House Passes Healthcare Bill

So the House passed the healthcare reform bill.  I suppose I should be happier.  Unfortunately, as they say, the devil is in the details.  And the detail that has gotten the most coverage is the restrictions on federal money going to pay for abortions.  64 Democrats voted with the Republicans to include the amendment.  So even when we have a Democratic majority, we don’t have a “progressive” or “liberal” majority.

Of course, this is just the House version of the bill, so we will have to wait and see what passes in the Senate and what finally gets signed by Obama will likely be slightly different.

There are other provisions of the bill that I don’t like but some of those things have been in the reform bills from the beginning.  For instance, I really don’t like the idea of a mandate to have health insurance.  I know that the idea was to have “universal” healthcare and most politicians felt that this was the only way to achieve that.  Unfortunately, without cost controls, I think this is a really bad idea.

Just imagine if you were someone (or perhaps) a family that made to much money to qualify for Medicaid (or your state equivalent) but not enough money to pay for insurance.  So now you will have to buy insurance and if you don’t then you have to pay a fine.  So you don’t have enough money to buy insurance, but you have enough money to pay for the non-insurance fine?  Well, I sure hope you don’t get sick.

I know that there are provisions in the bill to raise the limits on what families and individuals make to qualify for help, but it just seems like a slap in the face to those people that are on the low end of the income divide.

I really hope that this will help those that don’t currently have insurance to be able to afford it or get it somehow, but I am not all that optimistic.  And a single-payer system would be much simpler and it really would cover everyone without having to fine people for not having insurance.  There are lots of doctors who feel the same way.

More bad news

Just what we need: more bad news.

People are still losing their jobs and it may be a long time until we see employment numbers going back up.  According to the Labor Department it seems that employers are simply forcing their employees to work harder instead of hiring more workers.  Unfortunately, I have seen this time and time again at different companies that I worked for.  I can only imagine what it is  like in today’s economy.

Just remember, the recession is over.  GDP has gone up in the third quarter.  You should be happy.  In no time at all, you will get a raise or even a better job.  I’m sure financial freedom is right around the corner.

Or maybe not.

Too little, too late

John Reed who helped to create Citigroup (by merging Citicorp and Travelers Group) said he is sorry and that it should be broken up.  Of course, I think he’s right that it should be broken up and I guess I’m glad that he has seen the error of his ways but it is a little late.  Hindsight, is indeed 20/20, now isn’t it?

Not only should Citigroup be broken up, but so should lots of other banks and institutions.  And I don’t care if these companies got government money or not, the government should put checks on how much the CEOs and other top managers can make.  No one needs to make tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars a year.  Especially when we have people who have no jobs, they are losing their homes and others are struggling to find enough to eat.  It makes me sick to think of the disparity that exists in this country, not to mention, the world.

And these guys are praised for being good entrepreneurs and innovators for making millions of dollars.  If there was any justice in this world, then people like John Reed would choke to death on their fucking caviar.

Israel: America vs. the rest of the world

(This was supposed to go up on Wednesday, but WordPress was having some problems, so here it is, a few days late.)

A new report commissioned by the UN Human Rights Council has caused a lot of talk and discussion.  The UN is discussing whether they should endorse it or not.  And the US House of Representatives has voted overwhelmingly to reject it.  Of course, Israel has condemned the report as “one-sided” and “predetermined.”  However, several countries and the European Union have already endorsed the report which calls for more investigations by Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

I have just begun reading the report (it is over 500 pages, so bear with me), but one of the interesting things that I have already learned is the absolute lack of cooperation that the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict (hereafter, the Mission) got from Israel.  Not only would Israel not answer any of the questions posed by the Mission, but they would not even allow the members of the Mission to enter the country.  This, to me, speaks volumes.  It seems that Israel is acknowledging that things went wrong during their operation or that human rights were violated by the soldiers involved.  Of course, the Israelis will say that they didn’t cooperate because they knew what they outcome would be because the Mission was biased.  I don’t believe that at all.  In fact, the Mission found violations of human rights on both sides of the conflict.  But when you consider that 13 Israelis were killed and at least 100 times as many Palestinians were killed, to say that violations were found on both sides is a bit misleading. (The number of dead Palestinians is in dispute.  Israel puts the number at 1166.  While Gaza authorities place the number at 1444.  Other non-governmental sources estimate between 1387 and 1417 Palestinians were killed in that particular military operation.)  Whatever the number is it is many times more than the number of Israelis killed.  Obviously, this is not a numbers game and any number of people killed (regardless of what side of the conflict they are on) is too many, but the numbers do paint an interesting picture when Israel says that they are simply defending themselves from terrorists.

Here is a link to the full report.

Climate Change: America vs. the rest of the world

So the German Chancellor Angela Merkel spoke in front of a joint session of Congress to urge them to tackle climate change.  The Democrats in the both houses are trying to do just that.  Unfortunately, the Republicans are trying to delay and stop the legislation.  And it may be too little, too late.  However, I’m hoping it isn’t.  So here are some important links for more info on the bills in Congress as well as climate change in general (also there are links on the right in Section D).

