Keep an Eye on Obamacare

When my husband died a year and a few months ago, I was surprised and relieved to find that the health insurance of the Affordable Care Act really was affordable.  I figured I might just keep it as my private insurance when I became eligible for Medicare.

Wrong.

When you become age-eligible for Medicare, I have since found out, you cannot keep your Obamacare.  Your options become dizzying, and not in a good way.

I turn 65 in July, so for the past few months I have poured over Medicare books and stared at my computer screen for hours before becoming discouraged and just quitting for the day.  When I take it up again, the bad news starts to sink in, but it doesn't get any better.

But I am not here to whine.  I am here to bitch about the politics of health care for seniors.

I have had a hard time finding out what was available even a few years ago before Part D -- the prescription drug plan -- was enacted into law, so I can't tell you how much better Medicare was in years past.  But my guess is that the republicans -- with some Democratic compliance -- have been chipping away at Medicare for decades now.  Their preference, of course, is to privatize it entirely, but they are content -- as much as such a bunch of malcontents can be -- with destroying it one step at a time.

Let's start with the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003.  It may be that there was no drug coverage before 2003 (I can't even get that info on Wikipedia, so if any of you out there can enlighten us as to what people did for prescription drugs before W came into town and got his hands all over it I would be very appreciative.).  From 2003, the drug component -- Part D -- of Medicare proved to be a real boon -- for the pharmaceutical companies.  And there was a sadistic element to the bill that one has to admire.

First of all, it is purchased from private pharmaceutical companies, with the government subsidizing some of the cost.  But you are not required to buy this coverage.  HOWEVER, each year that you do not buy Part D coverage, your cost for when you do decide you need it goes up.  Each year.  It is called a "late enrollment penalty," and this is the way Medicare explains it:

 Medicare calculates the penalty by multiplying 1% of the "national base beneficiary premium" ($34.10 in 2016) times the number of full, uncovered months you didn't have Part D or creditable coverage. The monthly premium is rounded to the nearest $.10 and added to your monthly Part D premium.

I imagine the drug companies were tickled at those terms.  But wait!  There's more.

You may have heard of the "donut hole," which Medicare more civilly refers to as "the coverage gap."  Not civil either way you look at it.  This bizarre rule means that -- while you continue to pay your monthly premiums, and after your deductible and copays -- if your pharmaceutical needs are so great that your drug cost reaches $3,310 in 2016, your coverage stops  Then you pay out-of-pocket until you have paid $4,850, when your "catastrophic coverage" kicks in.  By that time, your life if not your health can truly be considered catastrophic, so at least that is aptly named.

I still have to stop and let my mouth drop open when I consider those two key provisions of this totally shitful law.

 After you have contemplated Medicare Part D for a few minutes, we can move on to the truly brilliant way the republican Congress has managed to screw up Medicare with barely a ripple of outrage.

Effective for new Medicare recipients, beginning this year, the monthly premium has gone up from $104.90 per month to the astounding $121.80.  And the deductible has gone up for new recipients from $147 to $166.  This is despite the fact that in 2016 there was no corresponding cost-of-living adjustment to social security benefits.  And there was no COLA because Congress determined that the cost of living had not gone up because gas prices went down.  And then proceeded to raise the cost of living by significantly raising Medicare costs.

Slipping this change in for new enrollees means that most of us just pay what we are told, without realizing just how much the cost has gone up.  By not requiring people already enrolled to pay the increase they manage to stem what would probably have been a shitstorm.

Here's something else to consider.  Our less-than-esteemed members of Congress don't have to deal with this at all.  In one of a very few exceptions, they are allowed to keep their government subsidized health care after they retire.  Pretty cool, isn't it?  As Fred Astaire said, "Nice work if you can get it."

I could go on about Medicare, but I really want to end with some thoughts about Obamacare.

I imagine that we are not allowed to keep Obamacare after we hit 65 because it is, so far, a truly affordable and comprehensive health insurance program.  The government pays steeply for this, but the savings are also tremendous and -- hey -- it actually keeps more people healthy.

Those republicans, fat and happy and with their own pretty damned good government health insurance, will lose sleep over the fact that the government is paying for other people to get good, affordable health care.  They will not rest until they have chipped away at Obamacare the way they have done with Medicare.  Over the years to come, as long as we let them, they will increase out of pocket costs and cut the government subsidy until, just as with Medicare, those who are living on a tight budget, will just have to go without needed health care while they pay mandated costs.

And even at that point our elected officials will resent the fact that we are at all able to continue to breathe their air.

So, forewarned, keep an eye on our Obamacare, and let's not let the right wingnuts put this over on us.  Again.

Killing Obamacare

I am outraged by assaults by the republicans on abortion rights and voting rights, but these are issues that are not personally going to affect me.  What I am personally concerned about these days is all the efforts that are going into killing Obamacare, still.  The latest assaults could well succeed.

Antonin Scalia, narcissist extraordinaire and the mouthpiece most damaging to the honor and credibility of the Supreme Court, is the most likely nail in the coffin of the Affordable Care Act.  He believes that in looking at legislation, intent should not be considered, even if it is verifiable.  The only consideration should be the exact words in the law.  Unless, that is, it goes against his own belief of what the law should be.

In this case, the whole of Obamacare is resting in the four words, "established by the state."  Despite the fact that no one involved in the debate or writing of the law believes that the intent was to exclude those states who refused to create an insurance exchange, Scalia will hold forth with the claim that those words are in the bill and must be followed.

Now that the ACA is the law of the land, and people have become very happy with having affordable insurance, the republican party is being a bit more sneaky about killing it.  They have already come up with an alternative that would continue the ACA until 2017, but only if the individual and employer mandates are discontinued.  Those extremists who believe tax subsidies should only go to wealthy corporations are proposing tax credits rather than subsidies.  So basically, if your income is so low you pay no taxes, voila, no tax credit.

