Showing posts with label Democrat. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Democrat. Show all posts

Saturday, July 11, 2015

[COMMENTARY] Clerks are bound to follow law

FRANKFORT  – A Republican attorney I know sees the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage and the reaction in Kentucky – where some county clerks refuse to issue marriage licenses – through the lens of history.
“It’s this generation’s Brown v. Board of Education,” he said, referring to the landmark court ruling that school segregation was unconstitutional.
“You don’t have to like it, but it’s the law,” my attorney friend continued.
The attorney is no Democrat. He’s not urban and he’s certainly not liberal. I have no idea how he feels about the morality of same-sex marriage. But he understands the law and how our system works.
There are similarities between the same-sex ruling, Obergefell v. Hodges, and the Brown v. Board of Education ruling that threw out the “separate but equal” justification for school desegregation.
Even the phrase “separate but equal” resonates in some Kentucky county clerks’ explanation of why their religious beliefs should allow them to refuse to grant marriage licenses. After all, they say, a couple can obtain the desired license simply by driving to a neighboring county – but they didn’t ask opposite-sex couples to do that until the court ruling.
The court ruled in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954. But it was 1964 before the Glasgow schools I attended integrated. Significant social change sometimes doesn’t happen overnight.
There are likely to be others who resist the ruling of the court. Just like some did in the civil rights era, some are now calling for changes to our court system and decrying a decision by “five liberal, unelected lawyers” (never mind a majority of the court is conservative and was appointed by Republican presidents).

Like civil rights and abortion, there will probably be more court battles as some resist the ruling. But supporters of same-sex marriage can probably draw hope from the history of the civil rights battles and from the general trend of American history to enlarge and expand individual minority rights rather than restrict them.

[VIDEO] Democrat county chairman punches blind veteran at polling place

Leroy Jones is Chairman of the Essex County Democratic Committee, the third most populous county in New Jersey, whose county seat is Newark.  According to LiveLeak:
Video was released purportedly showing Leroy Jones punching 75-year-old Bill Graves, who was volunteering as a poll worker during the incident on primary day, June 2. 
“I hear this rumbling, ‘Where the blank is Bill Graves? I’m gonna kick his butt!’” Mr. Graves told a local ABC affiliate. “You can see on the tape it was intentional.” 
The suspect, identified by Essex County Prosecutors as Mr. Jones, is seen throwing several punches at Mr. Graves following what appears to be a heated confrontation. 
Mr. Graves and his friends said Mr. Jones attacked him because he was backing a political candidate that Mr. Jones did not support.

Thursday, June 25, 2015

The Stupidity Continues: New Orleans Democrat Mayor Mitch Landrieu Calls For Removal Of Robert E. Lee Circle Statue…

Now is the time to talk about replacing the statue of Robert E. Lee, as iconic as it is controversial, from its perch at the center of Lee Circle, Mayor Mitch Landrieu announced Wednesday (June 24) during a gathering held to highlight his racial reconciliation initiative.
"Symbols really do matter," he said. "Symbols should reflect who we really are as a people.
"We have never been a culture, in essence, that revered war rather than peace, division rather than unity."

[Listen to Landrieu's speech on why Lee Circle should be renamed, or read a full article on his announcement here. ]

The slaying last week of nine black people in a historic Charleston, S.C., church at the hands of Dylann Roof, an avowed white supremacist, has sparked heated debate about whether the Confederate battle flag and other symbols associated with the country's racist past ought to be displayed in public places.

Just two days ago, Landrieu was noncommittal when asked whether the Lee statue should be removed, though he called for a larger discussion on it and other Confederate monuments in New Orleans. The 2018 Tricentennial Commission, whose tasks include addressing the city's complex racial history ahead of its 300th anniversary, would also examine the propriety of the monuments continued display on public property, the mayor's office said.

"These symbols say who we were in a particular time, but times change. Yet these symbols -- statues, monuments, street names, and more -- still influence who we are and how we are perceived by the world," a spokesman said in a statement. "Mayor Landrieu believes it is time to look at the symbols in this city to see if they still have relevance to our future."


