Better to Live in a Red State or Blue State?

California was the subject of both admiration and derision in the Intelligence Squared sponsored Oxford-style debate on the topic: For a Better Future, Live in a Red State. California’s former governor, Gray Davis, was one of the debaters defending blue states, while Chapman University professor and radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt spoke up for red states. These Californians were joined by New America Founder Michael Lind on the blue side of the table, and Wall Street Journal editorial writer Stephen Moore on the red.

Davis argued that blue states are better because they aim to give economic opportunity for everyone by investing in education and infrastructure, protecting the environment and providing a safety net. The former governor said if you look at the top ten states with the highest average income nine are blue states.

Hewitt countered that education in many blue states was subpar, pointing to California’s low ranking. He attributed that to red states’ innovation in education while blue states are in the grip of education special interests.

Statistics flew about the debate as both weapons and shields. There were plenty of comparisons between the economic leaders of the two categories, California and Texas.

Stephen Moore said while one million jobs have been lost in California, Texas has gained one million jobs over the same time period. Moore said the poverty rate in California was higher than Texas.

Yet, Lind argued that those moving to Texas were more likely low-income people undercutting the argument that high taxes chase out those with higher incomes.

Davis said that California leads in Fortune 500 company headquarters, manufacturing and agriculture and has more venture capital investment than all other states combined.

Citing the innovation of the Silicon Valley, Davis flatly stated: California is the future.

Via: CA Political Review

Continue Reading......

10 things Obamacare won’t tell you

1. “You might want to avoid signing up right away.”

In the offices of certain government officials and health insurance companies, a ticking countdown to a specific date was posted on the walls for months: Oct. 1. That was the day of the official ribbon-cutting for the exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act (commonly called Obamacare), when Americans began lining up for 2014 individual health insurance. But because the law’s future was uncertain until the Supreme Court upheld it in mid-2012, the exchanges had to scramble to get ready for opening day. Thirty-six states declined to set up their own exchanges for 2014 (each state has just one), so federal health officials had to do it instead — cramming years of work into a tight time frame. “Some people we’ve talked to will count it as a victory if the lights come on Oct. 1,” said Eric Johnson, a Columbia business professor and co-director of the university’s Center for the Decision Sciences, before the launch. (The small-business section of the exchanges in those 36 states won’t be able to accept online applications until November, the administration said, and some of the states running their own exchanges may also be running behind, having not yet announced when they will open to small employers.)

Indeed, grand-opening snafus ranged from jammed telephone lines and websites to technological glitches. “As much of a big deal as is made about [the launch] date, it is still a soft opening,” says Bill Melville, a market analyst for HealthLeaders-InterStudy, a research firm covering the exchanges. Lawmakers and even President Obama have acknowledged that the beginning has been more of a bumpy dress rehearsal, during which they’ve identified problems and deployed legions of software engineers to fix them.

Via: Market Watch

Continue Reading......

NY Times Writer Celebrates Single-Party Rule in CA

The New York Times news department has apparently become the official national propaganda machine of California’s liberals in control of state government, more-or-less in the same manner as the Soviet Communist Party’s newspaper Pravda served as the official organ of that one-party state in Russia during the Cold War. 

At least that’s the impression some better informed observers can come away with after reading the Time’s crack reporter Adam Nagourney’s rather unbalanced homage to the loveliness of one-party liberal rule in California’s state capitol these days.

​With a sharply uncritical eye, Nagourney’s front-page above-the-fold piece in last weekend’s newspaper gushes about the wonderful “gridlock ease” in state politics as a result of the Democrats achieving supermajority status in both Houses of the State Legislature and sweeping control of every single state constitutional office in the last election. “A parade of bill signings” (as if that’s a good thing) and legislative successes now characterize Democratic-dominated Sacramento according to the article, where legislators are working together to solve problems in moderation and harmony. This is in contrast to the awful “shutdown in Washington,” where presumably Republicans still have some influence.

But Nagourney goes further and speculates that the current “end-zone dance” by liberals in Sacramento may instead be attributable to enactment of a handful of measures affecting elections “intended to leach some of the partisanship” out of state governance. Before those changes, Nagourney reports that California “was the national symbol of partisan paralysis and government dysfunction.” But now, after changes to the method of district apportionment, loosening of term limits, and elimination of partisan primary elections, Nagourney suggests even some Republicans are gleeful.

“We’re seeing, almost against the odds, a more centrist legislature, at least when it comes to jobs and budget issues,” according to liberal Republican Sam Blakeslee. The new rules “gives Republicans the chance to break with their caucus on certain issues” added a former Schwarzenegger aide.

Via: California Political Review

Continue Reading....

$174K-Per-Year Rangel: ‘No Question About It' Taxpayers Should Help Him Buy Obamacare Plan

(CNSNews.com) - Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-NY) says that there is “no question” that members of Congress who are paid $174,000 a year are entitled to taxpayer-funded subsidies when they purchase health insurance in the Obamacare exchanges.

In response to questions posed by CNSNews.com on Capitol Hill Wednesday, Rangel said that he considers the subsidies part of Congress’ “overall compensation” even though ordinary Americans who earn $174,000 per year would have to have at least nine dependent children to qualify for the same subsidy if they bought insurance in the Obamacare exchanges.

CNSNews.com: "Earlier today, Congressman Barton on C-SPAN - who like most members of Congress makes $174,000 a year - said that he gets a $10,800 taxpayer subsidy for his health insurance, which most people who make his money would not ordinarily get in the private sector. Do you think members of Congress should be able to get that subsidy?"

Rangel: "We should not be able to get any subsidy that anybody with a life profession, who’d be getting from any other employer, and it’s my understanding that the government’s contribution is on square with the type of job we have in the private sector."

Via: CNS News

Continue Reading.....

Sen. Barrasso: Sebelius now 'laughingstock of America'

Sen. John Barrasso on Sunday added to his criticism of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ handling of the ObamaCare website, saying she is now the “laughingstock of America.”

The comments by Barrasso, R-Wyo., who last week called for Sebelius’ resignation, follow NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” comedy show in which the opening skit featured an actor pretending to be Sebelius talking about the site and its problems.

Barrasso is just one of dozens of congressional Republicans who have called for the resignation of Sebelius, whose agency has handled the development and Oct. 1 rollout of the site.

Thirty-three House Republicans, separately, sent a letter to President Obama urging him to ask for the resignation. They appeared to be joined Sunday in the call by Tennessee GOP Rep. Marsha Blackburn, who said Sebelius will testify on Capitol Hill this week "before she's out the door."

"The incompetence in building this website is staggering," Blackburn told "Fox News Sunday." 

Sebelius last week fought back against calls for her resignation, saying she doesn’t work for the people asking her to resign and that “no one is getting fired” over the glitches.

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading.....