Because I turn 65 in 2016, and it seems even the rabid republicans can't kill Medicare in that short a time, I let go a sigh of relief to hear that I could still have insurance even if Scalia gets his way.  But that doesn't make the problem a lesser one.  Killing the mandate kills the funding for the ACA.  What the republicans understand is that Obamacare only works if everyone participates.  And what they also understand is that most voters are mostly concerned with what affects them immediately.  They will be angry if they lose their insurance coverage.  But if the republicans can blame Obama and the Democrats, which they have done successfully for some time now, it is a win-win for them.  They can continue to be the anti-tax party and the freedom party.

What they understand all too well is that people don't care about health insurance until it affects them.  That is why forcing insurance companies to offer better plans only matters to those who had inadequate insurance that they needed.  Those who didn't need it are quite loud and angry about having to pay more for what amounts to better insurance.  And some that are quite stupid will yell about paying more even when they use that better coverage.

I worry about what the Supremes will decide in June.  As should we all.  Because I might be okay till I turn 65, but my kids might not.  They might end up having the same vulnerability to illness that too many of us Americans experienced up until Obamacare was passed.  It was a terrifying time, and the republicans, frankly, don't give a damn.  They can turn our fear and tragedy to votes.

What we can do at this point, is be educated about this.  And inform others.  Keep an eye on the Supremes, and be willing and ready to fight our South Carolina legislators, both state and federal, to preserve affordable health care.

...and If You Hate Obamacare...

I am one of those South Carolinians waiting with bated breath for the U.S. less-than-Supreme Court to rule on the Affordable Care Act.  It infuriates me that in this country, so many who are fortunate enough to have health care security will continue to rant and obstruct the program that has given so many of the rest of us the same.  The what's-in-it-for-me crowd is so blinded by greed and rage that they are unable to see how, in fact, making health care a right instead of a privilege has been a major factor in the dramatic upswing in our economy.

We have gone in a short time from an economy crippled by high unemployment, in which the younger job-seekers were shut out because we older folk had to hang on till we were eligible for Medicare.  We stayed with jobs we hated, jobs that hurt our aging bodies, jobs that often did not pay a living wage, so that we could cling to that health insurance that each year cost more and covered less.  Employers called the shots because they knew they had something we needed -- and it wasn't that barely living wage.

The health insurance industry, with a strong house advantage, never lost the insurance gamble.  They took in the young and healthy and priced out of the game anyone who actually might cause them to have to pay out.  The cost of people growing sicker and dying because of lack of adequate health care never showed up on the health insurance industry bottom line.

It is true that the health insurance industry made sure to take care of its own when reform became inevitable.  They made promises in exchange for the ability to make even more money.  They did this by allowing our government to subsidize those fat premiums.  And their lobbyists made sure the public saw the government as the enemy and not the industry itself.

So for pretty much the entirety of President Obama's terms in office, we have been listening to the uninformed parroting the vitriol against health care reform.  I've heard people complain about Obamacare in the same breath that they admitted they were now paying less for coverage.  They rage against "Obamacare" as though it is responsible for the global warming they deny and pretty much everything else (Melissa McCarthy as Tammy:  "Four dollars a gallon.  Thanks, Obamacare.").

It is also true that the ACA has only slowed the rise of health care costs.  Well, if Democrats had spines and Republicans had consciences, we just might be able to tackle the greed of the insurance industry.  I'll bet they could have enough profit without raping the all-too-willing government.  It might even be that regulation of the industry would result in a better product.

But we were left with the worst of capitalism, that bit that decries government involvement, unless of course, it is writing the checks.  If you look closely at your "affordable" health insurance, you will see that the government is picking up the tab for most of what continues to be a ginormous premium.  And yet you still have to pay all those cleverly named additional amounts when you actually need health care.

Yet people like me do have affordable health insurance.  For now.  Because even though all those idiotic votes to repeal in the US House, and despite states with governors with Tea Party dreams like ours, the federal government passed a law that has stood up.  Democracy, right?

But now that libertarian Koch darling, the Cato Institute (support with "the Gift of Stock") is leading the challenge to the ACA in the Supreme Court.  And the hook this time is four words in the law, which may eliminate federal exchanges in states like South Carolina, where we insist that the best way to help people without health insurance is to deny them health insurance.

I only just today learned that argument will be heard on Wednesday.  Most of us, happily insured, are totally uninformed on this fight for our very health and well-being.  I worry that while we look away, we will lose our health care security once again.  And ironically, a lot of those who are going to lose are the Obamacare haters.  Imagine that.

"Pain-Capable" Is Back and as Devious as Ever

Anti-abortion legislation is the bread-and-butter of the right wing.  Followers are rabid and loud.  My guess is it is a much smaller group than they seem, but they seem bigger because they just. won't. stop.  They show up at Planned Parenthood clinics, ACLU meetings, statehouses and Congress.

One might think that the right-wing, so concerned about governmental invasion of privacy in the Affordable Care Act, would be opposed to anti-abortion legislation that would control medical care and enforce it through invasion of privacy in those same medical records they have claimed to be protecting.  Or right-wingers that go ballistic (yeah, it's a pun but it's not that funny, is it?) over the suggestion of background checks much less registration of gun owners for fear they would invade the privacy of those who seek to wield deadly weapons would look askance at these bills.  Or how about those freedom-of-the-marketplace right-wingers who are now fighting to prevent private pharmaceutical and health insurance companies from offering birth control and abortion services?

These right-wingnuts are the same people who block attempts to feed the poor, including the pregnant and children, much less provide health care or adequate housing.  Life seems a little less precious to them when it comes to protecting it after birth.

Here in South Carolina, on Tuesday, an infant died.  Less than a month old, with a 17-year-old mother, who has been charged with murder and child felony abuse.  What social services might have prevented this tragedy?  And, what's worse, who among our lawmakers even cares?

So once again Congress and our own state legislators are force-feeding us the 20-week abortion ban, which, despite proven science, is misnamed the "pain-capable unborn child prevention act."  This is a win-win for these cruel and creepy lawmakers.  Whether the bill passes or not, they are allowed to act morally superior, get lots of publicity, and garner the support of the most vocal, persistent and vicious of us.

Neither new Senate leader Mitch McConnell nor our own Senator Tim Scott care about the suffering of the poor, the hungry children, the emotionally disturbed who are forced to bear children without a support system.  And here in South Carolina, during the holiday season, our own Wendy Nanney couldn't wait to introduce the 20-week abortion ban.  The national organizations are all over this, helping write the laws that allow others to invade the privacy and personal lives of women; they are there to corrode liberty in each state and nationally.