Sunday, June 21, 2015

[VIDEO] HERE’S THE CONDESCENDING RACIST INSULT A DEMOCRAT PRESIDENT CALLED THE CHARLESTON MAYOR FOR HELPING BLACKS

Charleston Mayor Jason P. Riley Jr. was fondly remembering how he used to advocate for black people when Jake Tapper reminded him about the racist insult that President Lyndon Baines Johnson used to call him over it.
“Little black Joe” is just a footnote to history. Of course, if Reagan or Nixon had called him that, it’d be indoctrinated into our kindergartners as absolute proof that all conservatives are racist.


Monday, June 15, 2015

The voice of opposition past, Justice Kennedy may save Obamacare now

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Justice Anthony Kennedy was furious when a majority on the U.S. Supreme Court upheld President Barack Obama’s healthcare law. As he read the dissenting opinion from the bench three years ago, his anger was palpable. The majority regards its opinion “as judicial modesty," he declared. "It is not. It amounts instead to a vast judicial over-reaching.”
That was Kennedy on June 28, 2012.
Now, as the country awaits a ruling in the second major challenge to Obama's signature Affordable Care Act, a question is whether the justice who was the voice of the opposition then could provide the critical fifth vote to uphold the law on the nine-justice court now.
At stake are the tax-credit subsidies that have helped low- and moderate-income Americans obtain health insurance. The challengers say the government unlawfully extended those subsidies to states that did not create local insurance exchanges but instead relied on the federal exchange. If the court strikes down the subsidies, millions of Americans in at least 34 of the 50 states could lose coverage.
Five years after its passage, the Affordable Care Act has become ingrained in American life even as it remains politically divisive. “This is now part of the fabric of how we care for one another," Obama, a Democrat, declared in a speech last week. Republicans have called for repeal and among the related lawsuits simmering in lower courts is a dispute brought by Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives over Treasury Department payments to healthcare insurers.
IMPOSSIBLE TO PREDICT
In the case before the court, the unique issue along with Kennedy's record and his comments in oral arguments raise the possibility he will join the four liberal justices to endorse the law. Three years ago, his fellow conservative Chief Justice John Roberts cast the swing vote with the liberals to uphold the law. It marked a rare episode when Kennedy, the usual key justice on this divided bench, did not control the outcome of a momentous case.
It is impossible to predict with confidence how the court will resolve the case, King v. Burwell. A ruling is anxiously awaited by officials in Washington and the insurance and healthcare industries nationwide.
What is known: Two days after the March 4 oral arguments this year, the justices, per their usual practice, took a vote in a small conference room off Chief Justice Roberts’ chambers. The most senior justice on the winning side then assigned the opinion for those in the majority; the senior justice on the dissenting side tapped a writer for the main dissent. Drafts of dueling opinions began circulating among the chambers.


Sunday, June 14, 2015

Why Hillary Clinton Will Be Hard to Beat

U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton takes the stage to speak in New York City on Saturday.
 
CARLO ALLEGRI/REUTERS
Hillary Clinton is often at the center of controversy. But it would be a mistake to think this has undermined her candidacy, at least based on polling so far. As a political figure, she has a strong foundation.
Here are five charts, showing why she remains formidable—and where she has potential vulnerabilities.
* * *
1. When matched against GOP rivals, Mrs. Clinton retains a big lead among minority voters. These voters were a pillar of President Barack Obama’s winning coalitions and make up a growing share of the electorate.
* * *
2. Moreover, Mrs. Clinton shows signs of expanding the Obama coalition by drawing more white women, a group that Republicans won by 14 percentage points in 2012. When matched against likely GOP rivals, Mrs. Clinton leads among white women.
* * *
3. Views of the economy—likely the top issue in the campaign—play to Mrs. Clinton’s advantage. She leads likely rivals among voters who say job creation and the economy are their top or second-highest concern:
* * *
4. Where is Mrs. Clinton vulnerable? Voters tend to cast ballots for people they like, and so Mrs. Clinton’s declining public image could prove to be a problem. The share of people with a negative view of her is rising.

