to how people will vote.
As the top chart shows, Trump is popular only among Republicans -- where 85% give him a positive approval rating. It's far different for other voters. He only has 39% approval from the general public, 35% from Independents, and 9% from Democrats.
Those are not good numbers, especially when you consider the second chart. It shows that 67% of voters say their opinion of Trump is a factor in how they'll vote, while only 31% say it is not. By comparison, in 2014 only 47% said their opinion of Obama was a factor, while 52% said it was not.
Trump is not helping Republican candidates this year, and that's because most Americans just don't like him.
The charts are from the newest NPR / PBS NewsHour / Marist Poll -- done between October 21st and 23rd of a national sample of 935 adults, with a margin of error of 3.9 points.
Rising Costs Are A Serious Detriment To U.S. Health System
The two most egregious Problems with health care in the United States are the lack of insurance coverage for all citizens and the enormous growth of the cost of health care. Obamacare helped with the first problem (but did not completely solve it), but Republican efforts have actually started to make it worse. Neither Obamacare nor the Republicans have done anything to address the second problem (rising cost of health care).
The Josh Bivins of the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) has written an excellent article about the enormous and growing cost of health care in the United States, and some suggestions on how to control it. It is a lengthy article (but well worth your time), so I include only a part of it below.
Rapid growth in the cost of U.S. health care has put sustained downward pressure on wages and incomes. This rapid growth of spending has not purchased notably high-quality care, however. U.S. spending on health care is higher than in peer countries, while quality is lower. These high costs cannot be attributed to overuse of health care in America; instead, it is clear that the high price of health care is the culprit. Prices for pharmaceuticals, physician salaries, and medical procedures are almost uniformly higher in the U.S. than in peer countries—sometimes staggeringly so.
Why it matters: Rising premiums, out-of-pocket costs, and public health spending are crowding out income gains and spending on other goods and services. Meanwhile, our health care system ranks low on measures of equity and quality relative to peer countries. Recognizing the role of health care prices in driving health spending is crucial: Efforts to contain costs by controlling use are not only economically inefficient but also dangerous—leading to decreases in medically indicated and preventive care that would improve health outcomes for Americans and that is more cost efficient in the long run.
Key findings
- Premium prices in the employer-sponsored insurance system have risen rapidly over the past two decades. The total cost of a family ESI plan rose from $5,791 to $18,142 between 1999 and 2016.6 As a share of average annual earnings for the bottom 90 percent of the workforce, these premium costs rose from 25.6 to 51.7 percent over that same period.
- Fast premium growth did not purchase better protection from health care cost growth for workers. Out-of-pocket costs rose faster between 2006 and 2016 than total costs or costs paid by insurers did. Out-of-pocket costs rose 53.5 percent cumulatively over that time, while total costs rose 49.2 percent and costs paid by insurers rose 48.5 percent.
- The rapid growth in health care costs has led to a rapid increase in total health spending as a share of GDP. This measure has risen from 5.2 percent of U.S. GDP in 1963 to 8.4 percent in 1979 to 17.4 percent in 2016.
- Among industrialized nations, the U.S. has the highest health care costs and below average quality and utilization. When comparing the American health system with the health systems of advanced economy peer countries, American health care spending and prices are by far the highest, while utilization—the volume of health goods and services being consumed—and measures of quality are decidedly below average.
- Policymakers need to focus on controlling prices, not utilization. The weight of the empirical evidence in this report indicates clearly that policies to “bend the health care cost curve” should focus on efforts to control prices, not use. The common root in strategies to contain prices in the health care sector is the need to bring countervailing market power to bear against monopoly-like pricing power currently wielded by health care providers.
- Policy focusing on utilization leads to inefficiency. To date, most efforts to control use of health care services have been poorly tailored because they focus simply on “cost sharing”—or raising the cost of receiving health care across the board. Raising the marginal cost of health in this way does reduce utilization, but patients do not cut back only on low-value care. They also cut back on medically indicated care that could actually be cost-saving in the long run.
- Meaningful policy to address pricing includes public negotiation of “all-payer rates.” The most straightforward way to provide countervailing force against the pricing power of health care providers, as well as to make health care prices informative to consumers, is more robust public negotiation of prices and the extension of this public-sector pricing power to all payers. For example, policymakers should strongly consider setting caps on rates as a tool to slow growth and provide greater transparency and accountability to consumers.
These findings underscore the depth of the challenges that remain to making our health care system more equitable and efficient. They also provide a clear series of steps that policymakers can take to improve this situation. These steps can be part of the groundwork for a more fundamental transformation of the American health system but would also ensure that the current pillar of this system—ESI—will remain strong as new reforms are made.
What can be done about it: Policymakers need to focus on controlling health care prices, not restricting use. While much attention has understandably focused on the ambitious vision of adopting a “single-payer” or “Medicare-for-all” plan, there are steps policymakers could adopt in the nearer term that would allow many of the virtues of single-payer to be realized more quickly and that could serve as useful stepping stones to even more ambitious reform:
- Extend already existing public plans and incorporate a “public option” into ACA exchanges.
- Adopt “all-payer rates”—mandating that the same prices apply regardless of who is paying—to allow private insurers to benefit from the bargaining power of Medicare.
- Pursue policies that would diminish the intellectual property rights monopolies of key health care sectors, like pharmaceutical companies.
- Increase antitrust scrutiny of consolidation of hospitals and physician networks.
Saturday, October 27, 2018
Bomber Arrested (& As Expected Was A Trump Supporter)
The MAGA-bomber has been arrested. It turns out to be Cesar Sayoc, Jr. of Florida. He has a prior criminal record, but that is not why he sent the bombs. He did that because he was a Trump supporter (note the decals on his van), and evidently, was trying to please his favorite demagogue -- Donald Trump. He is a registered Republican.
In the last couple of days, right-wingers have floated conspiracy theories saying the bombs were sent by Democrats (or leftists) to defame Trump. That has now been exposed as a ridiculous lie.
Trump himself spoke after the arrest. He said the bomber would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law (even though he has nothing to do with how the bomber will be charged or prosecuted). He also called for unity among U.S. citizens -- completely ignoring his own efforts to divide the nation.
I wish I could say this is over, and Trump's critics are now safe -- but that is probably not the case. As long as Trump continues to demonize his political opponents, they will be in danger. Too many right-wing terrorists exist in this country -- people like Sayoc, who may try to please Trump with violent acts. And the next one may be more competent that this bomber was.
Trump has poisoned the politics in this country, and he has made the country a much more dangerous place.
NOTE -- A 13th package has been found in Sacramento -- addressed to Senator Kamala Harris.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)