The thing is, we should also be all over this.  Not just because it seeks to impose government control over what should be women's private health care and reproductive decisions, although that is more than enough.  This bill speaks lies and deception from its very name.  First of all, "pain-capable" -- what the hell IS that?  Apparently, it means that a fetus is "capable" of feeling pain, if only...?  How about a fetus is capable of feeling pain if the mother does not get the proper nutrition?  Or a fetus is capable of feeling pain if a pregnant woman is not properly housed, or has to work in unsafe conditions, or has to breathe polluted air?

Actually, no, a fetus still is not capable of feeling pain under those conditions.  However, a pregnant woman is capable of feeling pain in those circumstances.  And if a pregnant woman brings her pregnancy to term, an actual baby is likely to feel pain with inadequate nutrition, health care, environment.  It seems that all those right wingnuts stop caring whether there is pain once a living being is actually capable of feeling it.

And actually, abortions at twenty weeks are very rare, and most often done in wanted pregnancies, when serious health problems arise.  To hear the wingnuts talk, you would think droves of women sit around pregnant for five months and then impulsively decide they'd rather not have that baby.  We need to yell bullshit to the false, deceptive presumptions that give these bills air each legislative season.

I for one get tired of fighting for the rights that women were guaranteed when we had a Supreme Court that considered individuals and not their own personal biases.  I hate to think about it, because there may well come a day when our daughters will be denied those rights, in fact, have been gradually losing them over the past decades.  But, you see, those on the other side love nothing better than that good old self-righteous fight.  If they lose, they lose nothing, and it feels good to bash others.  And if they win, they will be smug and smarmy about it for awhile, and then redraw that line so we have to fight them or lose another freedom.

So we need to be louder, and more persistent, and angrier than all those who are once again standing up to defend their right to take away a woman's freedom and privacy.

Racism and Reverberations

First thing I want to do (as do we all) is vent.  The republican party has had big balls and they have been bouncing them around since Obama's landslide six years ago.  We all laughed when Boehner said, "Hell, no," but it worked, and it has worked ever since.  Today I heard Michael Steele say that Obama should just try to approach the new Congress, nicely, regarding immigration.  Really???  Did this image occur to anybody else:

Whenever they say "hell, no" they reinforce their power and confidence, and when we waffle, we are seen as unsure of what we think will work and maybe even a little shady.  It began with health care when Obama backed off from the public option; our Blue Dogs added a few nails to the coffin when they failed to throw their support behind the Affordable Care Act.  And with a few exceptions we have been seen as cowards that will do anything to survive ever since.

Worse is the slurs and insults directed at the President by the opposition, and the Democratic flight to safety in response.  When Bill Clinton was kicked around, we can say he gave Newt and his gang the ammunition, not only by his sexual misadventures, but by dancing around the truth and outright lying about everything from not inhaling to whether he had sex with that intern.  Barack Obama has had no such dark deeds in his background; he has an enviable family life and was frank about past casual drug use and even his cigarette habit.  Unable to dig up any hidden bodies, the idiot brigade resorted to making up racist nonsense about a Kenyan birth.  But once they did, the noise reverberated for years.  The racism that has accompanied this president's years in office has been overt more often than not, and barely masked at other times.  And the Democratic Party predictably failed to stand together confidently to back our President.

And we can thank the media from both sides and in the middle for helping to keep the echo going.  Anything for a story.  Anything, that is, but the issues.

Speaking of which, if we were to talk honestly about the issues, this president has done some heroic things against great odds, including the auto bailout, handling terrorists with intelligence and calm and making gains with sustainable energy that have been too little publicized.  He has also made some serious mistakes by siding with Wall Street over Main Street, stepping up deportation of undocumented immigrants and excessive border control,  and  giving the NSA a free hand with domestic spying and failing to protect whistleblowers.  But there has not been a president who has done great things who has not also shown a tragic flaw, as did LBJ with civil rights juxtaposed alongside the Vietnam war.

Sadly, we have been hearing the media talk about Obama's unpopularity for some six years, almost through his re-election.  We have all believed it because it has been said so often by so many.  Rather than simply and rationally disagree on certain of the issues, we Democrats have allowed ourselves to reject the President on the whole, to the delight of the republican party.  And I have to say, it has not just been us red staters.  And the midterm election disaster was what we ended up with. 

Barack Obama is a great statesman and an admirable politician.  I believe that if he were to run a third term, he would once again be re-elected, and he could do it on all the good things he has done during his time in office.

So it was tragic when Alison Grimes, once running ahead of McConnell, chose to refuse to admit that she voted for Obama.  So many ways she could have said he was and is the best man for the job, although she disagreed with him on energy and would always vote what was best for her constituents.  Instead, she bumbled and looked embarrassed.  The media ran with it, and the republicans did not need to do anything other than look smug.

And the absence of the President during the campaign -- noted often and loudly by the media -- was what was wrong with these midterm elections.  Yes, there are other factors that affected the outcome, and I would like to talk more about those at another time.  But had we stood proud and tall with the leader of the country, who has after all, done some amazing things with a country that his predecessor had pretty nearly flushed down the toilet, we would no doubt be on the other side of history these next two years.

Two Smart Candidates ... and Tim

This is what the debate for South Carolina US Senator was not:  it was not slick (despite the matching suits worn by Tim Scott and moderator Charles Bierbauer).  There were not a lot of fancy words or high-minded philosophies.  After all, this was South Carolina.  Instead, the responses by all three candidates were predictable, and if we did not know the candidates, left us with very little information other than how comfortable each was in front of the camera.

It turns out that the women, Independent candidate Jill Bossi and Democratic candidate Joyce Dickerson, shared similar views on most topics.  Both are strongly pro-women, pro-choice, both in favor of strengthening benefits for seniors and veterans.  They also (along with Tim) threw out the ever-popular "secure our borders" and "improve education" because who would not?