Thursday, June 11, 2015

Reid’s Handpicked Successor in Nevada Senate Race Touts Anti-Trafficking Efforts

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid’s (D., Nev.) preferred successor in the Nevada Senate race is touting her efforts to crack down on human trafficking despite Reid’s repeated moves to stall a Senate bill earlier this year that would help combat the practice.
After announcing that he would retire from the Senate earlier this year, Reid indicated he would back Catherine Cortez Masto, a former Democratic attorney general in Nevada, to replace him. The endorsement likely means Masto will benefit from Reid’s vaunted political machine in the closely watched race.
In a recent email to her campaign supporters, Masto noted that Congress had passed legislation to impose harsher penalties on sex traffickers and boost support for victims. “But there’s still so much more we could be doing,” she said in the email.
“I know what it means to make this a priority,” she said. “As attorney general, I cracked down on sex traffickers and fought for legislation to better provide resources for victims—and I intend to take that fight to the Senate.”
“I need you on our side now though if we’re going to keep making progress: Will you join me in calling for an end to human trafficking?” she continued.
In March, Reid led Senate Democrats in blocking the anti-human trafficking bill multiple times. Democrats objected to a provision in the legislation that they said would expand the Hyde Amendment—a law that prohibits federal funding of abortions—by barring a victims’ fund from receiving federal money for abortions.
However, Democrats admitted that they did not fully read the bill when the Senate Judiciary Committee approved it. Republicans said they did not believe the provision was controversial because appropriations bills are typically subject to the Hyde Amendment.
The Senate eventually passed the anti-trafficking legislation in April by dividing the victims’ fund in two—fines from perpetrators would be directed to non-health care services while federal money for community health centers would still be subject to the Hyde Amendment. Victims could obtain abortions in cases of rape due to exemptions in the law. President Obama signed the bill into law the following month.
The Masto campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

Saturday, June 6, 2015

Connecticut's tax greed may cost it dearly

Connecticut seems determined to follow the Illinois path into a death spiral of higher taxes driving out business, leading to less revenue and the need to raise taxes on the remaining businesses unable to flee. The Democrat governor and legislature, who ran in 2014 on a promise of no new taxes have just introduced a large tax increase, including a suicidal attempt to drive corporate headquarters out of the state.  The Wall Street Journal’s Review and Outlook column explains:
The blue-state paragon’s two-year budget of $40.3 billion includes a $1.5 billion net increase in taxes and fees. The top marginal individual tax rate rises to 6.99% from 6.7%. But the biggest blow is making permanent a 20% surtax on a company’s annual tax liability—a tax on a tax—and for the first time taxing Connecticut companies on their world-wide income, rather than what they earn in the state.

General Electric , long a Connecticut fixture, protested that the state is “retroactively raising taxes again,” which “makes businesses, including our own, and citizens seriously consider whether it makes any sense to continue to be located in this state.” Aetna , the giant health insurer and pillar of Hartford, said the bill would “undermine the competitiveness” of companies and “lead to an exodus of jobs and business from the state.’’

The biggest shock came Thursday when GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt told the company’s Connecticut employees that he has “assembled an exploratory team to look into the company’s options to relocate corporate HQ to another state with a more pro-business environment.”
Via: American Thinker

Continue Reading.....

Friday, June 5, 2015

In Vermont, Frustrations Mount Over Affordable Care Act

BURLINGTON, Vt. — Just a few years ago, lawmakers in this left-leaning state viewed President Obama’s Affordable Care Act as little more than a pit stop on the road to a far more ambitious goal: single-payer, universal health care for all residents.

Then things unraveled. The online insurance marketplace that Vermont built to enroll people in private coverage under the law had extensive technical failures. The problems soured public and legislative enthusiasm for sweeping health care changes just as Gov. Peter Shumlin needed to build support for his complex single-payer plan. Finally, Mr. Shumlin, a Democrat, shelved the plan in December, citing the high cost to taxpayers. He called the decision “the greatest disappointment of my political life.

