Quantcast
Channel: Health Insurance Headlines on One News Page [United States]
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live

Medicaid Expansion For Millions Hinges On Key Governors' Races

$
0
0
WASHINGTON -- The last few years of Tarika Collins’ life have been a series of horrendous medical complications. Four separate car accidents in 2012 left her with nerve damage in her back. That same year, she was diagnosed with an aortic valve leak, which, over time, led to heart disease. In 2013, she had a heart attack, which resulted in the installation of a stent in her coronary artery. Months later, she had to have neck surgery. She was told that without it, she may end up paralyzed.

Collins is just 45. But the parade of horribles leaves her with intense anxiety. She has been unable to work since leaving her job as a corporate travel agent following her heart attack. Today, she says, “It is very rare that I leave the house.”

Collins is among the nearly 5 million Americans estimated to be too poor for Obamacare, because of actions by the Supreme Court and Republican politicians in 23 states.

Collins estimates she has made a dozen trips to the hospital emergency room in the past few years. Having sold all her assets to pay for her care, she's now about $500,000 in debt and is hosting Internet fundraising drives to help with the bills. Absent a breakthrough with disability insurance (she has a court date in December), Collins has one last hope: That on Tuesday, voters in her state of Florida send a message through the ballot box that they want an expansion of Medicaid.

“It would get me in the system,” Collins, of Clearwater, said. “I would be able to get some health care. For me, it would mean a longer lifespan.”

“Mostly, the emotions I feel are scared,” she said of her wait for the outcome of the race between Gov. Rick Scott, a Republican, and former Gov. Charlie Crist, a Democrat. “Scared that it could go either way. I’m scared I’m going to die before [Medicaid expansion] comes.”

There are two threads of conventional wisdom heading into Tuesday's midterm election. The first is that the election doesn't much matter. Regardless which party controls the Senate, President Barack Obama will still occupy the White House, which means gridlock will remain, if not escalate. The second is that, when it comes to Obamacare, the status quo will remain in place for at least the next two years. Senate Republicans may push for repeal votes. But Obama will veto them. Smaller reforms may pass. But the law will mostly remain intact.

What these threads ignore is that for millions of Americans, Tuesday's election may have life-altering consequences on the issue of Obamacare. At least six states have close gubernatorial elections featuring an incumbent Republican who has resisted expanding Medicaid -- an option states were given by the Supreme Court in 2012. Avalere Health, a strategic advisory services firm, has estimated that in Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Maine, and Wisconsin, almost 2.3 million people have been left uninsured because of that resistance.

"As we looked at it, we came to the conclusion that this is a very important election for the future of Medicaid," said Dan Mendelson, founder and CEO of Avalere Health. "And these six gubernatorial elections are the best examples of that. There are a number of other states where if the balance shifts even subtly, the balance will shift toward Medicaid expansion."

GOP governors and legislators say they base their opposition to Medicaid expansion on the potential cost to their state, despite the availability of generous federal funding. The result of their refusal to approve expansion are clear: The uninsured rate has declined much more in states that adopted the policy than in those that haven't, surveys show.

Denise Sock, of Presque Isle, Maine, sees Tuesday as potentially life-altering for her medical care. Sock, 51, has been unemployed and uninsured since October 2012, when she lost her job after being sidelined by a work-related injury. She suffers from a slew of chronic health problems, including diabetes and very high cholesterol and triglyceride numbers, she says. Her conditions worsened because she couldn't afford care, and she has thousands of dollars in medical debt she can't pay.

"I have fought depression. I have figured, you know, maybe the world was better off if I wasn't around. Why am I even trying to keep fighting?" Sock says.

Sock's husband has been without a job since 2009, so their 27-year-old daughter, Tasha Stetson, moved home with her own 2-year-old daughter, and is covering the family's household expenses while she can.

Medicaid expansion would "make a huge difference," Sock says. "It would alleviate a lot of the burden off my daughter."

Standing in the way is Maine's governor, Paul LePage (R), who has blocked the state legislature's five attempts to expand Medicaid. Maine is the only New England state that hasn't accepted the mostly federally funded expansion of the benefit to more poor residents.

Sock's health coverage predicament is tied to two decisions LePage made. In addition to rejecting the Obamacare Medicaid expansion, LePage actually scaled back Medicaid eligibility this year, taking away benefits from tens of thousands and denying it to people like Sock, who might have qualified under the state's old rules.

Six months ago, the women at Sock's church pooled money so she could see her doctor, have blood tests, and get her prescriptions renewed. The results confirmed what she already felt: She had gotten much sicker.

"I was basically among the walking dead. My blood work was so bad because I hadn't had most of my medication in two years because I couldn't afford them," Sock says.

Sock tried signing up for Obamacare, only to learn she fell into the coverage gap. The federally run health insurance exchange sent her to MaineCare, the state's Medicaid program, which sent her back to the exchange.

"It's a vicious cycle, and I'm not getting anywhere," Sock says.

For Sock and others, the coverage gap seems like an Obamacare promise unfulfilled. Athena Ford Smith, advocacy director for the Florida Community Health Action Information Network, also known as Florida CHAIN, says people are often crestfallen when they learn they're actually too poor to get covered.

"The most painful part of my work and of our work as health care advocates is looking somebody in the eye and saying, 'I'm sorry. There's no help for you,'" Ford Smith says. "A lot of consumers do think that it's the health care law that created that coverage gap."

In fact, the Affordable Care Act intended the Medicaid expansion to be national. But the Supreme Court ruling and resistance from Republican policymakers have shortened its reach, leaving the poorest uninsured Americans with no coverage. Because Congress didn't anticipate Medicaid wouldn't be available to everyone with earnings below poverty, tax credits for private insurance only are available to people who make more than that, which is about $11,500 for a single person.

While Tuesday's elections may spark the process that can close the coverage gap in up to six states, simply electing a new governor doesn't guarantee it will happen. State legislatures have resisted Medicaid expansion, even in states where the governor is supportive (see: Virginia, Terry McAuliffe, or Missouri, Jay Nixon). Even in Florida, Gov. Scott nominally supported the expansion, but has not persuaded lawmakers to follow through. Advocates say Scott has barely tried.

Those same advocates argue that an election win for a Medicaid-backing governor candidate would send a powerful message to state lawmakers. And it may accelerate the existing trend of Republican-run or Republican-leaning states softening their opposition to the expansion, as have Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett and other Republican governors who have taken up the Medicaid expansion.

"We hope on Jan. 1 that our leaders will move immediately to close the coverage gap. This must be a priority," Ford Smith says.

In Kansas, state Rep. Jim Ward (D) says he will reintroduce legislation to expand Medicaid in the next session, regardless of who wins the governor's race. He recognizes that it remains a challenge, even if Gov. Sam Brownback (R) is to lose on Tuesday. The state remains Republican-leaning. And the statehouse has a big say in the matter. But the tide of public opinion in turning, Ward adds.

"It is not over with the change in governor, but it changes the whole discussion from, 'We don't even talk about it,' to 'It is something we will be talking about every day, it is something we would be pushing every day,'" Ward says. "I hate to speak for Paul [Davis, the Democratic candidate] because he speaks so well for himself. But his win changes the whole conversation.

"For about 150,000 to 180,000 Kansans," Ward adds, "the stakes couldn't be higher." Reported by Huffington Post 19 hours ago.

HSA for America Offering Webinar to Help Consumers Optimize Insurance Enrollment Period

$
0
0
HSA for America is hosting an informative webinar, What You Need to Know About Healthcare Reform Before 2015, on November 4, 2014. Topics will include how to avoid mistakes that could cost you time and money, plan and benefit changes resulting from the ACA and how an HSA can reduce your tax liability and potentially help you qualify for a subsidy.

(PRWEB) November 04, 2014

HSA for America will host an interactive webinar on November 4, 2014 to inform the public of the best practices to avoid mistakes that could cost time and money when selecting a health care plan for 2015. HSA for America is expecting record enrollments for 2015 during this year’s Open Enrollment Period which will run November 15 through February 15.

The webinar will provide insight regarding the upcoming insurance enrollment period and explain how without the proper guidance and action, policyholders could face premium increases of as much as 50 to 100 percent.

Personal Advisor Justin Brogdon will host the webinar, and believes participants can gain valuable knowledge to assist them in making wise decisions when purchasing health insurance in 2015 and some can cut their premiums in half with premium subsidies. The webinar will also provide guidance for those who are unsure if they should keep their current plans.

“In my experience over the last year, there are avoidable pitfalls and hurdles in the enrollment process that consumers need to be aware of. Having the expertise of an experienced licensed agent can save you frustration and headache. We'll be going over the basics and explaining the key benefit changes in the plans offered now versus pre-ACA plans, taking the guess work out of what makes most sense for our clients,” states Brogdon.

The webinar will also focus on changes to the Affordable Care Act that will impact plan choices and doctors networks for 2015. Information will be discussed regarding premium subsidies and cost sharing subsidies and how those making upwards of $100,000 can qualify to significantly reduce their monthly premiums.

In addition, participants can also expect to receive a breakdown regarding penalty costs that may apply if credible coverage is not maintained, as well as certain exceptions that could apply, and help you qualify for a subsidy.

The November webinar will also provide insight into the benefits of a specific benefits of working with a Personal Advisor to assist in upcoming health insurance decisions, and what you can expect during Open Enrollment and beyond when you work with a certified professional Personal Advisor through HSA for America.

How To Register for HSA for America’s November 4 Webinar

Free registration for this informative health care reform webinar is available on the HSA for America website, where consumers can register now.

HSA for America notes that this free event is only for educational purposes; no plan-specific benefits or details will be shared.

HSA for America provides free, immediate access to licensed insurance professionals with expertise on health savings accounts at 1-866-749-2039 between 9 a.m. to 11 p.m. Eastern. Reported by PRWeb 16 hours ago.

4 Steps To Take During Open Enrollment Season to Avoid Medical Debt

$
0
0
The Association of Credit Counseling Professionals, ACCPros, Recommends Smart Strategies to Help Americans Pay or Prevent Medical Bills

Falmouth, ME (PRWEB) November 04, 2014

November marks the peak of open enrollment season, that time of year when employees nationwide should be reviewing their workplace healthcare coverage and deciding whether or not to make changes to their benefits package.