If you know Joyce at all, you are probably aware that she is not a formidable public speaker.  She has the tendency to occasionally mix up words.  But her understanding of politics and her democratic beliefs are strong ones.  I can see her in the Senate fighting for the middle class, as well as for those who are struggling to earn a living wage, and for children with inadequate health care and nutrition, and students who are unable to compete because of our government's unwillingness to commit to education.

If the race had been between Jill Bossi (I) and Tim Scott (Tea Party Republican), Bossi would get my vote easily.  But what concerns me about Bossi is her emphasis on her willingness to compromise, to find the middle ground, in an America where there have been too many compromises to an uncompromising right-wing.  Our middle ground is far right of where it was in the 60's and 70's, and our environment, our health care, our education, our infrastructure, have all suffered the results.  Bossi emphasizes her business creds, and I fear that once in Congress she would be all too eager to lean toward the big business dollars and lobbyists that would come her way.  Jill Bossi says she wants to institute a "fair, flat tax," a term that sends chills up and down my spine.

Tim Scott, on the other hand, for all his grooming by the big guns that control him, when left to his own devices, will talk about pretending to work alongside "everyday people," clueless as to the condescension.  Right from his introductory comments, he talks about wanting to be in the US Senate so he can spend time with his family, and help build a future for his nephew.  Clumsy, maybe, but he pretty much lets us know with this Freudian slip that the rest of us "everyday people" don't feature much in his consciousness.  Matter of fact, please go to C-Span and listen to his introductory comments, because I just can't do them justice.  You really do want to hear him say in regards to Washington, that if it weren't for relatives, people wouldn't like him at all.

But let's please get back to the issues.  Actually, not the issues, just the platitudes, because that is what Tim is all about.  Somebody invented something called an "Opportunity Agenda" for Tim, and if you listen to him talk about it, you will walk away wondering just what he's going to do to create all this opportunity.  Because he won't tell you.  The answer to the economy is creating "certainty" and "stability" in the workplace.  Now you know this doesn't mean certainty and stability for the workers.  This is just Tim Scott bullshit for cutting corporate taxes and deregulation.  Which has continued to drag us into the dark ages since Ronald Reagan's handlers first packaged it for the American people.

Of course, Scott called upon the evil Obamacare and was even told to bring up Dodd-Frank, as in "Dodd-Frank and Obamacare" as reasons why our country was failing.  Like Mark Sanford debating the cardboard Nancy Pelosi, this is a matter of throwing out red meat to the snarling and brainless base.  I am hoping that more than a few of us heard him and said, "say what???"  Apart from just the stupid pat phrases, there were the bizarre "facts," like that our corporate tax rate is ten points higher than the rest of the world.  Or that through Nikki Haley's leadership Spartanburg and Greenville are at nearly 100% employment.  And responding to the comment about his missed votes, that he has a "99% voting record" -- whatever that means.

Scott goes on to say that he "voted to reduce interest rates on student loans," which plain old made my head spin around.  So I looked it up.  HR 4628, prettily called the "Interest Rate Reduction Act," also repeals parts of the Affordable Care Act...

  establishing and appropriating funds to the Prevention and Public Health Fund (a Fund to provide for expanded and sustained national investment in prevention and public health programs to improve health and help restrain the rate of growth in private and public sector health care costs). Rescinds any unobligated balances appropriated to such Fund.  

This bill had something in it for nearly everybody to hate, from those on the right that opposed keeping student loan rates low, to those on the left who opposed this sneak attack on essential parts of the Affordable Care Act.  In fact, the only group that officially supported the bill was the Christian Coalition of America.  Which made it good enough for Tim Scott.  Funny, though, how Scott made it sound like it was the student loan part of the bill he was supporting and not the strangling Obamacare part....

Oh, my, I wish I was a better writer, I could write a comedy and a tragedy on Tim Scott.  What's most important about the Senate debate for me, however, is that I got to hear just how lame he is next to the two smart women running against him.  I also had the chance to hear Jill Bossi, who was well-spoken and has lots of good ideas.  But not enough.

Joyce Dickerson may not have had time to rehearse for the debate because she appears to be spending every moment of her waking day running to different parts of the state to introduce herself to voters.  She is running on a shoestring, and doesn't have the staff to prep her and polish her.  But I prefer my candidate without the polish.  She is knowledgeable and caring, and she is not in it for the money or the power.  She is not likely to sell us out for business interests, and she understands the difference between healthy compromise and caving in.

So I will continue to support Joyce Dickerson, and I hope you will as well.

Joyce Dickerson

for US Senate

Kudos South Carolina

Well, it's over.  It's been an agonizing legislative year here in South Carolina.  Yes, there were great comic moments like the debate about the Columbian mammoth and the age of the earth.  And we all appreciate the great effort put into all the new laws reinforcing our gaming and fishing rights.  But we spent much of the past session trying to protect South Carolinians from the woman-hating power-mad religious right, while at the same time fighting to provide our citizens with health care and better than minimally adequate education.  Given all that, I feel the need to do something I rarely do:  brag about our success.

If you look at our neighbors, all those fellow "red states" and even purple and blue states, you'll see that we've all been bombarded with right wing-nuts with pockets full of money who fund all those "conservative" -- i.e. radical -- social issues that get their angry and ignorant constituents out to vote.  But we fought and I am proud to say we did NOT have any crazy personhood, pre-owned, pre-born baby bills pass in South Carolina.

We came so-o-o-o close to bringing our sex education curriculum into the 21st century, only to be stopped at the last second by one narcissistic and rather stupid state senator.

We attempted to pass meaningful marijuana legislation and equality legislation for the LGBT members of our community.  We fought for veterans, seniors, children and parents, the working poor, the unemployed and underemployed, and those who are not protected by unions.  We fended off drug testing legislation and warrantless searches of our electronic devices.  We went up against the bullies in the gun lobby, and while we weren't able to keep them from allowing guns in bars and restaurants, we continue to fight that battle, and we did succeed against crazy open carry legislation -- hey, we could be Georgia, but, I'm proud and relieved to say, we are not.

We, and by this I mean you, worked so hard to get some good bills passed, but we also kept some real stinkers from becoming law.  I was so impressed with the work that so many groups and individuals put into showing up and fighting, day after day and week after week.