Senate Bill 1733

House Bill 2454 (Summary)

The Climate Agenda: a special report from the Washington Post

A primer on the status of cap and trade around the world from the Council on Foreign Relations

350.org: activists around the world

Prayer as Medicine

There is a very scary article in the LA Times which details a very little noticed provision in the Senate bill that would “require insurers to consider covering Christian Science prayer treatments as medical expenses.”  The article discusses whether or not this is constitutional.  Apparently, some constitutional lawyers think that it is and others disagree.  I, for one, believe that it is not constitutional.  However, that is only one of the important issues here.

The other issue that is not discussed in the article at all is whether prayer is effective or not.  Of course, we have all heard about cases of parents being charged with murder for letting their child die because they chose prayer over regular medical care.  Those cases are, of course, tragic, but unfortunately they are also anecdotal.  But, believe it or not, studies have been done on the effectiveness of prayer.  Guess what?  They don’t work.  Go figure.  What is worse is that those in the study who knew they were being prayed for did worse than those that didn’t.  (Probably because of an expectation that they would be healed by God.)

So to bring prayer into mainstream medicine is not only likely to be unconstitutional but it has been proven to be ineffective or worse.  I really can’t think of a worse way to practice “medicine.”

Score one for gay rights

Even though health care reform is floundering and we are honestly no closer to pulling the troops out of the Middle East, every so often Barack Obama reminds us why it is better to have a Democrat in the White House (not to mention both houses of Congress) as when he signs legislation like he did on Wednesday (10/28).  He signed into law protections for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.  If anyone is attacked because they are LGBT (or perceived to be) then it  will now be considered a hate crime under federal law.

Of course, since I am being fair and balanced, I would say that I have problems with this scenario.

This was an amendment to the Defense Authorization Act.  I have spoken out against the amount of money that goes to “defense” so I won’t get into again.  (Not right now anyway.)  But even more problematic is that this legislation will only provide for more time in prison for violent offenders.  Believe me, this is a good thing, but it doesn’t go far enough.  We really need legislation that would bar workplace discrimination, allow military service or recognize same-sex marriages.

Perhaps in time, we will have these things at the federal level.  Some of these rights are recognized by a few states, but it should be at the federal level.  No one should have to worry about being discriminated against no matter who they love.  It’s amazing that this should even be a consideration.

I am glad to see that Congress is still working on other things while the health care legislation gets a lot of attention but very little action.  We need to tell them that they can do more though.  Even with majorities in both houses, they still need to be pushed.  Especially if your representative is a moderate or worse, a Blue Dog.

Here is a link to find out who your reps are.

Don’t worry, I won’t tell anyone that you don’t know who they are already.

US official resigns over Afghan war

I think this is an extremely important story.  And more people need to do things like this to protest what is going on in Iraq and Afghanistan.  In years past, we have seen a number of books come out from people in the Bush administration that said things like, “I didn’t think this was a good idea at the time but I went along with it… blah blah blah.”  Well, if they had resigned it would have really made others think about what we were doing and what we continue to do.  If everyone who was against the war in Afghanistan or Iraq (this guy can’t be the only one) were to resign, then the Obama administration would be forced to rethink its policies, especially at a time when it looks increasingly likely that Obama will increase the amount of troops in Afghanistan.  This is exactly the wrong thing to do.  We need to get our troops out of there, not bring more in.

Here is the Washington Post story on that US official (he worked for the State Department, and before that he was a Marine).  We need a lot more people like Matthew Hoh, even if he is not a “peacenik, pot-smoking hippie who wants everyone to be in love.”

Afghanistan has been called the place where empires go to die.  Hopefully, we can get out before it’s too late.

I’m Alive!

Believe it or not, I’m still alive.  I know it has been waaaay too long since I have written anything here.  And from looking at my stats, it has been a while since anyone stopped by.  But who can blame them.  If there is nothing new, then what’s the point.  Perhaps you were able to catch up on some of the older posts, but probably not.

I will not get into the gritty details of where I’ve been.  Suffice it to say, I was in a bad place and I didn’t like it very much.  But sometimes you can’t help being wherever you are.  I would love to say that I am back for good.  But that would be a little too presumptuous.  I will try to stay here for as long as I can and I hope to bring all of you back to the Butter.

Say It Ain’t So!

I am not sure what we can do at this point (because writing to the Supreme Court is kinda like praying, no one is listening and even if they were, things probably wouldn’t change) but I had to share this with everyone.  There is a very interesting and important editorial in the New York Times that everyone needs to read.  It concerns the Supreme Court and corporate money.

Essentially the Supreme Court will be hearing arguments about a case that could make our electoral system much, much worse.  I have already talked about how much money there is in politics and how we won’t be able to really change anything until we get that money out.  But if the conservatives on the Court rule how we expect them to, then corporations (and unions) would be able to spend money with impunity.  They would be able to spend as much money as they saw fit from their own coffers to defeat legislation or candidates.  Even though unions would have the same power, clearly the corporations have waaaaaaay more money than the unions.

If the corporations are allowed to spend whatever the hell they want to, then we can kiss our democracy good-bye.  But this is not a done deal.  They have not ruled on it yet.  They will begin to hear arguments on Wed.  So we will have to wait and see how it turns out.