“Failing to review your existing benefits and evaluate all your other healthcare options could cause you to pay hundreds or even thousands of dollars in medical bills if you’re not careful,” says Judy Sorensen, president of the Association of Credit Counseling Professionals, ACCPros.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s 2014 Employer Health Benefits Survey, the annual premiums for employer-sponsored family health coverage hit $16,834 in 2014. That’s up 3% from year-ago levels, and workers on average are now paying $4,823 towards the cost of their coverage.

So Sorensen and the experts from ACCPros suggest the following four steps to take during open enrollment season in order to lower healthcare bills and avoid medical debt.

1.    Evaluate your current healthcare benefits

Don’t make the mistake of simply sticking with your current benefit coverage as a default option. Such a move could be financially costly, especially if your old healthcare plan has skyrocketed in price.

So give your present health plan a good review, noting what might be different for 2015 versus what you had in the year 2014. “Pay attention as well, if your employer has given you any notices about policy or premium changes for the coming year,” Sorensen recommends.

Take cost into consideration, of course, but also evaluate the scope of your benefits; there may be some coverage you can’t afford to do without. For example, if you want to have a baby next year, don’t switch into a cheaper, but bare bones, plan that lacks prenatal and maternity coverage.

You don’t want uncovered medical expenses to lead you into medical debt.

2.    Consider contributing to a Flexible Spending Account or FSA

Many employers offer Flexible Spending Accounts. If you have this tax-advantaged healthcare account at work, determine if you’ve been putting away the appropriate amount of money.

With an FSA, you don’t want to over-fund it to the point where you have surplus money in there that you don’t use up by year’s end, since most companies mandate that you must “use or lose” the funds in an FSA by December 31st.

Fortunately, if you haven’t used all the funds, that money in your FSA account can be used to pay for health-related items and services that aren’t covered by your health insurance – like a year-end vision or dental appointment.

You save on taxes by socking away money in an FSA because your FSA contributions come out of your paycheck on a pre-tax basis. “So in the end, you lower your gross income, and shave your federal income taxes and Social Security taxes too,” Sorensen notes.

3.    Make a commitment to a healthier lifestyle

During open enrollment season it’s also smart to inquire about financial perks – like free medical exams, lower deductibles or reduced healthcare premiums – that your company may offer to employees who get healthy.

“Why wait until January to make a New Year’s resolution related to your health?” asks Sorensen. “Instead make a commitment to a healthier lifestyle now – and shed a few pounds, quick smoking or start eating better to lower your cholesterol.”

In exchange for your willingness to have better exercise and nutrition habits, employers often provide significant healthcare related benefits that save you money.

4. Weigh the pros and cons of using medical credit cards

For those who may already be dealing with medical bills, or those contemplating how to pay off existing healthcare bills, consider whether you should use a medical credit card. These cards, many of which have a Visa or MasterCard logo, work pretty much like regular credit cards – except that you can only charge medical or healthcare related expenses on them.

One advantage of a healthcare credit card is that it lets you immediately receive the medical treatment or healthcare services you need, even if you don’t have the cash upfront.

Another advantage of medical credit cards is that you can charge your healthcare needs and pay them over time – without worrying about a lack of cash causing you to have overdue medical bills that go into collections.

But consumer advocates say one drawback of these cards is their interest rates, which can often be 20% or higher. Another downside of medical credit cards is that, if you fail to pay, they can damage your credit rating similar to any other credit card.

The member agencies of ACCPros are skilled in working with consumers nationwide who are deep in debt. They are familiar with state and federal laws and can assist Americans with resolving delinquent credit card bills, past due medical accounts, including medical credit cards, and other unpaid obligations.

Individuals with unsecured debts, including medical credit card debt, can often qualify for a debt management program, or DMP, which can clear up debts sooner rather than later.

About ACCPros

The Association of Credit Counseling Professionals, ACCPros, is the credit counseling industry’s newest and fastest growing trade association.

ACCPros hopes to distinguish itself from other associations by placing an emphasis on ethics and compliance and focusing on best practices, quality service, education, training, and
professional ethics.

ACCPros member agencies can be a great resource for consumers seeking help managing their debt. Call the toll-free ACCPros Locator Line at 800-635-0553 to speak with a certified credit counselor at an agency licensed/registered in your state. Reported by PRWeb 15 hours ago.

Enroll In The Health Exchange During Open Enrollment At Community Health Center Starting November 15th

$
0
0
Community Health Center of Snohomish County recently released an article announcing that they can assist individuals and families enroll in the Health Exchange during open enrollment, which begins on November 15th, 2014.

Everett, WA (PRWEB) November 04, 2014

Community Health Center of Snohomish is now offering assistance with enrollment services for the Health Exchange during open enrollment starting on November 15th.

Their recently released article gives information regarding the enrollment process and how Community Health Center can assist individuals and families looking to enroll in the health exchange insurance program.

According to the article, “The open enrollment period begins on November 15th, 2014 and will end on February 15th, 2015. The entire purpose of the Health Insurance Marketplace is to help individuals and families find low-cost insurance coverage.”

For those interested in contacting Community Health Center of Snohomish County about the open enrollment health exchange, visit their website.

The article proceeds to explain the three categories of the various insurance policy options. The first is through private insurance companies, which is the most expensive option. The second is obtaining a policy based on household income and size, which tends to be more affordable. The third policy option is for individuals who qualify for Apple Health.

The article encourages individuals and families looking for health insurance to consider applying during the open enrollment period for the Health Exchange to find an affordable health insurance policy.

The article says, “If you’re wondering what type of insurance policy you would qualify for, Community Health Center of Snohomish would be happy to talk with you and help you find insurance coverage that is right for you.”

About Community Health Center of Snohomish County:
Community Health Center of Snohomish County (CHC) is a non-profit primary health care facility; providing medical, dental and pharmacy services to more than 37,000 Snohomish County residents. CHC operates out of five clinics in Arlington, Edmonds, Everett-North, Everett-South and Lynnwood. CHC opened its doors in 1983 to serve the uninsured and underserved populations in Snohomish County and they continue to do that today. CHC provides care to those who are uninsured and those on private, State or Federal health plans.

For more information contact:
Mallory Lisk
Community Relations Manager
Community Health Center of Snohomish County
425.789.3720
8609 Evergreen Way
Everett, WA 98208 Reported by PRWeb 13 hours ago.

URAC and Inovalon Partner to Provide Performance Measurement Reporting to CMS

$
0
0
The strategic partnership will make the industry’s most robust analytics platform available to URAC-accredited health plans

Washington, DC (PRWEB) November 04, 2014

URAC, a leader in promoting healthcare quality through accreditation, education, and measurement programs, announced that it has entered into a partnership with Inovalon, a leading technology company that combines advanced cloud-based data analytics and data-driven intervention platforms to achieve meaningful impact in clinical and quality outcomes, utilization, and financial performance across the healthcare landscape.

The strategic partnership will make the industry’s most robust analytics platform available to URAC-accredited health plans, including Qualified Health Plans (QHP) participating in the Health Insurance Marketplace, and will empower URAC with a comprehensive set of tools and data to advance new evidence-based methods to measure quality.

“URAC is excited to be partnering with Inovalon. Quality-driven healthcare is crucial to our nation’s welfare and the reporting of performance measures helps assess the impact of these programs on a dynamic basis,” said URAC President and CEO Kylanne Green. “URAC has invested in multiple years of research, evaluating a variety of options, to ease the reporting burden for our accredited QHP clients. After a rigorous analysis, Inovalon was chosen as the optimal partner to make that goal a reality.”

The quality measures are to be reported to the Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services (CMS) in support of the Final 2015 Quality Rating System Beta Test Measure Set and the final rule for Exchange and Insurance Market Standards for 2015 and Beyond.

“Data is critical to driving quality improvements, enabling accredited organizations to understand and provide meaningful comparisons amongst their accredited entities,” said Dan Rizzo, Chief Innovation Officer, Inovalon. “As more of the healthcare system adopts standards for quality measurement, from pharmacy accreditation programs in the areas of specialty pharmacy and community pharmacy, to provider care integration and coordination programs, we’ll see many more opportunities for data and measurement to inform and empower meaningful change.”

The strategic partnership with Inovalon will allow URAC to focus on its industry leading expertise in developing innovative programs to promote healthcare quality and guide clients through the rigorous and comprehensive process of accreditation. URAC offers the largest array of accreditation programs in the United States assessing health plan operations, including but not limited to, network operations, healthcare practitioner credentialing systems, and medical management functions (such as utilization management, case management, disease management, and health call center services).

About URAC
URAC’s mission is to promote continuous improvement in the quality and efficiency of healthcare management through processes of accreditation, education and measurement. URAC, an independent, nonprofit organization, is a well-known leader in promoting healthcare quality through its accreditation, education, and measurement programs. URAC offers a wide range of quality benchmarking programs and services that model the rapid changes in the healthcare system and provide a symbol of excellence for organizations to validate their commitment to quality and accountability. Through its broad-based governance structure and an inclusive standards development process, URAC ensures that all stakeholders are represented in establishing meaningful quality measures for the entire healthcare industry. For more information, visit http://www.urac.org.

About Inovalon
Inovalon is a leading technology company that combines advanced cloud-based data analytics and data-driven intervention platforms to achieve meaningful impact in clinical and quality outcomes, utilization, and financial performance across the healthcare landscape. Inovalon’s unique achievement of value is delivered through the effective progression of Turning Data into Insight, and Insight into Action®. Large proprietary datasets, advanced integration technologies, sophisticated predictive analytics, and deep subject matter expertise deliver a seamless, end-to-end platform of technology and nationwide operations that bring the benefits of big data and large-scale analytics to the point of care. Driven by data, Inovalon uniquely identifies gaps in care, quality, data integrity, and financial performance—while also bringing to bear the unique capabilities to resolve them. Supporting hundreds of healthcare organizations in 97.8% of U.S. counties and Puerto Rico, Inovalon’s analytical and data-driven intervention platforms are informed by data pertaining to more than 719,000 physicians, 229,000 clinical facilities, and more than 112 million Americans, providing a powerful solution suite that drives high-value impact, improving quality and economics for health plans, ACOs, hospitals, physicians, patients, and researchers. For more information visit http://www.inovalon.com.