Our Truthful Tuesday movement brought much needed civil disobedience back to Columbia, with brave individuals getting arrested for blocking traffic at the State House to protest the attempt to nullify the Affordable Care Act, and to bring attention to the need to accept federal money for Medicaid expansion.  A stupid bill that might have passed into law and would only have been overturned by the courts was kept from wasting our time and resources.  The protests got state and national attention.  Medicaid expansion hasn't happened yet, but it will.  This group is not giving up.

Here's a group whose existence I only recently became aware of:  Tell Them SC is a grassroots advocacy network that works tirelessly towards bringing appropriate and much needed sexual education to our teens as well as fighting for accessible birth control and making information and vaccine available to prevent cervical cancer.  I was amazed at the intensive effort that went into promoting legislation that would provide kids with better health care and better education.  They worked to let us know what was on the table, who to call or email, and when, so that our legislators wouldn't forget we were there.

And our amazing South Carolina ACLU has been there in Columbia, testifying and fighting for our constitutional rights.  Voting rights, reproductive rights, the rights of immigrants and members of our LGBT community.  If you regularly read our newspapers, you will see very frequently commentary by the director of the ACLU.  If you attend legislative hearings you will hear her speak to all those issues and many more.  The ACLU has been an integral part of our effort in beating back bad legislation and promoting bills that guarantee our individual rights.

And, you know, there are others, too many to mention.  We may not be a blue state, but you are all out there fighting to protect us from the uninformed and mean-spirited, who are funded by those with deep pockets and a hunger for more power.  We don't see our national Democratic party supporting us much.  And some of our Democratic elected officials here in South Carolina sometimes are too intimidated to stand up and fight for us.  But we have these amazing people who are here and are not afraid.  They won't compromise away our rights, and they won't let those rights be traded in the night.  They will fight, they will be loud, they will be heard, and they aren't going away.

Thank you all.

The Benghazi Plot

Things have gotten pretty grim around here.  Unemployment is down, the federal budget deficit is shrinking, and Obamacare is working.  Oh, and Hillary may be running for president in 2016.

What's to be done?

The answer:  Benghazi.

While even Kentucky has failed to buy into the evils of the Affordable Care Act, here in South Carolina you can't hardly say a friendly hello before someone tells you about that bad old Obamacare.  That's the result of the never-ending republican election strategy.  Years of repeating the same lies about the ACA, the "death panels," the threats of losing your favorite docs, socialism and government control, long lines and higher prices.  All that repetition actually works, especially when you have an uninformed middle class that has been hit hard in the economy.  It has gotten my fellow South Carolinians as fired up and ready to go as any Obama oratory.

And while they were hyping the evils of health care for all for the hurting middle class, they got the religious right cranked up with regularly scheduled anti-abortion votes in the House of Representatives.  In 2011, they introduced 44 anti-abortion bills.  Of course, there was no chance of getting them passed, but if the GOP understands anything it is how to get their base riled up -- and by the way, distracting us all from unemployment and corporate (and Wall Street) crime.

After the horrific shooting of twenty children and six adults in Newtown, Connecticut, in December of 2012, to our amazement, the republican party turned its attention to increasing the freedom of gun owners to bear weapons.  This became the cause that fired up the paranoid redneck population which has resulted in state laws permitting guns in bars and restaurants here in SC, to Georgia, which now has a "guns everywhere" law that "guards against tyranny."  Except, of course, for the tyranny of those nuts with deadly weapons.

So is it any surprise that those far thinking right wingnuts should be setting their sights (as in cross-hairs) on Hillary, who was in charge during the Benghazi attack?  If they can get their uninformed but flammable constituents to parrot the word "Benghazi" the way they have for "Obamacare" they will be well on their way to a strategy for 2016.

It would do us well to recall, however, that this strategy has not worked so well against Barack Obama.  They tried it when he was candidate Obama, and for a couple of years thereafter, with the Kenya birth certificate nonsense.

And since then, regardless what new conspiracy the right wing is pushing, Obama has moved forward.  In fact, in the Senate in 2012 the Democrats picked up two seats.  Had it not been for the nefarious redistricting done after the last census, Democrats would have won House seats, having won a nation-wide plurality in all House elections.

I don't think Hillary is quaking in her boots over Benghazi.  The shame is that one of South Carolina's own is proudly chairing the committee to perpetuate the question of whether Benghazi can lead to republican victories in 2014 and 2016.  Has the country not laughed at us enough?  I admit, I will miss the bizarre rages of Darrell Issa but I am confident that he will have plenty more conspiracy theories with which to waste time.

The further shame is that people who don't know or care where Benghazi is, people who waved the American flag in support of the Bush administration lies that led to the war that resulted in so many deaths, are pretending to really care about the four American fatalities in the Benghazi attack.

Since the only alternative to conspiracy theories, however, is to talk about issues like the economy, corporate greed, and the environment, you can rest assured that in these parts you won't be able to swing a dead cat without hitting someone muttering about Benghazi, at least through the next couple of elections.

Brave New World

I just heard our own Mark Sanford bloviating on the House floor.  He likes to twist things around, he does.  He called Paul Ryan's proposed budget "brave."  Okay, are you all done doing your double-take?  Because I'm still stunned by the man's nerve.  I'm talking about Ryan.  Sanford's just an idiot.

Jim Clyburn spoke just before Sanford.  Talk about pearls before swine.  He listed all the things that would be cut from Ryan's budget.  For example, seniors would have to pay more for medication -- if you were happy with the donut hole of the Bush prescription boondoggle, it's back.

We know about Paul Ryan's program, because the republicans have been trying to cram it down our throats for years.  Children, that other group of takers, will be denied school programs, food and nutrition programs, health programs.  Working parents as well as the unemployed will see safety nets cut out from under them; in fact, in Ryan's (and Sanford's) ideal world, there would be no minimum wage, no labor regulations at all.  Remember Newt Gingrich's plan to put poor kids to work as school janitors?  And forget about affordable colleges.  In fact, let these guys have at education so that they can privatize it -- more profit for their corporate buddies, less actual quality education for the dollar.

