I posted previously about ACORN, and how evidence is needed when making claims about the "evils" of this or that. And while I still believe that ACORN is an organization that needs to be reformed, it's not an evil organization. Rachel Maddow puts it best, which is why she's my favorite pundit. Ms. Maddow approaches every issue from a frame of "what is the truth" here, not "what is my point of view" and is one of the most sane talking heads out there. Who else could hear Pat Buchanan utter the phrase, "white people built this country" and still remain civil. Rachel can, and that's why her reporting on ACORN is so important.
At first blush it can seem like more of the usual, "sure it's bad, but you're worse" arguing. But the most important issue here is this: There is still no ACTUAL CRIME. On my previous blog I mentioned that there was never any actual voter fraud. In the current case, a crime was talked about, but nothing actually happened. Now this, even to me, seems like parsing, but when you consider Blackwater, KBR, and others, ACORN is like some guy who talked about committing a robbery and Blackwater is Dillinger (without the likability). But Rachel makes the point even better.
From youtube, because it doesn't seem to be on MSNBC.COM
For a party that always demands everyone be treated the same and no one deserves special treatment, Republicans sure don't put their money where there mouth is. Or, perhaps one can't talk with a mouth full of money.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Friday, September 18, 2009
ACORN: A teach-able moment
Acorn: a Teach-able moment
I was wrong, you were right. I want so much to modify this statement, but I shouldn’t. That’s what THEY do. The thing I want us to learn from this moment is that it’s O.K. to be proven wrong about something. Evidence is all I need to change my mind.
The evidence against ACORN, before these events came to light, was flimsy, circumstantial. Submitting a false voter registration is not the same as voter fraud. “Prosecutors believe ACORN workers were not scheming to permit illegal voting, but rather trying to get paid for work they didn't do.” (reference) It’s just evidence that sometimes people are lazy and don’t want to actually try to get voters to register, so they sit down somewhere and fill out the forms themselves. Since no one was actually going to vote, it doesn’t actually do anything. It may have inflated voter rolls, but not actual votes.
This new event, on the other hand, is horrible. And not just because these people believed some guy who looks like a Halloween version of a pimp, but because this is actual abuse, and is actually illegal. And the reason I know that, is evidence. This isn’t unsubstantiated rumors. This isn’t hearsay. This isn’t suspicion, this is evidence.
This is what’s lacking from every other criticism of Obama and Democrats in general. There are actual parts of the Health Care bill that deserve criticism. And the new Baucus plan is getting plenty of that. We can debate whether having everyone covered would reduce costs, since Hospitals would be paid for almost every procedure that is done. Costs would be reduced because records would be online, and centralized. We can argue those points, but no one is.
Evidence, facts, support of your position: that’s all we liberals are asking you to give us to convince us that you’re right or that we’re wrong. Or at least to get us to consider your side, if not agree with you. So the thing we can learn from ACORN, is that if you want to convince me, you better bring evidence.
I was wrong, you were right. I want so much to modify this statement, but I shouldn’t. That’s what THEY do. The thing I want us to learn from this moment is that it’s O.K. to be proven wrong about something. Evidence is all I need to change my mind.
The evidence against ACORN, before these events came to light, was flimsy, circumstantial. Submitting a false voter registration is not the same as voter fraud. “Prosecutors believe ACORN workers were not scheming to permit illegal voting, but rather trying to get paid for work they didn't do.” (reference) It’s just evidence that sometimes people are lazy and don’t want to actually try to get voters to register, so they sit down somewhere and fill out the forms themselves. Since no one was actually going to vote, it doesn’t actually do anything. It may have inflated voter rolls, but not actual votes.
This new event, on the other hand, is horrible. And not just because these people believed some guy who looks like a Halloween version of a pimp, but because this is actual abuse, and is actually illegal. And the reason I know that, is evidence. This isn’t unsubstantiated rumors. This isn’t hearsay. This isn’t suspicion, this is evidence.