Contacts:

Inovalon, Inc.
Kim E. Collins
4321 Collington Road
Bowie, Maryland 20716
Phone: 301-809-4000 x1473
kimecollins(at)inovalon(dot)com

URAC
Christian Moritz
1220 L Street, NW, Suite 400
Washington, D.C. 20005
Phone: 202-962-8803
cmoritz(at)urac(dot)org Reported by PRWeb 10 hours ago.

You're All Idiots, So Vote

$
0
0
The midterms this election cycle have seemed more contentious and looney than usual. The lead-up by the media, which is always overwrought with coverage and ads, has felt more like a constant insufferable pummeling from an abusive priest warning us of fire and brimstone. The warnings from pundits and campaign ads of the world ending if we, as voters, don't make the right decision on Tuesday. America, it would appear, is on the verge of imminent, if not certain, annihilation. Ebola and ISIL are right now, as you're reading this, rushing our unprotected borders to wipe us out and kill our babies, bunnies and puppies and "the other guy" is to blame. The other guy, if you vote for him, is not only personally responsible, but is intentionally and deliberately attempting to murder you by getting elected.

It's nothing new to feel like our intelligence is being questioned. There has always been a sense that we're being talked down to and that most of what is said is gibberish to placate and appease us without really saying anything of substance.

During a debate between Mitch McConnell and Alison Lundergan Grimes, McConnell was asked about the Kynect site which is Kentucky's Obamacare delivery system. Here's what Ole Turtle Jowls had to say:
"Kentucky Kynect is a Web site. It was paid for by a $200-and-some-odd-million grant from the federal government. The Web site can continue. But in my view, the best interest of the country would be achieved by pulling out Obamacare, root and branch..."
Yeah, a website that has delivered health insurance to nearly half a million Kentuckians. McConnell likes the site just fine, but wants to get rid of Obamacare. He carefully threaded the needle with that line of questioning, but in essence he's using semantics and nuance in an assumption that we and the media are rubes. His, "they can keep the website" comment is a little like me saying, "I'd like Switzerland just fine if it weren't for all the Swiss."

How about the campaign ad that's been going around in an attempt to get female voters. You know women, who only think about girly things like wedding dresses and stuff. The ad made the rounds and was customizable to allow each candidate to drop their name into the ready-made condescension soup.
*The Colbert Report*
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Indecision Political Humor,The Colbert Report on Facebook
How's that for relating to voters?

According to Politico, quoting DGA spokeswoman Sabrina Singh:
The Democratic Governors Association blasted the ads in a statement, calling them "further evidence" that the Republican candidates "still have no idea how to communicate with women voters."That's because it's not just their attitudes that are condescending and insulting, but because their policies - from deep cuts to education to opposition to equal pay for equal work, to mandatory ultrasounds and defunding Planned Parenthood - are deeply out-of-touch with the concerns of women and families."
Those are pretty tame examples of being treated like an idiot and having one's intelligence questioned. For the first time in my life time, I'm oddly pleased that some are just saying it.

Earlier last month, Bill O'Reilly of FOX said, "Many American citizens are simply dumb. They don't know anything. And when you don't know anything, you'll buy anything and propaganda rules."

Consummate hate bag Ann Coulter told Fox and Friends during an interview that Democratic pro-women voters are "bottom 51 percent in terms of IQ."

She went on to say:
"The Democrats don't care. If they can get the bottom 51 percent of voters in terms of knowledge and IQ, they're perfectly happy. I can fool 51 percent of the people, that's enough to win. And hopefully, we'll overcome that."
And then there's this little gem from "The Five" during which Kimberly Guilfoyle says that younger women should, "go back on Tinder or Match.com."

During some banter amongst the conservative members of the show spitting out right-wing talking points, trying to comically up-sell how "pro-women" Republicans really are, the video ends. Guilfoyle, who also recently said she wanted Vladimir Putin as our leader to get things "done right," decided to essentially call younger female voters dumb and incompetent. "The same reason why young women on juries are not a good idea. They don't get it," she says.

Guilfoyle then goes on to say that younger women don't have the same "life experiences" like paying bills, the mortgage, or taking care of children that older women have. You know, because clearly you can't be an independent, intelligent woman unless you're saddled with debt and have a house full of kids.

Unfortunately most of the people who they are referring to aren't watching this crap, so there's no risk of anyone voting out of spite.

The people who are going to vote and possibly decide the outcome of the election are the ones we should be worried about. Here's a video courtesy of Bill Maher, in which one guy says, "Yeah, but I think I deserve food stamps. I have no unemployment," and yet he's against food stamps.
Sixty percent of the eligible voting population in this country is expected not to vote this Tuesday. As French political thinker and historian Alexis de Tocqueville is often quoted as saying, "In a democracy, the people get the government they deserve."

No matter what the outcome of the election though, whomever ends up in charge and whatever side gets the majority, they're going to have to do some things they haven't managed to do in over six years: govern and legislate.

On a final note, here's a little satire from The Young Turks for your viewing enjoyment:
*Read more at nowitcounts.com* Reported by Huffington Post 9 hours ago.

A Two-Tiered Health Care System Is Coming Faster Than You Think

$
0
0
Get ready for two different health care systems. In one, patients will be able to schedule a doctor’s appointment in one or two days. In the other, patients will wait weeks or even months – with access problems similar to those in Canada. Patients who get health insurance in the [...] Reported by Forbes.com 7 hours ago.

Premature Ejaculation as Bad Manners

$
0
0
So I'm in this group therapy session conducted by Dr. Verleen Thunderpants, a clinical psychologist specializing in sexual dysfunction, sitting in a semi-circle with eight other men, all of us "suffering" (if that's the proper word) from chronic premature ejaculation, and desperately seeking a "solution" (if that's the proper word) to our problem.

Although I would have preferred a male therapist for something so sensitive (not to be indelicate, but don't women have a vested interest in this?), Dr. Thunderpants was the psychologist assigned to us. Because our health insurance coverage was paying for the sessions, we were obliged to take what was offered.

As it turned out, Dr. Thunderpants was an extremely capable therapist. She was smart, personable, articulate and entertaining. Perhaps looking to lessen the tension of our inaugural session by introducing a bit of humor, she referred to our group as her "pre-jacks." Alas, it was a clumsy move, because instead of mellowing us out, the term embarrassed us.

She began the session with a brief but deferential nod to the intransigence and raw majesty of Nature. With our therapy group hanging on every word, she summarized the whole thing in a couple of elegant sentences, driving home the point that in the Animal World, and in the milieu of the caveman, there is and was no such thing as premature ejaculation. The concept didn't exist.

On the plains of North Africa, 100,000 years ago, our ancestors never would have considered anything so abstract as this. There was a sex drive, there was animal attraction, there was copulation, and there was procreation, but there was no such thing as courtship, seduction, foreplay, intimacy, or concern for mutual satisfaction. Those concepts were "invented" much later, most likely in England.

Not only was life on earth extremely brutal 100,000 years ago, but a "real man" (Dr. Thunderpants' chosen term), a man whom Nature specifically intended to be governed by testosterone and musculature, was, by definition, a premature ejaculator.

That was the way males were designed, the way they were set up on the drawing board. Except there was nothing "premature" about it. All sexual orgasms were fully "mature," fully realized, complete unto themselves, exactly as Nature intended. The entire male gender were simply "ejaculators," plain and simple, something any junior high school kid would understand.

Of course, this observation had a salutary effect on the group. Instead of feeling inadequate, being told that we had been specifically designed by Mother Nature to have quick climaxes made us feel virile. Acknowledging the subsequent humanization and attention to bedroom etiquette that has occurred over the course of many centuries, Dr. Thunderpants went so far as to describe premature ejaculation as simply a form of "bad manners," akin to belching in public.

This was a relief to hear, especially from a trained professional. No guilt, no self-doubts, no angst. The session ended with her asking each of us to write down (anonymously) on a sheet a paper what we considered the definition of premature ejaculation to be -- the exact amount of time. We wrote down our responses, turned them in, and she read them aloud.

The majority of us placed the figure at about two minutes. One guy defined it as 30 seconds, which was met with looks of pity and suppressed laughter. Even our therapist appeared mildly alarmed. Another guy defined premature ejaculation as "anything less than 20 minutes." This response would have annoyed us if we hadn't assumed that Dr. Thunderpants herself wrote it.

David Macaray is a playwright and author ("It's Never Been Easy: Essays on Modern Labor"). Reported by Huffington Post 7 hours ago.

Meet the Working Families Party, Whose Ballot Line is in Play in New York

$
0
0
*Editor's note:* In New York's 2014 gubernatorial race, more than just who wins the governor's mansion is on the line. Also at stake is the automatic ballot access enjoyed by the Working Families Party, the force behind the economic justice issues that have dominated the state's progressive politics in recent times—fast-food worker pay and conditions, paid sick leave for New York City workers, and a living minimum wage. In a controversial deal with Governor Andrew Cuomo designed to push the incumbent to the left, WFP is running him on its ballot line. If the party fails to win 50,000 votes for Cuomo on its own ballot line, it could lose that automatic ballot access in statewide elections. With all that on the table, today seemed an idea time to reprise Harold Meyerson's profile of the WFP's Dan Cantor.
 
This article originally appeared in the January/February 2014 issue of The American Prospect magazine.
 
Timothy Devine

Election night, New York City, November 5, 2013. Mayoral candidate Bill de Blasio, the candidate for both the Democratic and Working Families parties, is racking up a huge victory after running on a platform that calls for raising taxes on the rich and raising wages for workers. Shunning the usual Manhattan-hotel bash, de Blasio has decided to celebrate in a Brooklyn armory, where his supporters have gathered to mark the end of the Michael Bloomberg era and, they hope, the birth of a national movement for a more egalitarian economy.

In one corner of the packed armory, Dan Cantor is talking with old friends and young activists who either work for him or used to—two groups that, combined, probably include about half the people in the hall. Cantor, who is 58 years old and of medium height, is wearing a black suit and tie but exhibits a touch of the willful schlumpiness that comes naturally to certain New York Jewish males. His most prominent features are a white streak that bisects his wavy dark hair, and eyes that seem alert to everything going on around him.