As the United States Supreme Court prepares to rule in a case that could gut a major element of the Affordable Care Act — federal subsidies for low- and middle-income people — Vermont should have little to worry about. Only states that use the federally run insurance marketplace stand to lose subsidies if the court rules against the Obama administration, and Vermont is among the 14 states that fully run their own.

Via: New York Times

Continue Reading....

Wednesday, June 3, 2015

‘Tone-deaf’ Clinton campaign throws kids off playground

Hillary Clinton’s campaign didn’t pick the best time to stage a major campaign rally at Four Freedoms Park on Roosevelt Island later this month.
According to the park’s website, a specially planned event for tots called Imagination Playground — which features unique blue building blocks — has been canceled to accommodate the Democratic front-runner for president.
Also at risk of major inconvenience: an annual celebration called Roosevelt Island Day, which features a blood drive, hot dog stands and free rides for kids.
“It’s going to be horrendous logistically,” said Sherie Helstien, vice president of the island’s community association, who noted that her community has just one main road.
“I think the campaign should have reached out to the community representatives of 14,000 people — absolutely,” fumed Matthew Katz, former president of the association, and husband of Helstien.
He says residents received no notice from the Clinton camp.
“We are not just a memorial and a park. We’re a thriving community of 14,000 people. It’s just tone-deaf to ignore that,” he added.
Katz, who voted for Clinton and even knocked on doors for her in Pennsylvania, said he was concerned that added security could harm the 18th annual island festival, which has been in the works for months.

Tuesday, May 26, 2015

Noteworthy Millennial Political Highlights from this Past Week

This week a 19 year old Republican, Yvonne Dean-Bailey, won a highly contested race in the swing state of New Hampshire. 
Dean-Bailey, a 19-year-old college student, becomes one of the youngest women elected to the New Hampshire House of Representatives.
The race attracted a disproportionate share of attention on the eve of a presidential primary season.
Republican presidential hopefuls Carly Fiorina and Rick Perry attended events with Dean-Bailey, while Democrat Martin O’Malley helped promote Mann, who is a former state representative.
The election drew enormous interest, and support for and against each candidate, from outside of the district. In Deerfield, for example, turnout was about 26 percent. In Candia, it was 16 percent.
She won despite dirty tactics from Democrats.
The state’s Republican Party plans to file an election law complaint today with the Attorney General’s Office after a former campaign worker for Democrat state representative candidate Maureen Mann admitted to emailing a hoax news release claiming her Republican challenger, candidate Yvonne Dean-Bailey, had dropped out of the race. 
While Republicans are promoting young stars through our Rising Stars program and through local elections, the Clintons are making our schools pay exorbitant prices to hear them speak
The Clinton Foundation has disclosed that it received up to $26 million in payments that had not been previously disclosed, with about 20 colleges and universities on the list of organizations and institutions that paid fees for speeches by one of the Clintons —Bill, the former president; Hillary, the former U.S. senator and secretary of state; or Chelsea, their daughter.
The total amount paid by the colleges and universities is between $2.8 million and $6.7 million — a range based on the way the fees are reported. For example, the top fees were reported in a range from $250,001 to $500,000.
Here, taken from the Clinton Foundation’s website, is a list of the college and universities that paid to have one of the Clintons give a speech from the time the foundation was founded in 2001 through 2014.
As Millennials are learning more about Hillary Clinton they are liking her less as Pew found out this week. Last year 82 percent of 18-25 year old Democrats had a favorable view of her now only 65 percent do.
Not only are young Republicans succeeding, we are also taking positions of leadership.  Just this week 30 year old RNC Chief of Staff, Katie Walsh, was named one of The Washington Post’s “40 Most Interesting Women In Politics