This is what’s lacking from every other criticism of Obama and Democrats in general. There are actual parts of the Health Care bill that deserve criticism. And the new Baucus plan is getting plenty of that. We can debate whether having everyone covered would reduce costs, since Hospitals would be paid for almost every procedure that is done. Costs would be reduced because records would be online, and centralized. We can argue those points, but no one is.
Evidence, facts, support of your position: that’s all we liberals are asking you to give us to convince us that you’re right or that we’re wrong. Or at least to get us to consider your side, if not agree with you. So the thing we can learn from ACORN, is that if you want to convince me, you better bring evidence.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Rebuttal to Rebuttal
I loved Obama’s speech, but then again, I love Obama. So no surprise there. So to the fun part: The Republican Rebuttal
The rebuttal was obviously written before the speech was ever given, or Representative Boustany wouldn’t have started out with the lie (which Obama refuted in the first few minutes of HIS speech) that you will have to give up your healthcare and switch to a government program. Or, maybe I’m naïve and he would have said that anyway. Heck, if you listened to Obama’s speech you’d see that Lord …uhm…Rep. Boustany essentially wanted the same things Obama did, including “let[ting] families and businesses buy insurance across state lines”. That’s funny, that sounds a lot like the Health Exchange the bill proposes.
Before I started rebutted the Republican Health Care proposals I had to find them. Last night when I tried to go to healthcare.gop.gov it said “invalid host name”. It was as if even the internet knew that GOP and healthcare don’t mix. It’s now working, just not immediately after the speech.
I did eventually find the “common sense” reforms that some Republicans were offering, but it still seems that there is a disconnect between Republicans and the American people. I read through Roy Blunt’s suggestions (His was the first listed, but I’ll read through the others later, if for no other reason than to rip them apart like I’m about to rip Blunt’s), and it seems Republicans think that the Americans have the money to buy coverage right now, they just aren’t incentivized to do so. One of Blunt’s proposals:
“ Brings greater fairness to the tax code by extending tax savings to those who currently do not have employer-provided insurance but purchase health insurance on their own. This provision would provide an “above the line” deduction that is equal to the cost of an individual’s or family’s insurance premiums.
• Provides immediate substantial financial assistance, through new refundable and advanceable tax credits, to low- and modest-income Americans”
Alright, so I dish out (based on the cheapest individual plan I found so far) $150 a month and in April I’ll get that money back. Wait, no I won’t!
This is one of those ways that Republican’s always make things sound good. It’s a tax savings, woo hoo! However, this isn’t really money back. (or as I’m about to show much savings)
Let me explain. When you do your taxes, all the money that is withheld from your paycheck is considered your total payments.
After you adjust your income, you use a tax table to determine what the tax you owe is.
If your payments are greater than your liability, you get a refund, if not you owe. Based on Blunt’s plan, you reduce your Adjusted Gross Income, dropping you into a lower tax bracket so you get a bigger refund.
Let’s see how this works out for a single female with an adjusted gross income, before Blunt’s tax credit, of 30K. The taxes she owes are: 4108.75 (based on last year’s totals), she had withheld from her paycheck $4476 (using my totals from 2002, which is when my AGI was around 30K) so she gets a refund of $367.25.
Now with the Tax savings from Republican plan: (let’s let her pay my premium for a year, $1800) so we adjust her gross income by this amount. $28,200. Tax she owes: $3838.75. Refund: 637.25 a difference of $270. WOW! Sign me up. I’ll gladly pay $1800/year for an extra $270 on April 15th. Who wouldn’t? Oh, yeah…everyone. The above the line tax credit would get NO ONE to sign up. Thanks Roy Blunt, congressman from Missouri, you did absolutely nothing to solve the uninsured problem.