The hall is filled with dealmakers and operators importuning and texting one another. Cantor exhibits no such election-night mania, but his casual manner conceals an idealism, strategic acumen, and a record of political success that puts the dealmakers and operators to shame. Cantor is the national director of the Working Families Party (WFP), a social democratic political machine that in recent years has elected numerous progressives in New York and Connecticut. It has translated those victories into legislation that established paid sick days in New York City and Connecticut and abolished discriminatory drug laws and police “stop and frisk” practices in New York. Founded 15 years ago by Cantor and a handful of like-minded union leaders and community organizers, the WFP has grown from a third party taking advantage of New York state’s “fusion” laws (which permit a candidate to run as the nominee of more than one party) into a full-service political operation, the likes of which are to be found nowhere else in progressive America—indeed, nowhere else in any wing of American politics.

 

This election night marks a high point for the Working Families Party. Not only is the mayor-elect a longtime ally—the party managed his successful 2009 campaign for the post of public advocate—but both victorious candidates for the two other citywide offices, Letitia James and Scott Stringer, are WFP stalwarts as well. Ken Thompson, with the party’s backing, has ousted longtime Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes; his campaign focused on raising the age for incarceration in general-population prisons from 16 to 18. More impressive still, 12 of the 13 candidates the WFP ran for city council have also swept to victory. In January, when the new council convenes, 20 of the city’s 51 councilmen and –women will be dues-paying members of the Progressive Caucus, which functions, roughly, as the party’s legislative bloc.

The night’s victories are not confined to New York City. Around the state, dozens of local candidates whom the party recruited, groomed, and ran for office are winning races for city council and county legislatures from Syracuse to Rosendale. In Connecticut, a slate of candidates in Bridgeport has won a hotly contested election to the school board. Across the Hudson River, a brigade of the party’s canvassers has helped turn out voters in support of a ballot measure that raised New Jersey’s minimum wage.

“We have a cornucopia of good ideas—debt-free college, paid sick days,” Cantor told me earlier that afternoon. “But nobody cares about your good ideas if you don’t have power.”

Starting from the most marginal position in American politics—that of a third party—the WFP has amassed the power to turn those ideas into law in New York and Connecticut. Recently, it persuaded the Oregon Legislature to enact a proposal that would drastically reduce student debt. Last month, the WFP began operations in the District of Columbia. In the next few months, it will move into Pennsylvania and Maryland and has plans for Wisconsin later in 2014. With the national Democratic Party focusing more of its energy and attention on combating economic inequality, which has been the Working Families Party’s chief purpose since its formation, it’s a propitious time for the WFP to expand. The question is whether the model Cantor and company have created can succeed in other states.

“Is the de Blasio moment, the Elizabeth Warren moment, a real transition to a new period?” Cantor asks a couple of weeks after de Blasio’s election. “Not unless we make them that. This is not a short-term project. It’s taken the left a long time to get as weak as it is.”

 

By conviction, I’m of the left,” Cantor says. “By personality, I’m a moderate. I don’t like crowds or mobs.” He is seated behind a beat-up wooden desk in an office cluttered by the bicycle he rides to and from work and boxes overflowing with binders and newspaper clippings.

The headquarters of the Working Families Party sprawls across the third floor of a dingy office building in downtown Brooklyn. Cantor’s own office looks out over Flatbush Avenue, from which the steady honking of gridlocked cars punctuates his conversation. His office exits onto a vast, cubicled chamber where dozens of predominantly young staffers are calling potential donors, mapping precinct walks, writing press releases. In a separate room, canvassers have assembled for their daily orientation. These briefings are anything but pro forma. Jessica Carrano, who is the WFP’s political director for Long Island, recalls the issues orientations that canvassers received when she was running the field campaign for a city council candidate in Brooklyn’s Park Slope neighborhood: “We were talking to highly educated voters. Everyone had to know everything at every door.”

Young progressives frequently turn to canvassing as their first job out of college and just as frequently quit when the jobs prove to be both exhausting and uninteresting. Not so at the WFP. As the first organization (and still one of the few) to give its canvassers health insurance, the WFP has long recruited the canvassing crème de la crème and provided them with a postgraduate education in the theory and practice of progressive politics. The party places many of them in positions of responsibility on election campaigns or at allied organizations, and a number have been hired on as WFP staffers.

The party employs a full-time staff of 40 in New York, not counting its paid canvassers, who range in number from 35 in a non-election year to 500 as Election Day approaches (augmented by thousands of volunteers who turn out for party candidates in the final weekends of a campaign). The party’s permanent non-canvassing staff is larger by far than that of any other state’s Democratic Party (California’s, for example, employs 19). Outside of New York, the WFP employs about a half-dozen.

Ideologically, the party is akin to the New York third parties—the American Labor Party and the Liberal Party—established in the 1930s and 1940s by the social democratic leaders of the clothing and garment unions who backed Franklin Roosevelt but didn’t want to vote for him on the line of the Tammany-dominated Democratic Party. “We’re garden varieties of social democrats, trying to use the state to make people’s lives a little less hard,” Cantor says. “The crisis of social democracy is real. If the 20th century was the century of the working class, it’s not clear yet what the 21st century will be. We are all Keynesians, but we need to be more than Keynesians. Our answer is to win massive investment in public goods, so you don’t have to be rich to have a decent life. Add in the climate crisis, and this grows still more complex.”

If the Working Families Party is the ideological heir to the American Labor Party, its status as a permanent electoral army makes it, however improbably, the operational heir to such classic Democratic machines as Tammany Hall (to be sure, a cleaned-up Tammany: no patronage, no kickbacks, no rigged elections). On any given day, the WFP’s tasks include cultivating progressive groups willing to join and fund the organization; convening meetings with its member groups to decide on strategies, causes, and candidates; undertaking research; finding and training candidates; and running campaigns. Cantor worked on Jesse Jackson’s 1984 and 1988 presidential bids and concluded that individual campaigns, no matter how groundbreaking, were too ephemeral to alter fundamental power relations. “I didn’t believe,” he says, “that the excitement of a presidential campaign was transferrable to the slow grind of building the kind of institutional trust and relations you need to contest for power.”

Maintaining a sizable and expert staff (“these are really talented people, not schleppers,” Cantor says) takes money. The WFP raised and spent $7.8 million in 2013. Most of the money came from unions and small donors. Only $600,000 came from large individual contributors. Cantor is always cognizant of the need to make payroll. “A big part of my job is being a small-business man,” he says. “I’m totally like my father, worrying about keeping the lights on at his store. I have the same fears he had, all the time. But the hunt for money is part of politics. I don’t mind it.” Colleagues describe Cantor as an unrelenting fundraiser. “He’s really had to push a lot of people,” says Congressman Jerrold Nadler, who represents Manhattan’s Upper West Side. “It’s not as if the party gets multimillion-dollar contributions.”

 

Cantor was born and raised in Levittown on Long Island, the youngest of three children. His father owned and ran an auto-parts store. “He hated his job, but it provided for his family,” Cantor says. His mother was a librarian who was active in civic affairs. Cantor describes his parents as liberals “but not of the left.” When Cantor was a teenager, his uncle gave the family a gift subscription to The Progressive, the monthly magazine started in 1909 by Senator Robert La Follette of Wisconsin, which Cantor devoured. “I was amazed,” he says. “I remember reading a piece on the Vietnam War and militarism and realizing I basically knew nothing.”

Bob Master, the political director of the northeastern region of the Communications Workers of America and perhaps Cantor’s closest political compatriot, has been a friend since they both attended General Douglas MacArthur High School, where Cantor was elected student-body president and Master vice president. Cantor was “funny and ebullient,” Master says, “but only somewhat political.” (Friends say he’s still funny, recounting the song parodies he’s written for birthdays and kindred occasions. For one soirée saluting Master, Cantor wrote and sang a lyric to the tune of Frank Loesser’s “Guys and Dolls.” For Loesser’s opening line—“When you see a guy/Reach for stars in the sky”—Cantor substituted, “When you see a Jew/Reading Monthly Review.”)

Cantor attended Wesleyan University in Connecticut but was not a happy student. “I was too young,” he says. In the middle of his sophomore year, he took time off to work on an Israeli kibbutz. “I essentially took the gap year I should have taken before college,” he says. “I milked 400 cows twice a day. I very much liked it. It was good to be seen as competent at something new.”

Back at Wesleyan, Cantor read a piece in The Progressive by the influential left writer Andrew Kopkind, who made the case that community organizing was an appropriate place for a young leftist to get started. “I didn’t really know what community organizing was,” Cantor says, “but it sounded cool.” After graduation in 1977, Cantor moved south to work for ACORN, a group founded by New Leftists seeking to mobilize the rural and urban poor. Cantor admired the writings of radical sociologists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, who argued that the power of the poor was the power to disrupt, which would cause the state to respond with greater social provision.

Cantor spent a year in Stuttgart, Arkansas, building an organization of whites and blacks that sought to pressure the local government to pave more roads. “I can’t say I accomplished a lot,” Cantor says, “but I got a real education.” For the next five years, Cantor worked for ACORN in St. Louis and then Detroit, where he organized a union of fast-food workers that won a representation election at a McDonald’s. “Only young people would have deigned to try this,” he says. “It got a lot of buzz until it crashed.”

In 1983, Cantor left ACORN for the National Labor Committee on Central America, where he mobilized union opposition to the AFL-CIO’s support for the Reagan administration’s efforts to destabilize the leftist government of Nicaragua and buttress the military regime in El Salvador. A number of unions supported the committee’s work, but they were opposed by the hard-liners who dominated the AFL-CIO.

Like many who came out of the 1960s left, Cantor came to realize that community organizing and movement building were both indispensable and insufficient to win lasting change. He still identifies with those movements, but his distinctive aptitude has been to find ways in which the electoral process can advance progressive goals. “I feel we’re in a long line of people going back to the abolitionists: the populists, the suffragists, the labor activists, the civil-rights workers,” he says. “These were all extra-parliamentary movements. We strive to be like them, and we recognize we have to contest for these values through the state, through elections. That’s what most people think politics is. That’s our role.”

At the end of the 1980s, Cantor took a job as a program officer at the Long Island–based Veatch Foundation, which funded a range of liberal organizations. Cantor remembers the time as one in which “the American left was made up of people desperately sending fundraising appeals to each other.” In 1989, Cantor married Laura Markham, the co-founder and -owner of the alternative weekly Detroit Metro Times. Markham and Cantor took their honeymoon in Europe, which coincided with several Green Party victories in Germany. Markham asked Cantor why there were no successful third parties in America. Cantor answered that U.S. election rules didn’t permit third parties to get anywhere. Then he thought about that some more.