Sunday, May 17, 2015

Clinton is banking on the Obama coalition to win


Hillary Rodham Clinton is running as the most liberal Democratic presidential front-runner in decades, with positions on issues from gay marriage to immigration that would, in past elections, have put her at her party’s precarious left edge.
The moves are part of a strategic conclusion by Clinton’s emerging campaign: that it can harness the same kind of young and diverse coalition as Barack Obama did in 2008 and 2012, bolstered by even stronger appeal among women.
Her approach — outlined in interviews with aides and advisers — is a bet that social and demographic shifts mean that no left-leaning position Clinton takes now is likely to hurt her when she makes her case to moderate and independent voters in the general election next year.
The strategy relies on calculations about the 2016 landscape, including that up to 31 percent of the electorate will be Americans of color — a projection that may be overly optimistic for her campaign. It factors in that a majority of independent voters already support same-sex marriage and the pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants that Clinton endorsed this month.
The game plan also hinges on a conclusion by Clinton strategists that the broad appeal of issues such as paid family leave, a higher minimum wage and more affordable college will help outweigh any concerns about costs.

Thursday, May 22, 2014

A “Left-Right Alliance” Against Public Sector Unions?

Unions pension public sectorConsumer advocate and left-wing activist Ralph Nadar has just written a book entitled “Unstoppable: The Emerging Left-Right Alliance to Dismantle the Corporate State.” In a Salon interview published on May 2, Nadar lists five areas where the left and right can agree on policy goals: (1) controlling security state overreach, (2) eliminating corporate welfare, (3) fighting military overspending and waste, (4) cracking down on Wall Street financial fraud, and (5) revisiting international agreements that undermine American sovereignty.
Populist right-wing commentator Patrick Buchanan has taken notice. In a column published on May 19th entitled “A Left-Right Convergence?,” Buchanan identifies the rift within conservative ranks that provides an opening for convergence with the left. He writes:
“Undeniably, there has been a growing gap and a deepening alienation between traditional conservatives and those Ralph calls the ‘corporate conservatives.’ And it is not only inside the conservative movement and the GOP that the rift is growing, but also Middle America.”
As for the left? Here are two easily identified, escalating rifts that are dividing liberals: The first, construction unions vs. environmentalists, as exemplified by their conflict over the Keystone Pipeline. The second, public sector union Democrats vs. progressive Democrats. As San Jose’s mayor Chuck Reed, a Democrat, puts it:
“There’s a difference between being liberal and progressive and being a union Democrat.”
This second rift has immediate importance in California, and it has immediate potential for what could become California’s regional version of a left-right alliance. Here are three areas where California’s left and right can unite:
(1) Charter schools: California’s public schools have failed millions of students. Charter schools, unconstrained by union work rules, have become laboratories of innovation. They have consistently delivered better educational outcomes at lower cost. Their proliferation should be encouraged.
(2) Pension reform: California’s cities, counties and state agencies now face unfunded pension liabilities that – depending on what assumptions you make – total between $200 and $500 billion. Annual pension contributions now consume as much as 25% of the general fund budget in major cities. Reform is vital.

Wednesday, May 21, 2014

Would You Have Voted for ObamaCare? Georgia Dem Gives AGONIZINGLY PAINFUL Answer

27 Seconds Is All It Takes to Realize This Is One of the Most Confusing Obamacare Answers Out There

By Mike Opelka, The Blaze
It was a simple question posed by NBC correspondent Kasie Hunt to Georgia Democratic Senate hopeful, Michelle Nunn.  Hunt was speaking with Nunn in a one-on-one interview and asked the question: “Would you have voted for the Affordable Care Act?”

The candidate’s answer was not a “yes” or “no.” In fact, it was so confounding that MSNBC’s Chuck Todd, during an appearance on “Morning Joe,” called it “terrible,” adding, “Boy, nothing screamed ‘practiced politician’ like that answer Michelle Nunn gave on health care.”
“It just doesn’t come across as credible,” he said.