Though I will say that the second part might help as a “refundable& advanceable” tax credit would be like the Earned Income Credit which might actually help you afford coverage, depending, of course, on how they define “low- and modest-income Americans”. No confusion on the Democratic plan on who they’ll help: HR3200 says it will offer credits to people up to 400% of the Federal Poverty Level. (which means if you’re making 3x the FPL you get assistance: A family of 4 making $66,000/yr would get help.)
I encourage you to read Blunt’s proposal. It has many other items it claims will reduce costs or help people, but in actuality it won’t. Quick examples:
1. incentives to use health savings accounts
2. “Encourages (not mandates, which means, “we’re not going to force you, you do it if you want”) states to create a Universal Access Program by establishing and/or reforming existing programs to guarantee all Americans, regardless of pre-existing conditions or past illnesses, have access to affordable coverage. (short version: Encourages nothing)
3. Promotes prevention and wellness by giving employers and insurers greater flexibility to financially reward employees who seek to achieve or maintain a healthy weight, quit smoking, and manage chronic illnesses like diabetes. (Now I can legally give that hot blond a raise, instead of that fat dude)
4. Encourages the creation of health plan finders to provide patients with the tools to easily find the right health plan that best meets their needs. (Encourages again, you know I can encourage my dog to pee outside all I want, if I don’t take him outside, he’s going to pee on the carpet.)
5. Makes health care more convenient by eliminating bureaucratic red tape to expand access to Community Health Centers that are so critical to underserved areas, both in large cities and in rural America. (I can go to that Health Center, where the doctor charges me $80 upfront to tell me there’s nothing wrong, and I waited 2 hours to see, As opposed to a $25 co-pay to see a traditional doctor with insurance. Thank you Republican party.)
What all this shows me is that the Republican party has a fundamental misunderstanding of the problem, and what the average American needs. The Democratic plan would solve the problems of the affordability and coverage, the Republican plans won’t. Especially when the Democratic plan mandates that large Employers like Walmart (the largest employer of people in the US would have to offer affordable health insurance to their employees. That’s a lot of low-income workers getting coverage for the first time. The Democratic plan also sets limits on how high a premium can be, what better way is there to control costs than that!
I hope the speech at least rallys the Democrats if nothing else. We only need 51 votes in the Senate to pass the bill, we need 60 to stop a fillibuster. Hopefully the Blue Dog Democrats will at least prevent the fillibuster, and allow the majority to rule. At least that’s my hope.
jr.
The rebuttal was obviously written before the speech was ever given, or Representative Boustany wouldn’t have started out with the lie (which Obama refuted in the first few minutes of HIS speech) that you will have to give up your healthcare and switch to a government program. Or, maybe I’m naïve and he would have said that anyway. Heck, if you listened to Obama’s speech you’d see that Lord …uhm…Rep. Boustany essentially wanted the same things Obama did, including “let[ting] families and businesses buy insurance across state lines”. That’s funny, that sounds a lot like the Health Exchange the bill proposes.
Before I started rebutted the Republican Health Care proposals I had to find them. Last night when I tried to go to healthcare.gop.gov it said “invalid host name”. It was as if even the internet knew that GOP and healthcare don’t mix. It’s now working, just not immediately after the speech.
I did eventually find the “common sense” reforms that some Republicans were offering, but it still seems that there is a disconnect between Republicans and the American people. I read through Roy Blunt’s suggestions (His was the first listed, but I’ll read through the others later, if for no other reason than to rip them apart like I’m about to rip Blunt’s), and it seems Republicans think that the Americans have the money to buy coverage right now, they just aren’t incentivized to do so. One of Blunt’s proposals:
“ Brings greater fairness to the tax code by extending tax savings to those who currently do not have employer-provided insurance but purchase health insurance on their own. This provision would provide an “above the line” deduction that is equal to the cost of an individual’s or family’s insurance premiums.
• Provides immediate substantial financial assistance, through new refundable and advanceable tax credits, to low- and modest-income Americans”
Alright, so I dish out (based on the cheapest individual plan I found so far) $150 a month and in April I’ll get that money back. Wait, no I won’t!