 

When Cantor returned from Europe, the New York mayoral election was under way. Progressives were furious that the no-longer-liberal Liberal Party had endorsed Republican Rudy Giuliani. “There was a lot of dismay with the Liberals,” Cantor says. “My old friend Bob Master, who was at the Communications Workers, floated the idea of taking over the party. Then he forgot it. I didn’t.”

Cantor got in touch with Joel Rogers, a professor of law and political science at the University of Wisconsin who’d done academic work on third parties. “Danny called me out of the blue,” Rogers says. He flew to New York to join Cantor in discussions with various liberal and union heavyweights about establishing a substitute for the Liberal Party. The heavyweights soon lost interest, but Cantor remained enthusiastic. “I was young enough and stupid enough to try something,” he says.

Many within the left—from socialist Michael Harrington to onetime Students for a Democratic Society leader Tom Hayden—had argued since the 1970s that given the absence of a parliamentary system or proportional representation voting, progressives had no plausible alternative to going into the Democratic Party and using primary elections to move it to the left. By the time Cantor and Rogers got together, most 1960s leftists still active in politics had followed Harrington and Hayden’s advice.

But by the time Cantor and Rogers got together, the Democratic Party was moving in a more conservative direction, particularly on economic issues. Center-right groups, like the Democratic Leadership Council, urged Democrats to cast a cold eye on the welfare state and steer clear of the tax increases that could make that welfare state more secure. Some on the left, on the labor left particularly, demanded that liberals break with the Democrats and start something new. Because the only vehicle for defeating an invigorated Republican Party shifting rightward under the influence of Ronald Reagan, however, was the Democratic Party, that break never came. Trapped within a Democratic Party that was also shifting rightward, the left stewed in discontent.

In 1990, Rogers and Cantor came up with an idea they believed could revive the left while uniting both its in-the-party and out-of-the-party camps. They co-authored and circulated a paper titled “Party Time,” which laid out their strategic vision. Beginning by noting that there were “an almost bewildering number of progressive groups of one stripe or another out there doing things,” they observed that those efforts had amounted to little. “We propose,” they wrote, “a cross between the ‘party within the party’ strategy favored by some Democratic Party activists and the ‘plague on both your houses’ stance adopted by some critics of both major parties.” What was needed was a new party, but one that didn’t take votes away from Democrats and thereby elect Republicans. Fusion, Cantor and Rogers argued, permitted just such an inside-outside hybrid. By winning explicitly progressive votes for Democrats on their new party’s ballot line, they could pressure Democratic elected officials to move left. The problem was only six states in addition to New York permitted fusion voting, so Cantor and Rogers urged their fellow progressives to expand the number of states where it was legal.

When they’d finished writing the paper, Cantor says, “I did one thing that was really clever. I wrote, ‘Do not circulate without permission’ on the front page, which guaranteed that people would pass it around.” Community organizers generally liked the proposal, he says, “but no one from labor did. They still thought they controlled the Democratic Party.” Cantor continued to mail out the paper, and when he’d received funding commitments totaling $300,000, he and Rogers founded the “New Party,” for which Cantor, leaving his post at Veatch, became executive director.

The party’s success hinged on challenging the constitutionality of the state laws banning fusion voting. For the next seven years, the New Party ran hundreds of left-leaning candidates for nonpartisan municipal offices, while laying the groundwork for the court challenge. “We worked out a whole strategy in detail,” Rogers says. “We were positioning local elected officials for future New Party candidacies as we were moving to the Supreme Court for our inevitable victory.” Rogers and Cantor’s optimism was bolstered when the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously for them in their suit against Minnesota. The case reached the Supreme Court in the spring of 1997. Although the Constitution establishes no special protections for the two-party system, the justices ruled 6-3 that states could bar fusion voting.

“That was the end of the New Party,” Rogers says. But Cantor believed fusion could still enable the left to build electoral power in the states that allowed it—at minimum, in New York.

 

Initially, Cantor says, the court’s decision left him dispirited. He was living in Ann Arbor, where he and his family had moved in 1996 when his wife had to rescue the floundering Detroit Metro Times. In New York, Governor George Pataki, a Republican, looked to be cruising to re-election in 1998, much to the dismay of liberal union and community group leaders. Cantor encouraged Master and Jon Kest, the New York–based executive director of ACORN, to think about establishing a party that would cross-endorse Pataki’s Democratic opponent, whoever that might turn out to be.

Under New York law, if a gubernatorial candidate receives at least 50,000 votes on a party’s line, that party is ensured a place on future state ballots, as long as its nominees for governor continue to reach that threshold. If this new venture succeeded, progressives would secure an electoral platform in New York politics, at a moment when neither the Democrats nor the Liberals had much to offer them. “It won’t fucking work,” Master recalls thinking, “but we’ll try it.”

Spending his weekdays in New York and his weekends in Ann Arbor, Cantor, with Kest and Master, convened a series of meetings to persuade New York liberals to get on board. “These three white boys had a fever dream of fusion,” says Bertha Lewis, then a leader of ACORN. “It was Danny who broke it down about why we needed a party to go to, why we needed some place where we could show our vote.” In time, Cantor convinced the leaders of the New York regions of the United Auto Workers and the community organization Citizens Action to join the Communications Workers and ACORN in backing the venture, which they named—after much debate—the Working Families Party.

New York City Council Speaker Peter Vallone, the Democratic gubernatorial nominee the WFP cross-endorsed, was hardly a man of the liberal left. The decision drew considerable and predictable criticism from some progressives, but it set the course the party was to take in future years: Making an immediate pragmatic compromise when it enabled the left to make a long-term strategic advance. Cantor has always understood that purity is not the path to power. “We don’t just want to have grievances,” he says. “We want to govern.”

ACORN precinct walkers explained to thousands of voters why it was important to vote for the Democrat on the Working Families line—no simple chore on someone’s doorstep—and an editorial in The Nation urged its New York readers to vote Working Families. On election night, though, it looked as if the party had come up short, with Vallone winning just 45,000 votes in the WFP’s column.

Gathered in a pizza joint as the votes came in, Lewis recalls, “Danny and Bob and Jon were seated in a booth, weeping. Grown men, weeping. Danny was the most crushed. His whole body crumbled. I said, ‘You punk-ass motherfuckers, stop crying and go out and check the voting machines!’” The trio heeded Lewis’s counsel. “We went to these dusty warehouses and oversaw recounts,” Cantor says. “‘That’s three for us. No, that’s 30!’” The party picked up 6,000 votes on the recanvass, ending up with 51,325.

The WFP’s place on the ballot assured, Cantor officially became executive director, and the party began to expand. Some of New York’s giant private-sector unions affiliated, including locals 32BJ (janitors, doormen, and security guards) and 1199 (hospital workers) of the Service Employees International Union. Later, the Teamsters, the New York Hotel Trades Council, and Make the Road New York, which canvasses and provides social services in Latino communities, joined as well.

Cantor took pains to devise a structure and bylaws that made groups large and small feel they had fair representation in the party’s decision--making. Initially, the party had sought to build neighborhood clubs, but the effort required so much staff time that it was abandoned. Instead, the party became a hybrid: a mix of county organizations (which individuals could join), unions, and community groups. The party set a maximum number of votes that an affiliate could cast in party deliberations, so an organization like 1199, with more than 200,000 New York members, couldn’t dominate the decision-making process. It levied dues for unions at a higher per capita rate than those for (invariably poorer) community groups. Meeting steadily over the years, the affiliates acquired a better understanding of one another’s concerns and their combined potential, which Cantor sees as critical in building an effective political coalition. “People have to develop trust with one another,” he says, “so that even if we don’t win every time, they still won’t go away.”

Following the 1998 election, the party hired Bill Lipton as its organizing director. A native of upstate New York, Lipton attended Columbia University, where he studied under Eric Foner, the great historian of Reconstruction. After graduation, he worked as a tenant organizer before moving on to ACORN and then the New Party. At the WFP, Lipton assembled the canvass operation and built a reputation as a stellar campaign manager. “Where Danny is a visionary, always thinking about how to win and export big ideas,” says one leading New York politico, “Bill is an unbelievable ground tactician.”

In 1999, Cantor’s wife, Laura Markham, sold the Detroit Metro Times, and the couple, with their two children, returned to New York. (Markham has since become a clinical psychologist and a noted parenting authority. Her website, AhaParenting.com, Cantor says, has “a lot more hits than the party’s.”) In 2001, the WFP backed the mayoral bid of Democrat Mark Green, who signaled his awareness of the party’s electoral proficiency by making Lipton his field director in Queens. Confronted with the aftermath of September 11 and Michael Bloomberg’s limitless campaign spending, Green lost. In 2003, the party deviated from its usual practice and ran community activist Letitia James only on the WFP line against an unqualified Democratic nominee for a Brooklyn City Council seat. James won with 72 percent of the vote, becoming the first strictly third-party candidate elected to the council in nearly 50 years.

The campaign that made the WFP’s reputation in New York state was its 2004 effort to elect a little-known lawyer named David Soares as Albany’s district attorney. Cantor conceived the campaign as a way to dismantle the so-called Rockefeller drug laws, which for decades had wreaked havoc in minority communities by imposing lengthy prison sentences on people apprehended with small amounts of drugs. Civil-rights groups had tried and failed repeatedly to get the law reformed or repealed. “Dan came up with the notion,” Master says, “that if we could win a D.A. race in which the candidate says the Rockefeller drug laws are terrible policy, it could break the legislative gridlock holding up their modification or repeal.”

In 2003, Cantor asked WFP interns to see which counties had district attorney’s races the following year. He concluded that the most tempting target—though with the steepest odds against success—was Albany, the state capital. The district attorney there, Paul Clyne, was seeking re-election with the backing of the city’s venerable Democratic machine. Cantor cold-called an Albany legal-aid attorney and asked if he’d like to run. The attorney declined but suggested Cantor call David Soares, an assistant district attorney who was promoting community policing and youth programs.

At first glance, Soares was not a promising candidate. His name had appeared in the local paper just twice in the preceding four years. He was black in a county that was 95 percent white. And he had never heard of the Working Families Party. But he agreed to meet with Cantor, Lipton, and Karen Scharff, the head of Citizens Action in New York, which was the biggest community-organizing group in the Albany area.