What was Chuck Todd talking about? It might have been the initial 27 seconds of circuitous language heard from Nunn. Her exact words:

“At the time the Affordable Health Care Act was passed, I was, uh, working for Points of Light (a non-profit organization where Nunn served as CEO, earning $300,000/year) . So, I think it’s hard to go back…to look back retrospectively. But when I look at it, I think about…what do we need to do going forward? I look at it, I come at it from the perspective of someone who made payroll, who saw rising healthcare premiums, who believes we actually need to work together to make changes where it’s not working and improve the things that already are working.”

Nunn followed her initial response with more standard Democratic talking points about healthcare, citing the protections given to people with pre-existing conditions and children under 26 years old.

Thursday, February 27, 2014

Pelosi says she's not done yet

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) wants everyone to know she's not done yet. 
After a recent wave of retiring veteran Democrats, the former House speaker assertively said Thursday that's no indication she would soon follow in their footsteps. 
"When it is [time], you'll know," Pelosi told reporters in the Capitol.
"They go at their pace, [and] I go at mine. We'll miss them — they're fabulous — but, again, it stirs the pot, and lots of people are very excited about the prospect of what comes next for them," said the Democratic leader. "It's a constantly reinvigorated body; that's what our founders intended."
Since January, a number of seasoned House Democrats, have announced that this year will be their last in Congress. The list includes many close Pelosi allies like Reps. George Miller (Calif.) and Henry Waxman (Calif.) and other longtime members such as Jim Moran (Va.), Rush Holt (N.J.) and John Dingell (Mich.), the longest serving member in the history of Congress.
While the number of retirements is not unusual and is so far less than in recent cycles, the veteran stature of the names and their relationships with Pelosi has only amplified the whispers that she, too, might be eyeing the door, particularly if the Democrats fail to take back the House in November.
Pelosi, for her part, has consistently dismissed such speculation, which has swirled ceaselessly since the Democrats lost control of the House in 2010's landslide elections.
She says her focus on passing Democratic bills and winning back the House — a tall order with the 17 seats her party needs to flip — doesn't allow the time to contemplate her longer-term plans. 
"I'm too busy," she said. "As long as there's 1-in-5 children in America who lives in poverty, what I do is get up every morning revved to the task."
Pelosi used the question about her future as an opportunity to attack a comprehensive tax reform bill introduced Wednesday by Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.), the head of the Ways and Means Committee. 
Pelosi said the proposal would pile $2,000 in additional taxes on single moms making the minimum wage. 
"I have enough to invigorate me, and everybody's timetable around here isn't everybody else's timetable around here."
Via: The Hill

Continue Reading....

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

Sen. Barbara Boxer: The Keystone Pipeline Will Cause Cancer

featured-imgSen. Barbara Boxer wants to add a new element to the Keystone XL oil pipeline debate: its effects on health.

The California Democrat claims negative health effects from the proposed pipeline's development were ignored by the State Department's environmental impact review.

"The Environmental Impact Statement was woefully inadequate when it came to exploring human impacts of the pipeline," Boxer said Wednesday at a press conference held with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and anti-Keystone XL activists and environmentalists.

She said Keystone would add pollutants to the air that will increase the likelihood of people getting cancer or heart disease.

"I do believe the public health impacts are something that average people can really relate to because they know cancer is the second leading cause of death in this country — heart disease is number one — and all of this filthy air contributes to both of those," she said.

Boxer and Whitehouse will send a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry detailing the health impacts of the pipeline, which they hope he will consider when determining whether Keystone XL is in the nation's best interests.

The State Department is currently in the national determination phase of its review, which lasts for 90 days. While the department's environmental analysis said the pipeline developed by TransCanada would not significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions, Boxer claims more information is needed on the human impacts.

"As tar sands oil flows to our gulf coast refineries it will increase toxic pollution that already plagues communities like Port Arthur Texas, which is near many refineries that will process tar sands," Boxer said.
Boxer said hearings on the topic are a possibility but nothing is set in stone. Her goal is to get President Obama and Kerry's attention.