You might wonder what is "brave" about the Paul Ryan budget.  Maybe Sanford's talking about having to face us all after he's cut out support for basic human needs -- what they derisively call "entitlements."  You heard Ryan's former running mate Romney:  he was just appalled that people think they, as Americans, should expect food, a roof over their heads, health care.

I guess it must be "brave" to suggest to 47 percent of the people whose lives you govern that they are unimportant.  Unmotivated.  Undeserving.  Imagine thinking, much less stating, that some of us deserve better schools based on what we earn, that some children should be denied health care and nutrition, that losing a job when the rich have run the economy into the ground is no concern of the government.  Imagine not giving a damn about people who struggle every day to do right by their families.  Quoting Ayn Rand and her mythological capitalist American hero as though it was anything other than right-wing fantasy.

That's Paul Ryan.  Don't even get me started on Mark Sanford.  This is the man who stole from the state government because funding laws were not meant for him.  Who walked away from the governor's office without being responsible enough to let his staff (or his wife) know he was off on an assignation.  Who is happy to let the government pay for any-damn-thing he can get away with, and then deride social programs as pork.  This is the man who just called Paul Ryan's budget "brave."

We need to make lists, as did Clyburn today, extensive lists, and let everyone know what they will lose if Paul Ryan and Mark Sanford get the government they have dreamed of.  Because there is something in there that affects all of us.  We need to document each benefit that will be lost, because for example, just saying Obamacare will be cut is not the same as telling people they will no longer be protected if they have a pre-existing condition, they will no longer be able to keep children on their health plans till they are 26, they will no longer have free preventive health care.

And we need to tally up the huge costs of Paul Ryan's budget as he continues to give fistfuls of money to the biggest and wealthiest corporations, tax breaks to billionaires. And does away with regulations that will end up costing us dearly whenever a bridge collapses or a food-borne pathogen creates an epidemic of illness or Wall Street is allowed to play wildly with mortgages and retirement funds.

If Paul Ryan and Mark Sanford are allowed to enact their plans for the future of America, then we will truly see a brave new world.

Will the Democrats Stand Up?

West Wing spoke to many of us over a decade ago.  I was so in thrall to its message that I actually went out and bought the entire series, and determined that someday I would start from the beginning and do it again.

About a year ago, I decided the time was right.  I have been watching one episode a week now, and find to my surprise/dismay, the same political games and the same attacks on the same groups, with the exception of the recent gains made in marriage equality and marijuana legalization.  Women are still fighting to keep our reproductive freedom and privacy; African Americans' right to vote is still under attack; the same programs that make some small dent in the struggles of the poor are being picked at by corporate and right-wing vultures.

So when Bruno Gianelli, campaign organizer for Bartlett's

re-election campaign said this:

  

I threw my bowl of popcorn to the floor and stood up and cheered.

In spite of the fact that the republican party has become more destructive with each passing year, and in spite of the fact that the goal of these right-wingnuts is to take from the poor and middle class to make the wealthy even richer and more powerful, I am hearing Democrats talk about the possibility -- no, the likelihood -- that we could lose the US Senate.

Even as more of us benefit from the Affordable Care Act, democrats, rather than take this as the cue to turn moderate republican voters (most republicans) to our cause, are tip-toeing around the fact that this program just might be a success.

Here in South Carolina, we support democrats who do not support women's reproductive rights or LGBT freedom, who do not openly support President Obama, or the Affordable Care Act, or Food Stamps, who incredibly vote in favor of allowing guns in bars.  Our candidates will continue to force us to live in a right-to-work-cheap state because they just have no clue as to how anyone could be helped by a union.

That's it, really.  Too many democrats running for office that appear to be clueless about what it is to be a Democrat.  It's almost as though the thought process is, "Gee, there's already a republican running, and I really want to win this election, so I may as well run as a democrat."

I'm with Bruno Gianelli on this.  I've had it with politicians expecting me to vote for them because I'm a Democrat and, well, they are running as democrats.  Not good enough.  If you want my vote, start now by acting like a Democrat.  That means fighting for individuals who may not have the financial clout, or may be in the minority, or may be too beaten down to get out and vote for you.

You never know.  If our candidates fearlessly run as the opposing party, they may actually be heard by young men and women who really haven't seen a reason to turn out and vote -- yet.  Those poor people that are so easily dismissed may be staunch supporters if they think you might honestly make a difference in their lives.

Our state and county democratic party needs to try a lot harder to invite people in, and to get them heard.  They need to stop looking for the safe candidate and begin to look for real Democrats.  They need to stop thinking that cheerleading is going to convince voters that their candidate is going to make a difference.

Barack Obama has had a tough uphill slog.  I have been among his critics.  But I have to say that, once he decided to talk and act like a Democrat he began to get things done.  If he were starting his presidency today, knowing what he knows now, he just might be pushing for universal health care.  He is not equivocating about raising the minimum wage, although shamefully, some congressional democrats are starting to do that dance.  His eventual support for marriage equality has helped in the progress that has been made.  He is fighting for the vast numbers of people who have been imprisoned for minor drug possession.

He's not perfect, but he's certainly given our politicians some coattails that they can hold on to.  They just need to stop cowering in the corner.  As Bruno Gianelli said:

"No more.  Let's have two parties."

Death to the Death to Obamacare Bill

Amid the flurry of anti-abortion legislation making its distasteful way through the South Carolina House and Senate, there was the Obamacare Nullification bill.  I am happy to say that this week the bill died in the Senate.

There has been so much hot air about the Affordable Care Act and the Medicaid Expansion in particular, that it was a pleasant surprise to see so many Republicans bail on it.  I wondered why, and came up with a few ideas.

It seems that the prevalent opinion is that amendments were added that were so icky even some original supporters could no longer back it.  For example, the bill took on an amendment that would forbid anyone in government from helping someone sign onto Obamacare.  It placed such burdensome restrictions on the Navigators -- mostly volunteers -- who help people sign up for health care, that it would likely end the navigation program, which was certainly its intent.  Such additions were so extreme that the Obama administration would likely have immediately pursued a lawsuit.