“I didn’t understand their strategy initially,” Soares says. “They placed huge emphasis on educating the electorate on reforming the Rockefeller drug laws. Most people don’t understand how a D.A.’s race could be a force for change, but the party did a great job on messaging.” Cantor raised money from sentencing--reform advocates, Scharff turned out precinct walkers, and Lipton ran the campaign in perpetual overdrive. “After a day of knocking on doors in the rain, 30 volunteers and I come back to the campaign headquarters, wet and exhausted,” Soares says. “It’s nine o’clock. Lipton gets up on a desk to thank everybody and gets them to stuff envelopes for another two hours.”

Soares defeated Clyne by 25 percentage points. Six weeks later, the legislature pared back the Rockefeller laws, and when the Democrats captured the state senate four years after that, the laws were repealed altogether.

Following Soares’s victory, the party’s newly won reputation as the state’s most effective campaign organization convinced many Democratic elected officials that they needed the WFP’s endorsement and its operatives to run and staff their campaigns. Members of New York’s Democratic congressional delegation funded the WFP’s successful efforts to flip historically Republican upstate districts in the 2006 and 2008 elections. At the insistence of Governor Eliot Spitzer, the state Democratic Party engaged the WFP to manage all the state senate races in swing districts in 2008. The WFP–backed candidates won, putting the senate in Democratic hands for the first time since 1964. The consequence was immediate. When the new legislature convened, it raised $4 billion in new taxes on the wealthiest New Yorkers, enabling the state to avoid the huge cutbacks in social services that other states enacted in the depths of the Great Recession.

 

In 2007, party organizer Emma Wolfe began to vet and recruit candidates for the New York City Council races two years hence. The unions and community organizations, meeting under the party’s auspices, settled on nine council candidates for which the WFP would campaign. The party referred to the gatherings as its “table.” Political directors of the party’s main affiliates convene regularly—weekly in election season—with WFP leaders to discuss, debate, decide on, and plan campaigns. “There’s not a city in the United States, and I’ve worked in 17 of them, with a table as sophisticated and effective as this,” says a veteran political consultant.

One of the candidates who received the party’s support in 2009 was Brad Lander, an affordable-housing advocate who lived in Park Slope. “I never would have been interested in running but for the party,” Lander says. “The progressive table that Working Families had created made it possible to wage campaigns both inside the government and outside for causes I cared about.” Lander and seven other WFP–recruited candidates won in 2009. The party then helped them set up their offices, hire chiefs-of-staff, and master the city’s arcane budgets. “New members elected only on the Democratic line are often dependent on the county Democratic bosses for these things,” says one union leader who attends the WFP’s weekly table. “The party does it better.”

At Lander’s suggestion, the incoming members formed the Progressive Caucus on the council and announced they were promoting three pieces of legislation: mandating paid sick days for employees; extending the living-wage ordinance to more workers on projects that received city funding; and enacting an inclusionary zoning ordinance that would require developers of luxury apartments to build affordable housing as well. “For three years we had nothing to show for it,” Lander says. “People scoffed at the caucus. They thought it was silly. But the momentum for these issues grew.”

Led by Lipton, the WFP waged a media and canvassing campaign on behalf of paid sick days. The party and the caucus tried to persuade Council Speaker Christine Quinn to bring the measure to a vote six times, but she refused. The seventh effort—a discharge petition signed by a majority of council members—succeeded. With Quinn planning to run for mayor and fearing she had placed herself on the wrong side of an issue city voters thought was a moral necessity, she permitted a vote. The measure passed over Mayor Bloomberg’s veto.

 As early as 2010, the party began looking at potential candidates for the 2013 city council races, eventually choosing and training candidates for 13 seats. The candidates waged their campaigns on the party’s signature issues: eliminating the police practice of targeting young minority men for “stop and frisk,” and increasing wages for fast-food workers. Some faced opponents backed by the city’s real-estate lobby, fearful that the new council and mayor might enact an inclusionary zoning ordinance. In all, the city’s real-estate industry spent $7 million on the council races, with virtually nothing to show for their effort. Twelve of the WFP’s thirteen candidates won.

It was not the first time the party had come under establishment attack. Following the WFP’s victories in the 2009 city elections, the Rupert Murdoch–owned New York Post ran more than 100 stories alleging that a company the party had created to provide campaign services gave illegal discounts to the candidates it favored. Investigations by the U.S. attorney’s office and the state’s Election Commission found no basis to file any charges, but it took three years and nearly a million dollars in legal fees before the party was absolved. (The Republican district attorney of Staten Island still has an ongoing grand-jury investigation of the allegations.)

Conservative policy analysts contend that the party’s emphasis on raising wages will hurt small businesses without engendering any of the higher-skilled jobs the city needs to rebuild its middle class. “I don’t think Cantor knows much about how to revive the New York economy,” says the urban historian Fred Siegel. By advancing an agenda that helps city unions, Siegel says, the party will raise the cost of living and make New York increasingly unaffordable for the very workers the WFP claims to be helping.

Cantor counters that it’s the market that has rendered the city unaffordable. He singles out the real-estate market, where an infusion of the super-rich has sent building costs, housing prices, and rents soaring. Fixing the New York economy requires zoning policies that will create housing that’s within the reach of ordinary citizens. More broadly, he argues that what’s needed is “a much greater provision of public goods”: early childhood education, better schools, affordable college, parks and libraries in poor neighborhoods. Cantor’s vision hews closely to that of the city’s last great social democratic mayor, Fiorello La Guardia, and it is one, he hopes, de Blasio and the new city council will make real.

 

Even with a new council and mayor, New York City lacks the power to enact many of these changes. Greater public provision requires more tax revenues, and taxation is the prerogative of state government. New York may be a heavily Democratic state, but decades of legislative gerrymandering have often saddled it with a Republican senate that has killed countless progressive reforms.

Moving New York state left, says one of the party’s allies, “is a bigger problem than moving the city. Unlike the city council, the state legislature has no term limits. Unlike the city, the state has no public financing for its elections.”

The absence of term limits for the legislature means that the transformation of state government must proceed slowly. To that end, the party has inaugurated what it calls the “Candidate Pipeline Project” to have credible aspirants ready when legislative seats come open. As town council and school board members are often the elected officials who advance to the state assembly and senate, the Pipeline focuses on running candidates for local offices. “We train 1,000 prospective candidates across the state in the off years,” Lipton says, “then we home in on the 75 most promising. We aim to send six to eight new progressives to the legislature in every election. If we succeed, within eight years the legislature will be divided between progressives and Democrats, not Democrats and Republicans.”

The depth of the party’s commitment to the project becomes evident in a meeting of 55 of the party’s regional political directors and campaign workers who convene a few days after the November elections. Dressed in a green shirt that hangs outside his baggy jeans, WFP organizing director Mike Boland reviews the party’s campaigns across the state. While the Republicans had a good day, he begins, the candidates whom the Working Families Party prioritized won most of their races. The Hudson Valley regional coordinator reports on the campaign for a professor active in environmental causes who won a town council seat and her prospects for taking a state senate seat. The Long Island coordinator details the victory of a CWA activist in a Long Beach City Council contest. The party considers him a strong candidate with a bright future: Long Beach’s current state assemblyman is in his mid-eighties. On Election Day, the party turned out 49 precinct walkers for him, although Long Beach has just 43 precincts.

“Experts will tell you this district is winnable, and that one isn’t,” Boland tells me after the meeting. “But facts on the ground change. So instead of recruiting a candidate for where the action is this year, we find progressive activists everywhere and start running them for local office. We see if they’re willing to work hard and build a good record in office. We can see if the person has real political potential.”

In conjunction with its canvass operation and its weekly table, the Pipeline is what sets the Working Families Party apart from almost any other political organization, left or right. “It’s obvious,” Master says of the Pipeline, “but who else does it?”

The scope of the party’s New York activities has grown to the point where Cantor no longer can keep track of it all. On Election Day, Lipton mentioned to him that they had a slate of council candidates running in Plattsburgh, by the Canadian border. “We do?” Cantor asked.

 

How much of what the Working Families Party has accomplished in New York can be transferred to other states that don’t have fusion voting? Quite a lot, Cantor says. It turns out that fusion—the sine qua non of his and Joel Rogers’s original manifesto—isn’t essential to building an electoral left after all. “The Tea Party proved we were wrong,” Cantor says. “They yanked the Republican Party to the right without being a separate party. We realized that most of our power in New York comes from our work in Democratic primaries. We don’t have to be on the ballot.”

What the WFP has built in New York, in fact, is a left party within the Democratic Party—a coalition of unions and community groups that has come together and decided to fund and conduct joint electoral and issue campaigns. Indeed, as the institutional Democratic Party has atrophied, the WFP looks less like a party within the Democratic Party than a party that has assumed the functions of the Democratic Party, only with progressive politics.

Buoyed by its own success and the rise of economic populism, the party is now expanding its operations into other states. “If you include the New Party, it took us 23 years to get operations in New York, Connecticut, and Oregon,” Cantor says. “In year 24, all of a sudden, we could have operations in seven states.” In June, Cantor became the party’s national director, while Lipton succeeded him as director of the New York WFP. “I pulled away from New York work to go evangelizing across the country,” Cantor says, “persuading labor, environmentalists, and others to invest time and money in us.”

Just how much labor can invest is much on Cantor’s mind these days. “Our biggest problem is that the labor movement is too weak,” he says. In every state where the Working Families Party is active or becoming active, the progressive wing of the labor movement is central to all the WFP’s work. Cantor worries that the ongoing assaults on American unions will diminish them to the point where they can no longer provide the financial and human resources the party needs to survive.

While doing all they can to bolster unions’ strength, Cantor and other WFP leaders are looking to new sources of support. They’ve cultivated a close relationship with MoveOn.org, not only because of the groups’ ideological affinities but also because MoveOn’s members can sway elections and fund campaigns. “As labor declines, the netroots become more important,” Cantor says. In 2010, the MoveOn PAC joined with the Oregon Working Families Party to unseat the state’s most conservative Democratic legislator, and Cantor hopes that can be a portent of partnerships to come. “Add the netroots to labor, and you have more than you need to win any Democratic primary,” he says. “In blue states, progressives could govern.”

Ilya Sheyman, the director of the MoveOn.org political action committee, sounds favorably disposed to such an alliance. “We’re not a formal affiliate,” he says, “but we’re now talking about affiliating in several states.”