This is one of those ways that Republican’s always make things sound good. It’s a tax savings, woo hoo! However, this isn’t really money back. (or as I’m about to show much savings)
Let me explain. When you do your taxes, all the money that is withheld from your paycheck is considered your total payments.
After you adjust your income, you use a tax table to determine what the tax you owe is.
If your payments are greater than your liability, you get a refund, if not you owe. Based on Blunt’s plan, you reduce your Adjusted Gross Income, dropping you into a lower tax bracket so you get a bigger refund.
Let’s see how this works out for a single female with an adjusted gross income, before Blunt’s tax credit, of 30K. The taxes she owes are: 4108.75 (based on last year’s totals), she had withheld from her paycheck $4476 (using my totals from 2002, which is when my AGI was around 30K) so she gets a refund of $367.25.
Now with the Tax savings from Republican plan: (let’s let her pay my premium for a year, $1800) so we adjust her gross income by this amount. $28,200. Tax she owes: $3838.75. Refund: 637.25 a difference of $270. WOW! Sign me up. I’ll gladly pay $1800/year for an extra $270 on April 15th. Who wouldn’t? Oh, yeah…everyone. The above the line tax credit would get NO ONE to sign up. Thanks Roy Blunt, congressman from Missouri, you did absolutely nothing to solve the uninsured problem.
Though I will say that the second part might help as a “refundable& advanceable” tax credit would be like the Earned Income Credit which might actually help you afford coverage, depending, of course, on how they define “low- and modest-income Americans”. No confusion on the Democratic plan on who they’ll help: HR3200 says it will offer credits to people up to 400% of the Federal Poverty Level. (which means if you’re making 3x the FPL you get assistance: A family of 4 making $66,000/yr would get help.)
I encourage you to read Blunt’s proposal. It has many other items it claims will reduce costs or help people, but in actuality it won’t. Quick examples:
1. incentives to use health savings accounts
2. “Encourages (not mandates, which means, “we’re not going to force you, you do it if you want”) states to create a Universal Access Program by establishing and/or reforming existing programs to guarantee all Americans, regardless of pre-existing conditions or past illnesses, have access to affordable coverage. (short version: Encourages nothing)
3. Promotes prevention and wellness by giving employers and insurers greater flexibility to financially reward employees who seek to achieve or maintain a healthy weight, quit smoking, and manage chronic illnesses like diabetes. (Now I can legally give that hot blond a raise, instead of that fat dude)
4. Encourages the creation of health plan finders to provide patients with the tools to easily find the right health plan that best meets their needs. (Encourages again, you know I can encourage my dog to pee outside all I want, if I don’t take him outside, he’s going to pee on the carpet.)
5. Makes health care more convenient by eliminating bureaucratic red tape to expand access to Community Health Centers that are so critical to underserved areas, both in large cities and in rural America. (I can go to that Health Center, where the doctor charges me $80 upfront to tell me there’s nothing wrong, and I waited 2 hours to see, As opposed to a $25 co-pay to see a traditional doctor with insurance. Thank you Republican party.)
What all this shows me is that the Republican party has a fundamental misunderstanding of the problem, and what the average American needs. The Democratic plan would solve the problems of the affordability and coverage, the Republican plans won’t. Especially when the Democratic plan mandates that large Employers like Walmart (the largest employer of people in the US would have to offer affordable health insurance to their employees. That’s a lot of low-income workers getting coverage for the first time. The Democratic plan also sets limits on how high a premium can be, what better way is there to control costs than that!
I hope the speech at least rallys the Democrats if nothing else. We only need 51 votes in the Senate to pass the bill, we need 60 to stop a fillibuster. Hopefully the Blue Dog Democrats will at least prevent the fillibuster, and allow the majority to rule. At least that’s my hope.
jr.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)