Another thought I had is that of late there has been a lot of attention focused on this bill, particularly the Medicaid Expansion part of it.  From The Daily Show interview of a Haley lackey ("So your state can't afford to pay 0 dollars?") to a bombardment of facts that made it clear that not accepting government funding for Medicaid was just dumb.  The end-runs Haley et al tried to do in order to say that they had an alternative to Medicaid were all costly and far less effective.

And we had our Truthful Tuesday activists in Columbia, each week, refusing to let this happen quietly in the Senate chambers.  Carrying signs, talking to Senators, and even being arrested in an act of civil disobedience by blocking the roadway to the Statehouse.  Not just once, but each week.  Making news.  And I believe that the knowledge that this was not going to go away may have made some of our legislators just a bit more reasonable.

Finally, it just might be that a few of our legislators are taking advantage of some of the aspects of the Affordable Care Act themselves.  Even access to contraceptives.  Certainly the abolishment of the pre-existing condition clauses that kept so many people from getting health insurance, or thrown off a plan when they needed it most.  And maybe a few legislators have kids under age 26 who are now on the family plan.

I wouldn't go overboard and say that more legislators are seeing the light as far as providing health care to the poor, but at least where they have something to gain, it looks like Obamacare just may be here for awhile.  Even in South Carolina.

Obamacare -- Good News and Lies

Horrors!  The Congressional Budget Office report states that people are leaving their jobs because of Obamacare.  The champagne was overflowing yesterday as the republicans celebrated the proof of just how we lazy Americans would quickly begin to suck on the government teat when given cheap -- read "affordable" -- health insurance.

While employers have been twirling their mustaches and  threatening to let workers go if Obamacare was put into place, only some of us were aware of just how many of us have been stuck in jobs just so we could get health insurance.  And if our employer wasn't providing health insurance, we were stuck in badly paying jobs -- often more than one -- with horrendous hours and no benefits in an attempt to keep our heads above water without health insurance.

Well, fact is, now we have some options.  Some of us can quit our job to go back to school or train for better jobs.  Some of us can stay home to take care of our children or parents.  And some of us can quit jobs that were physically hurting us, many older people who were trapped until age 65 when they could be insured under Medicare.

All of the above absolutely infuriates those who have kept wages low because they always had a line of applicants willing to do anything to make ends meet.  Just listen to the whining from those who will now have to raise their standards if they want a work force.

Of course, it is a different story that is being put forth by the right wing, those corporate patsies who themselves have never had to worry about medical bills since they are graced with taxpayer covered insurance plans.  According to them, we suddenly have no work force.  People are bailing out so they can watch TV and drink margaritas, I guess.

In actual fact, the result of people choosing to leave their jobs is that jobs will be created for those who have been seeking employment.  We seem to be looking at a reduction in unemployment (and payment of unemployment benefits), a healthier and younger work force, and maybe even healthier retirees.

This is exactly why the right wing has been doing everything in its power to kill Obamacare before it could take a breath.  That is, because it works.  Suddenly the power base has somewhat shifted, and there is fear and loathing in corporate America.

But just as every progressive movement, from raising the minimum wage to the implementation of Social Security, has begun with wails and accusations of anti-Americanism, fist thumping and threats, this tantrum too shall pass.  As more people successfully enroll in health insurance, its opponents will search for other misinformation and attempts to scare us.  When it becomes apparent that in fact Americans are not quitting their jobs to live off the government, the muttering will turn to something else.

But the fact is that as more people are able to afford to be insured, more people are free to leave work for better jobs or to live healthier lives, fewer people will be on unemployment rolls, and employers will have to offer better wages, benefits and work conditions in order to staff their businesses.

And that's what is called a good start.

Obamacare -- The Fight Goes On... And On...

Here in South Carolina, we do seem to be doomed to continue to fight the Civil War.  Since President Obama moved into the White House, this has taken the form of nullification laws, which basically say, "We don't want your dadgum gub'mint."

Remember those Tea Party town halls back in 2010 when the Affordable Care Act was just a bill?  Those rousing town halls in which the most violent and irrational attacks were played and replayed to the benefit of that new group of radical right-wing nutcases?  Where pro-bill senators were shouted down and wheelchair ridden proponents were told to just shut up?  Here are a few moments from this glorious episode in our history: 


Rather than being embarrassed, the Tea Party saw this as a glowing success story.  And here in SC, legislators unable to pass nullification in spring of this year, have decided that town halls are the way to relive that glorious past, win that ole War against Northern Aggression, and defeat even scarier Tea Party challengers on the right.

Beaufort County Tea Partier Tom Davis is hosting nullification town halls throughout the state, hoping to relive those glory days and make life safe once again for... well, at least for Tom Davis.

Here in Charleston, the event will be held Wednesday, November 6, at 6 p.m., at the North Charleston City Hall.

This time could be different.  For one thing, we know a few things we can get from the Affordable Care Act, and in fact have already benefited from.  The big items include:  no longer being disqualified due to real or fictitious pre-existing conditions, being able to keep a child on a family plan until age 26, and covered-with-no-co-pay preventive care, including birth control (which truly is preventive, folks).

In the true take-no-prisoners -- even if we have to shoot ourselves in the foot -- spirit of the confederacy, we've lately heard a bunch of myths, i.e. lies, and distortions about Obamacare, and I'd like to address that here.

1.  There has been a lot of outrage by people whose health care plan has been dropped, or whose premiums have gone up, since the inception of the ACA.  I don't know where y'all have been, but here in the US, being dropped from plans is not a whole new thing.  And premiums going up?  You really just woke up and realized your premium was going up?  How do you think we got to be #1 in health care costs?

2.  Those young people don't need health care; why should they be saddled with paying for everybody else?  I've got more news for you.  Not only are young people young, they are more likely to be more active, and yes, take more risks than us more mature folks.  And do you have any idea what the cost of a simple broken leg is these days?  So let's not pretend that young people have less need to insure their health than the rest of us.  Statistically it may happen less, but in the real world it can certainly happen.  And here's another news flash:  responsible young adults are all too happy to have health insurance, because they understand the risk of being uninsured and the cost of health care.