Cantor also admires MoveOn’s success in online fundraising. “We have 4,500 sustaining members who pay dues to us every month,” he says. “Can we turn that into 45,000? MoveOn has cracked the code on this.”

The WFP’s most successful online campaign has been the one it has waged against fracking in New York state. “Our e-mail list grew more from that one issue than anything else,” Cantor says. Party leaders have long sought to have the WFP focus as much on environmental concerns as on economic. Indeed, Cantor and Rogers’s “Party Time” manifesto called for their new party to have a “red/green coloration.” In New York, the party’s campaign against fracking played a role in convincing Governor Andrew Cuomo to declare a moratorium on the practice until further studies are conducted.

But just as an alliance with MoveOn, an expansion of the party’s digital presence, and an increased emphasis on environmental causes all promise to enlarge the party’s base, they also threaten to divide it. Working- and middle-class beliefs on issues like fracking are not always in accord. The weekend before Thanksgiving, the WFP convened its initial event in Pennsylvania—a town hall at Philadelphia’s Temple University, attended by 750 members of the state’s largest progressive unions and community organizations and by five of the state’s leading Democratic candidates for governor in next year’s election. At one point, demonstrators briefly interrupted the proceedings by parading onstage with an anti-fracking banner.

The encounter wasn’t hostile, but they knew they had opponents in the hall. In Pennsylvania, Governor Tom Corbett, a Republican, has authorized a major expansion of fracking in the state’s Marcellus Shale fields while imposing few regulations and taxes on the extractors. What the Working Families coalition was demanding—which was echoed by the five gubernatorial candidates—was not an end to fracking. Rather, it called for tighter regulation and higher taxes on the industry to increase funding for the state’s strapped social services and schools.

This rift between the party’s different constituencies is hardly peculiar to the WFP. It looms over all of American liberalism. But, as Cantor acknowledges, the division is something that the party will have to grapple with in coming years as it expands. The WFP does not have the luxury of focusing solely on bread-and-butter issues. Cantor particularly wants to ensure that the party continues to take on racially discriminatory public policies, as it did in its campaign against the Rockefeller drug laws and “stop and frisk.” “We will fail if the DNA of this work does not fully recognize the centrality of race and the enduring effects of America’s ‘original sin’ and its newer mutations,” he wrote in an essay he co-authored last year.

If the essence of the Working Families Party project is to put together a coalition that supports an ongoing campaign operation that elects liberals to office and promotes liberal causes, the party should be able to have success in other states—but by no means all of them. In red states, and most purple ones, unions are too weak, if not altogether absent, to support the creation of such a force. In a blue state, however, where progressive unions still have resources, a Working Families Party could become a social democratic force.

The WFP’s growth could also forge new opportunities for working-class advances at a time when traditional collective bargaining has all but disappeared from the economic landscape. The paid sick days that the party has won and the minimum-wage hikes that are being enacted point to a shift in the way workers are seeking to promote their interests. The new arena for collective bargaining, imperfect though it be, is legislative. “Now more than ever, politics is in command, because we can no longer solve our problems one workplace or one company at a time,” Cantor says. In this new world, the WFP becomes a bargaining agent for the vast majority of workers who do not have and are not likely to get union representation.

Still, how much an organization like the WFP can do ultimately depends on conditions beyond its control. “You don’t organize movements,” Cantor says. “You build organizations, and if movements emerge, you may catch their energy and grow. Occupy Wall Street moved the ball farther in three months than a lot of us did in three decades. But the Tea Party understood that you disrupt and then you electoralize. We will fail if there aren’t strong community and environmental and youth movements in America. But they will fail if they can’t figure out how their values and issues become part of the legislative and electoral process. That’s where a group like the Working Families Party has a role to play.” Reported by The American Prospect 7 hours ago.

For Many Small-Business Owners, Providing Health Insurance Remains a Struggle

$
0
0
A year after the insurance marketplaces were introduced as part of the Affordable Care Act, provisions that were supposed to help small businesses offer benefits to employees have yet to fulfill their promise. Reported by NYTimes.com 3 hours ago.

For Many Small Business Owners, Providing Health Insurance Remains a Struggle

$
0
0
For Many Small Business Owners, Providing Health Insurance Remains a Struggle Reported by ajc.com 6 hours ago.

Kentucky Health Cooperative: What You Need to Know About Annual Open Enrollment

$
0
0
LOUISVILLE, Ky., Nov. 4, 2014 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- In just days, Kentuckians may visit the state's health insurance Marketplace, kynect, and enroll in a plan. Nov. 15 is the first day that consumers can make plan changes, too, that would go into effect as early as Jan. 1, 2015.... Reported by PR Newswire 6 hours ago.

Why One Insurer Sees a Growing Market for Small-Business Health Insurance

$
0
0
Why One Insurer Sees a Growing Market for Small-Business Health Insurance Reported by ajc.com 5 hours ago.

Cincinnati Bengals Devon Stills’ Daughter, Has Cancer, Will Watch Him Play for First Time

$
0
0
Cincinnati Bengals Devon Stills’ Daughter, Has Cancer, Will Watch Him Play for First Time Cincinnati Bengals Devon Stills’ Daughter, Has Cancer, Will Watch Him Play for First Time
Cincinnati Bengals Devon Stills’ Daughter, Has Cancer, Will Watch Him Play for First Time
American Football
Health
Sports
Cincinnati Bengals Logo
Has Been Optimized

Leah Still, the 4-year-old daughter of Cincinnati Bengals defensive lineman Devon Still, will get to see her father play football for the first time this Thursday night against the Cleveland Browns.

Leah was diagnosed with Stage IV neuroblastoma, a form of cancer, in June. Her dad was cut by the Bengals, but the team re-signed him to their practice squad and later moved him back to their roster so that the family would not lose their health insurance.

Leah will also be part of a ceremony in which the Bengals will donate a $1.25 million to the Cincinnati Children's Hospital to help fight pediatric cancer. The money was raised by fans who bought Devon's No. 75 jersey.

Leah has been hospitalized in Philadelphia, but her doctors are allowing her to make the trip. She had a cancerous tumor removed on Sept. 25., noted USA Today.

"I know she's excited about coming to Cincinnati to see what Cincinnati has to offer," Devon told Fox Sports. "I think the crowd will go crazy. They've been supporting her the whole time with her being all the way in Philadelphia. With her being here in Cincinnati and having a chance to see her it's only going to get the crowd kind of hyped."

"It's going to be added motivation just knowing my daughter is watching me. I want her to be able to hear how the crowd cheers that loud whenever I make a tackle, so I'm going to go out there and do whatever I can to put a smile on her face," added Devon. "I'm trying not to think about it right now. I'm trying to think of the Browns. Like I said, it's a fast week and I don't want to get caught up in too much emotion with my daughter."

"It will probably be the most special game I'm ever going to play because I know my daughter is going to be here to watch me play," said Devon. "All the money that's been raised for the cancer research is because of her strength and because she's fighting this disease. So it's definitely going to be an emotional game for me."

Sources: USA Today, Fox Sports

1
Shares: 
Combined FB: 
Video Piece: 
Regular Piece
OV in Depth:  Reported by Opposing Views 4 hours ago.

Washington Post Fact Checker Relies on Dictionary to Protect Jeanne Shaheen

$
0
0
Washington Post Fact Checker Relies on Dictionary to Protect Jeanne Shaheen On Monday, the Washington Post Fact Checker issued four Pinocchios to an anti-amnesty ad blasting Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) for aligning 99% of the time with President Obama—a man who has promised executive amnesty for illegal immigrants. Embarrassingly, the Post’s pedantic review invoked that most outmoded of rhetorical tropes—the old grammar school “According to Webster’s Dictionary…” side-step—as it performed linguistic gymnastics in an attempt to refute an ad whose premise is patently true.

The ad, which was sponsored by Ending Spending Action Fund (ESAF), states that Shaheen votes with Barack Obama 99% of the time, a fact the ad sources to CQ Roll Call. The Post Fact Checker chose not to challenge this portion of the ad. “We will lay aside the 99 percent claim,” wrote thePost, because it has been “ably examined by our colleagues at PolitiFact.” Indeed, PolitiFact rated the claim “Mostly True.” 

The Fact Checker then stated it would focus on the ad’s claim that, “After the election, Obama admits he will give amnesty to 11 million illegal immigrants.” After conceding that many of ESAF’s back-up materials for that claim come from none other than the Washington Post, the Fact Checker then devolves into a silly game of elementary semantics and actually links to Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary entry for the word “amnesty. 

Quoth the Post’s grade school banality: 



As we have noted before, "amnesty" is a loaded phrase when used in the context of illegal immigration.The dictionary definition is: "The act of an authority (as a government) by which pardon is granted to a large group of individuals."



The Post Fact Checker goes on to assert that because the Senate’s “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act” does not perfectly align with the Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary definition that it looked up online, the bill “did not contain anything as sweeping as that dictionary definition of amnesty.” 

Yes, the Washington Post actually wrote and published that statement.

Undeterred, the Post Fact Checker continued, this time choosing to parse whether the actual number of illegal aliens who stand to receive executive amnesty is less than 11 million and perhaps closer to five million.

“Note the 5 million number,” says the Fact Checker. “That’s much lower than 11 million, which by itself is considered the total universe of undocumented immigrants in the United States.”

Very good, Fact Checker! You’re right, five is less than 11. You get a gold star today!

Or maybe not. Indeed, as the Post Fact Checker admits a few paragraphs later: “At this point no one really knows the exact impact. But the odds are the number will be much less than 11 million.”

Yes, and the odds are, “If you like your health insurance, you can keep your health insurance.”

Embarrassing.

So, in the end, the Washington Post “Fact Checker” assigned four Pinnochios to an ad with two main claims—one which it concedes was proven “Mostly True” by its progressive cousin Politifact and the other which it says “no one really knows” about but that, “odds are,” may be less than the ad states.

The Post Fact Checker would do well to use its Merriam-Webster dictionary to look up “inane” and“non sequitir” the next time it plans on running its predictable pabulum against those who support protecting America’s borders. Reported by Breitbart 3 hours ago.