Saturday, February 8, 2014

Different Shades of Blue: California and Wisconsin

Though both Wisconsin and California have been a solid shade of blue in electoral politics for over 20 years, there are nonetheless important differences in their governing styles.  These distinctions, driven principally by the fact that Wisconsin has a Republican Governor, offer keen insights into the priorities of fiscal management between Republicans and Democrats.
Both states were hit particularly hard by fallout from the Great Recession.  Unemployment increased, manufacturing withdrew, and economic growth was anemic.  Governors Walker and Brown entered office staring at a wall of red ink from debts run up by years of political mismanagement and economic malaise.   Both had no choice but to implement significant changes.
After California’s Jerry Brown was elected in 2010, he was immediately faced with a $26.6 billion budget gap.  To address it, Brown instituted a combination of spending reductions and tax increases.  There was virtually no choice but to cut spending – everything from primary education to welfare recipients to correctional facilities saw reductions in their allocations.  Brown also successfully persuaded voters to pass Prop. 30, a “temporary” hike in income tax rates on the state’s wealthiest and an increase in the state’s sales tax rate.  After the increases, the nation’s most populous state now boasts the country’s second highest income tax rate and the highest sales tax rate.
Wisconsin was similarly faced with dire financial straits.  Governor Walker entered office in 2010 and was quickly faced with a deficit of $3.6 billion.  To address the sea of red, Walker implemented structural reforms to the state’s economics.  He reduced runaway spending, imposed targeted tax cuts to boost growth, and most controversially, sought to modify public sector union contracts.   The result was the “Budget Repair Bill”, also known as Act 10.   The Act required public sector employees to contribute a portion of their income to their pensions (previously they contributed little or nothing to their pensions), pay 12 percent of their health care premiums (previously they paid 6 percent), and most public employee unions would be unable to collectively bargain for wages.  In addition, Act 10 eliminated the requirement for public sector unions to have their dues automatically deducted from their paychecks – instead, members would have to “opt in” to the union.
The results for both California and Wisconsin were significant; the fiscal fortunes for the respective Governors improved markedly.  Though the resurgence of the stock market in 2013 as well as the rebound in housing certainly contributed to the turnarounds, the reforms also had clear impacts.  California is expected to generate approximately a $4.7 billion surplus this year.  Wisconsin, a smaller state with lower revenues and expenditures, is expected to have a surplus of $977 million.

Thursday, December 19, 2013

Baltimore Sun: Maryland MUST consider scrapping its state #obamacare exchange.

The sound that you just heard was Martin O’Malley’s Presidential ambitions getting shot in the gut:
…the pace of enrollments is still far too low. If the [Maryland state] exchange is able to replicate its best weekday and weekend performance during every one of the 104 days between now and the end of the open enrollment period on March 31, Maryland will still only achieve about three-quarters of its goal of signing up 150,000 people with private coverage. The site may be better, but better isn’t good enough.
Under those circumstances, the question raised by Rep. John Delaney, a Montgomery County Democrat, about whether it would be better for Maryland to scrap its effort to build its own exchange and instead join the federal one has merit. Indeed, Gov. Martin O’Malley acknowledged on Monday that the option — and all others — remain on the table.
That’s a hard possibility for Governor O’Malley to acknowledge. Under his leadership, Maryland was one of the most aggressive states in the effort to build out its own exchange — a strategic decision that appears in retrospect to have involved no small amount of hubris and political ambition. Walking away now from all that effort and tens of millions in expenditures would be particularly embarrassing.
What is so astounding about this is that the Baltimore Sun is usually a reliable water-carrier for Democrats in Maryland: if you read the whole editorial, you immediately get struck by the fact that apparently in its world healthcare.gov is doing a whole lot better than it is in ours. If the paper is seriously discussing shutting down the Maryland state exchange anyway, then things are bad for the O’Malley administration.
Needless to say, this is also going to have an effect on the governor’s election next year: the Lt. Governor’s gubernatorial bid will probably get scuppered for certain if he has to preside over giving Obamacare back to the federal government. As I noted earlier this month… between this, underage twerking, and quixotic pot crusades, the Democratic primary is going to be insane.

Popular Posts