3.  Why should people pay this tax (excuse the four-letter word) for something they don't want?  Okay, let's start with paying taxes for a bridge you aren't ever going to cross, and for all those business incentives that corporations claim they need to exist, and then we can end with the Iraq War.  And all the government funded programs in between.  That's what taxes are, and that's what they do.  With a better Congress, we might be paying less for subsidies to big profitable corporations and more to build roads and schools.  But that's another whole soapbox.

So when you go to that Town Hall on Wednesday, be sure to make those points, and all the other good ones you can think of.  Things are different now, and we won't be shouted down.

God: the Default Option

October is a scary month, and I mostly revel in it.  I read scary books and watch scary movies.  And when I turned on the TV yesterday, there was the Values Voter Summit.

The strangely named event is brought to us by Tony Perkins -- no, that Tony Perkins...

...was making an honest living.  This Tony Perkins heads the Family Research Council, one of those groups that make you want to shower after you have been exposed to their sick ideas.

They are anti-gay, anti-abortion, and anti-spending their wealth and our tax dollars on the poor.  They bludgeon us with their faith, so that we don't notice their hypocrisy.  And this weekend they are in full wrath of god mode, the wrath being hurled against, naturally, the Affordable Care Act.

And there he was, our own Tim Scott, doing his poor Martin Luther King routine.  I had heard he was a powerful speaker, but I was misinformed.  He was well-rehearsed.  His recitation of the words of the wondrous Amazing Grace in those halls of greed were a shameful manipulation, as was his story -- oft told, I'm sure -- of his rebirth in God.  The twisting of Christian values to the cause of power looked plain old wrong coming from the mouth of a South Carolinian who I believe was raised to believe in good works.

The final twisting was the requisite attack on Obamacare.  And this was impressive, because he was given fake numbers to read, like "three trillion dollars to insure five percent of the population."  Not only were his "facts" twisted lies, but brought home the reality that this is not at all about providing health care to those without.

A comment that was so odd that he may have inserted it himself was in the "if you earn a dollar you spend a dollar" fiscal responsibility segment.  That is, that you should give 10 percent to the church.  Hmm, why would you do that?  I don't think it's to lay gold at the feet of God.  I think maybe it's so that the church can redistribute it to the needy.  

No, that's the old Christianity, the one I grew up with.  The new Christianity says that you lay gold at the feet of the representatives of God so they can build bigger and more awesome churches.  Interesting that while Pope Francis is returning his church to those old values, these guys are still trying to get us to believe that giving a portion of one's wealth to the poor is bad.  And just sad that Scott's point would be that the problem with Obamacare is that it's too much money to spend on too few people.

If you check out the homepage of the Values Voter Summit you will see the button, "Having Issues Viewing the Video?"  And I must reply, "Yes, it is tasteless, full of lies, and truly absent of Christian, or any religious, merit."

Field Trip

Back when I was a psychologist, there were lots of neat tax-deductible places we could go for "educational purposes."  Like Caribbean cruises.  Throw in a couple of lectures and you're good to go.  Of course, we did have to pay for the trip ourselves.  And in the interest of full disclosure, I never could afford a Caribbean cruise.

Not so with the U.S. House of Representatives.  As much as they squeal when President Obama travels as President of the United States, they were all too happy to accept a trip to Israel, expenses paid for by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.  Why a group of 37 Democrats followed by a group of 26 Republicans needed to take a trip to Israel, rather than have a couple of representatives go is beyond me.  Also, why they needed to go in separate groups, as though if they went together a few ideas might get exchanged, much like middle school boys and girls who are afraid of getting cooties from each other.

And of course they all brought wives, because who would want to go on an educational junket without a spouse.  And of course our own Mark Sanford wouldn't want to feel left out and lonely, so he got special dispensation to bring along his girlfriend, excuse me, fiancee.  I'm absolutely sure since they are not married they had separate rooms....

As the House Republicans fight over taking pennies for the poor out of the budget, and making sure that no one who can't afford it gets heath care, it strikes me as the height of hypocrisy to have the nerve to take massive group vacations on someone -- anyone -- else's dime.  Not to mention the fact that if Israel pays, no one is going to come back complaining about money we spend on Israel.  Can you say "conflict of interest?"  And I thought taking gifts from lobbyists was illegal.

Don't let Mark Sanford, or anyone else who is voting against the poor while getting paid vacations and lobbying junkets, get away with it.  Our Representatives are living high off their corruption, and we need to keep letting them know we know about it.  They have no conscience, so we will have to take that role for ourselves.

Tweet @MarkSanford, go to his Facebook Page, call and email him to let him know what you think of his hypocrisy.
  

Nikki Cuddles Up While We Pay Up

So who among us is surprised that Governor Haley wants to appoint an insurance industry lobbyist to run the state insurance agency?

Scandal is no stranger to Governor Haley, and no more so than in her relationship with the insurance industry.

In 2011, after less than one year, David Black resigned the post.  With no official statement it was nonetheless not hard to jump to the conclusion that he was reluctant to be the fall guy on Haley's Health Planning Committee, which spent a million dollars in federal health care reform grant money for the purpose of determining that South Carolina would not participate in the health exchange.  In Nikki's own words, the directive to the committee was:

"the whole point of this commission should be to figure out how to opt out and how to avoid a federal takeover, NOT create a state exchange."


Not hard to understand why Mr. Black was unable to stomach the workings of the Haley administration.  Also easy to understand Haley's move in nominating Ray Farmer this time around.  AIA is absolutely tickled that this 32 year insurance insider is now going to the government side.

Fortunately, there has been a bit closer scrutiny of this nominee, but who among us will be surprised when Mr. Farmer gets the green light?

Meanwhile, if you spend much of your free time reeling from the high cost of all kinds of insurance premiums, too many of which are higher than claims and conditions in the state would warrant, our state government is hard at work to get you to stop griping.

No, they are NOT going to challenge the insurance industry.  What they WILL do is give you a tax credit to offset those too large premiums.  That's right folks, instead of getting the wealthy and powerful insurance industry to lower their premiums (and hence, their profit), our state is going to give us back some of our tax dollars.  That's less money for schools and teachers, roads and bridges, police officers, libraries, hospitals, colleges.

So check out the Excess Insurance Premium Credit, brought to you by Governor Nikki Haley, who loves nothing better than using your tax dollars to keep industry fat and happy.