NRP Company Describes The Anatomy of An Ideal Candidate:

$
0
0
Mid-term elections will have its share of winners, losers and surprises. In The Anatomy of An Ideal Candidate, Dale Tyler, President of National Roofing Partners (NRP) and member of The Political Insiders Council (PIC), which consists of major donors to NRCA’s political action committee, ROOFPAC, outlines the four issues essential to the roofing industries:

DALLAS, TX (PRWEB) November 04, 2014

Mid-term elections will have its share of winners, losers and surprises. In The Anatomy of An Ideal Candidate, Dale Tyler, President of National Roofing Partners (NRP) and member of The Political Insiders Council (PIC), which consists of major donors to NRCA’s political action committee, ROOFPAC, outlines the four issues essential to the roofing industries:

1. Regulatory Reform

“We want to support candidates who are pro-business. The amount of regulation that has crept into our industry is daunting. A massive amount of nickel and dime red tape is tied up in all of it,” says Tyler.

2. Taxation Reform

Members of the National Roofing Contractors Association fall squarely into two groups: C-corporations, which pay a 35 percent corporate tax rate, and pass-through businesses, which pay at the individual tax rate. Tyler also believes that a simplified tax code - designed to promote business, protect individual rights and eliminate confusion - would make the most sense for taxpayers.

3. Illegal Immigration Reform

Demand for workers is outpacing available labor. By 2020, The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates the roofing industry will have added 18% more jobs, which US workers alone will not be able to fill. A number of conditions contribute to the problem, including an aging roofer population and a younger generation choosing college over the roofing trade. In this environment, illegal immigrants have sometimes filled the gap.

To address the chronic problem, the commercial roofing industry needs a temporary worker permit program, which would allow foreign workers to relieve some of the work-force vacancy pressure.

4. Repeal the Affordable Health Care Act’s Health Insurance Tax

“A lot of people would like to repeal all of [the ACA] because it is such a burden for businesses,” says Tyler.

The industry’s congressional contender would inherently understand that the Healthcare Insurance Tax (HIT), made possible by the Affordable Care Act, represents a specter of the worst kind for the small businesses that comprise so much of NRCA’s membership. The ideal industry candidate should support a repeal or major overhaul of the ACA that contains market-oriented reforms to the healthcare system.

For more insights on where the NRP stands on the relevant issues, please read The Anatomy of An Ideal Candidate.

About National Roofing Partners
National Roofing Partners is your Single Source for Roof Maintenance & Repairs. With just a single point of contact, your National Account Manager will help you manage your building assets. NRP can analyze the roofing needs of your entire building portfolio and create a customized program that meets those needs in an efficient and cost-effective way. NRP is committed to Superior Service with time-defined responses to meet your scheduling needs and simplified pricing for all of your serviced locations. For more information, visit the website at nationalroofingpartners.com.

Press Contact:    
David Huval
National Roofing Partners
800-537-6034

Jeff Brady
Brady Media Group
jeff(at)bradymediagroup(dot)com Reported by PRWeb 3 hours ago.

A Crucial Part Of Obama's Legacy Is On The Line Tonight

$
0
0
A Crucial Part Of Obama's Legacy Is On The Line Tonight The election scenario we now find ourselves in is the one Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell had in mind when he delivered an ominous warning to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid last November. 

"You'll regret this," McConnell said. "And you may regret it a lot sooner than you think."

McConnell's pronouncement came after Reid finally pulled the trigger on the so-called "nuclear option," which was one of the most drastic rule changes in recent Senate history. Under the new rules, most presidential nominees could be appointed by a simple majority vote. It removed the minority party's power to filibuster and prevent executive and judicial nominees from getting confirmed.

Reid and senior Democrats argued at the time the rules changes were necessary due to a mass blockade of judges by Republicans. But after Tuesday, they could find themselves on the other side of the coin and in the minority party if, as is looking increasingly likely, Republicans take back control of the Senate.

A major benefactor of the rules change was President Barack Obama, who has largely reshaped the federal courts with a friendly ally in a Democratic-controlled Senate. However, now Republicans have the power to effectively grind Obama's nominees to a halt — or force him to make compromises for his judicial picks to get a vote. 

"Sounds like Harry Reid might be getting his comeuppance," Roger Pilon, the chair of the Cato Institute's Center for Constitutional Studies, told Business Insider.A significant part of Obama's legacy rests on the judicial nominees he can appoint to courts, which will determine the constitutionality of his administration's policies, regulations, and executive actions long after he leaves office. With Reid's help, judicial appointments have been one of the few ways Obama has been able to work around a polarized, gridlocked Congress that is on track to become the least productive in history when it comes to passing bills into law.

Consider the way Obama has already reshaped the federal judiciary: When he came into office, only one of the 13 powerful US Courts of Appeals were filled with a Democratic-appointed majority of judges. Now, nine of the 13 courts have Democratic-appointed majorities. According to The New Yorker's Jeffrey Toobin, he has nominated far more women and minorities than any of his predecessors.

If Republicans control the Senate, Obama's advantage will disappear. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the likely next chair of the Judiciary Committee, could block any nominees from even receiving a hearing. And McConnell, who stands to become the next Majority Leader, could prevent them from getting a full vote on the Senate floor.

Three of Obama's nominees to the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit —which is widely considered the second-most powerful bench in the country after the Supreme Court — were confirmed last year after Reid changed the Senate's rules. Many of Obama's appointees are controlling the implementation of his agenda, writing new rules for financial reform, climate change, and even gun control and immigration.

The DC Circuit Court has vast jurisdiction over the federal government and thousands of regulations, rules, and executive actions from more than 400 administrative agencies. It's the court, for example, that last January ruled Obama's 2011 recess appointments unconstitutional.

"The issues before this court are some of the most important with respect to administrative law, which is where so much law gets made today," Pilon said.

The rules change benefitted the Obama administration in a major way this year in a case involving the Affordable Care Act. A three-judge panel — two Republican-appointed, one Democratic-appointed — ruled a 2012 IRS regulation that implements key subsidies under the law is invalid, in the case of Halbig v. Burwell. That decision has the potential to eliminate a feature of Obamacare that provided tax credits for more than five million people that enabled them to purchase health insurance through the federal exchange.

But the Department of Justice appealed the panel's decision, requesting an "en banc" review by the full D.C. Circuit Court. The math for the Obama administration was better in this situation — because of Reid's rule change, the court splits 7-4 in favor of Democratically appointed judges. In September, the court agreed to rehear the case, and thanks to Reid's nuclear option, many experts expect it will reverse the Halbig decision and preserve the tax credit feature of the president's signature healthcare law.

"If Republicans take the Senate, judicial appointments are probably going to grind to a halt," Timothy Jost, a professor at the Washington and Lee University School of Law, told Business Insider. "And that would probably have an effect in lots and lots of areas, including healthcare."

According to data from the non-profit group Alliance for Justice, there are 56 total district and circuit court vacancies without nominees. Congressional scholar Norm Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute wrote this March that he expects Republicans to confirm virtually none of the possible nominees if they take control of the Senate.

But though they admit lingering hard feelings, Republicans have adopted a conciliatory tone in advance of the election. Top lawmakers and aides say they want to employ a strategy that will show they can be effective at governing.

In Kansas last month, Sen. Pat Roberts, who is running for re-election, promised a McConnell-led majority would eliminate the nuclear option and restore minority rights upon taking back control of the Senate.

"We want to give back the minority right in the Senate like it used to be for the last 225 years before Harry Reid did that," Roberts told Business Insider. "That might be a little tough job, given the kind feelings that we have and the way we've been treated. But I think that's the right thing to do."

Alliance for Justice also isn't expecting a doomsday situation for confirmation of judicial appointments, though almost everyone acknowledges the pace of confirmations will severely slow during Obama's last two years in office. 

Each of the three preceding two term presidents — George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Ronald Reagan — faced an opposition-party Senate during their last two years in office. But in those three cases, about 20% of each president's total slate of nominees were confirmed during those final two years. Confirmation rates for all three presidents did plunge significantly, however, to the low- to mid-60s. 

"Some people have been saying this will result in a complete shutdown," said Michelle Schwartz, the director of justice at the group. "We don't think that's right."

*SEE ALSO: Here's What Happens If Republicans Take The Senate*

Join the conversation about this story » Reported by Business Insider 2 hours ago.

Health-Insurance Enrollment: What You Need to Know

$
0
0
Health-Insurance Enrollment: What You Need to Know Reported by ajc.com 37 minutes ago.

Hotwire Insurance Services to Provide Health Insurance Coverage Under Open Enrollment Period of Affordable Care Act

$
0
0
Hotwire Insurance Services is certified through Certified California to cover California residents who sign up for health insurance through the Open Enrollment Period beginning on November 15th.

CHULA VISTA, CA (PRWEB) November 04, 2014

Hotwire Insurance Services announced today that they will offer health insurance coverage to California residents under Covered California during the upcoming Open Enrollment Period. Starting on November 15th, Californians will be able to enroll for health insurance through Hotwire Insurance Services.

Hotwire Insurance Services is certified under Covered California. This certification allows agents to enroll customers under the Affordable Care Act, which is designed to provide all Americans with access to affordable health insurance policies.

“We’re proud to be able to provide our customers with access to health insurance policies through the Affordable Care Act,” said Haitham Bilal, President of Hotwire Insurance Services. “We’re constantly looking to provide our customers with the coverage they’re looking for, and the Covered California certification will allow us to provide millions of California residents with access to a variety of health insurance plans.”

As a Covered California certified agency, Hotwire Insurance Services serves as an alternative to the federal healthcare signup website. Customers of the agency will be able to enroll with a health insurance plan that fits the needs of their family, but they’ll also receive the personal guidance and expertise of dedicated insurance agents during the enrollment process.

About Hotwire Insurance Services

Hotwire Insurance Services is a full-service independent insurance agency, assisting customers in California. Hotwire Insurance Services gauges the needs of customers and scours for insurance plans on their behalf in order to deliver excellent coverage and customer service. For more information, visit our website at http://www.hotwireins.com/. Reported by PRWeb 47 minutes ago.

November Marks National Pet Cancer Awareness Month

$
0
0
BREA, Calif., Nov. 5, 2014 /PRNewswire/ -- Last year, Veterinary Pet Insurance Co. (VPI), the nation's first and largest provider of pet health insurance, received more than 63,000 claims for cancer diagnosis and treatment in pets, making cancer-related conditions one of the most... Reported by PR Newswire 11 hours ago.
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images