Company Maintains Aggressive Dedication to Data Security Best Practices

Cambridge, MA (PRWEB) November 05, 2014

Backupify, the leading provider of cloud to cloud backup and recovery solutions for Software as a Service (SaaS) applications, today announced the company achieved HIPAA compliance by successfully completing a HIPAA audit administered by an independent audit firm. Driven by Backupify’s deep commitment to data security on behalf of its customers, meeting HIPAA compliance requirements is yet another important security initiative completed by the company. In addition to HIPAA compliance, Backupify recently created new user roles for admins within the Backupify platform to adhere to security best practices and also renewed its SOC 2 Type II compliance.

HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) compliance is a critical standard for protecting sensitive patient data. Any company dealing with protected health information (PHI) must ensure the right security measures are in place and followed. While Backupify does not interact with PHI, the company does however count many healthcare organizations as customers and therefore felt compelled to go through the necessary steps to meet HIPAA compliance requirements.

“Given all the changes in the regulatory landscape, Backupify wanted to get independent verification that we meet the required standards for HIPAA compliance,” said Ben Thomas, VP of Security, Backupify. “We now have third party validation through an independent audit which should help customers feel even more comfortable entrusting their data to Backupify. As we build innovative backup solutions, data security remains a core focus. It always has been and always will be.”

Backupify follows comprehensive security regulations and guidelines for the privacy and security of customer data - spanning product features, data encryption protocols, and internal controls. Recently, Backupify introduced the creation of a Help Desk Admin user role. The addition of new admin roles offers organizations greater flexibility while granting companies the ability to tighten security by restricting privileges within Backupify to those who need them.

Outside of product features, Backupify subjects itself to rigorous external penetration tests by industry leading firms, is self-certified in compliance with the US Department of Commerce Safe Harbor program, allows customers to store data in Amazon’s VPC (Virtual Private Cloud), and goes beyond using Amazon’s built-in bucket-level encryption with every Backupify account receiving a unique AES 256-bit encryption key. Backupify also renewed its SOC 2 Type II compliance which reviews Backupify’s backup and recovery system to ensure that controls are suitably designed to provide assurance that the applicable trust services criteria are in place.

About Backupify
Backupify is the leading provider of cloud-to-cloud backup and recovery solutions for Software as a Service (SaaS) applications, offering an all-in-one archiving, search and restore solution for the most popular online services including Salesforce, Google Apps, Facebook, Twitter and more. Backupify ensures that companies can access and control the data they entrust to these systems and prevents data loss from external threats, user error or service failure. Backupify was founded in 2008 and is based in Cambridge, Massachusetts. For more information, please visit http://www.backupify.com, subscribe to the Backupify blog or follow @Backupify on Twitter. Reported by PRWeb 11 hours ago.

Event and Meeting Management Firm Produced Sixth Annual Event for North Carolina Executives

CARY, N.C. (PRWEB) November 05, 2014

The Special Event Company announces their recent involvement in the 2014 NC CEO Forum, held at North Ridge Country Club, in Raleigh, North Carolina on Thursday, Oct. 30. The sixth annual event focused on the theme of Leading Transformation and brought together more than 400 CEOs and business executives from some of the largest companies state-wide. Attendees welcomed Alan Mulally, former CEO of Ford Motor Company and Google board member as featured keynote speaker.

In addition, attendees heard from more than 10 executive speakers, including the following title keynotes:

Lou D’Ambrosio, Chairman, Sensus

Bill Demchak, Chairman, President, and CEO, PNC Financial Services Group

Lynn Good, President and CEO, Duke Energy

Karen Ignagni, President and CEO of America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), presented by Brad Wilson, President and CEO of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina

Tom Pike, CEO of Quintiles

Peak Performance Expert, Orna Drawas, and author of "Perform Like A Rockstar…And Still Have Time for Lunch", joined the lineup as special guest speaker.

A charitable opportunity was included as part of the day’s events, with all proceeds from the Forum’s raffle and auction being donated to Make-A-Wish® Eastern North Carolina. Total proceeds from this year’s event will allow Make-A-Wish® Eastern North Carolina to grant two wishes for the children in their program.

The Special Event Company was an official Partner of the Forum and provided production needs, registration assistance, speaker and sponsor management, and venue coordination. The Special Event Company has managed the NC CEO Forum since its inception in 2009.

For more information about the 2014 NC CEO Forum, visit http://www.ncceoforum.com.

ABOUT THE SPECIAL EVENT COMPANY:
The Special Event Company (TSEC) has provided exceptional strategic and creative delivery of meetings and events since our formation in 1987.  From our headquarters in Cary, NC and satellite offices in Newport Beach, CA, London, and Sydney, the company executes global programs with seamless efficiency.  We offer a turnkey service for site selection, planning, logistics, production and audio visual, transport, collateral and graphic design. Our team of professional planners will effectively budget, design, source, contract, and execute award-winning programs, which exceed clients’ goals and deliver excellent ROI. For more information, please visit http://www.specialeventco.com. Reported by PRWeb 9 hours ago.

Cloud backups are all the rage at the moment, but they do raise security concerns, particularly for businesses that deal with sensitive information. Cloud to cloud backup specialist Backupify has add some new features to its service to make it more secure. These include HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) compliance as well as new features for admins. "Given all the changes in the regulatory landscape, Backupify wanted to get independent verification that we meet the required standards for HIPAA compliance," says Ben Thomas, VP of Security at Backupify. "We now have third party validation through an independent audit… [Continue Reading] Reported by betanews 8 hours ago.

The U.S. Supreme Court has delayed announcing whether it will hear a case challenging subsidies in Affordable Care Act's "federally facilitated" health insurance exchanges (Virginia has a federally run state health insurance exchange in which 80 percent of enrollees received subsidies for their... Reported by dailypress.com 5 hours ago.

In the phase one audits under the US Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), in which organisations were randomly selected to be audited, only 11% of those investigated came back with a clean bill of health. Reported by Mondaq 7 hours ago.

*Editor's note: An earlier version of this post was first published on Nov. 3.*

Republicans will adopt a combative but strategic approach toward governing now that they have swept to control of both chambers of US Congress, top GOP lawmakers and aides told Business Insider over the past month. 

With an eye toward the 2016 presidential election, Republican leaders in the House and Senate will look to move forward GOP legislative priorities popular with the American public and could earn an ample number of Democratic votes to send to President Barack Obama's desk.

They'll also aim to show they are the party best able to run the country.

"We want to demonstrate a kind of competence that Harry Reid has not," a senior Republican Senate aide told Business Insider recently, referring to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

"They have governed with the sole purpose of casting the Republican Party in a bad light," the aide said of the Democrats. "We want to pass legislation that casts the party in a more favorable light."

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who won his race by a whopping 16 points Tuesday night, is expected to become the next Senate Majority Leader in a Senate that will likely be controlled by a 54-46 GOP majority after a runoff election in Louisiana next month.

Republicans also expanded their majority in the House of Representatives, picking up at least 14 seats with 16 races still hanging in the balance. As it stands now, Republicans hold a 243-176 House majority.

Reid released a statement congratulating McConnell on his expected promotion Tuesday night.

"I'd like to congratulate Senator McConnell, who will be the new Senate Majority Leader. The message from voters is clear: they want us to work together," Reid said. "I look forward to working with Senator McConnell to get things done for the middle class."

But some of the immediate legislative priorities that Republicans will look to act on include items where the parties have been unable to compromise. They include passage of the Keystone XL Pipeline — which the Obama administration has delayed multiple times over the past three years — chipping away at the Affordable Care Act, and corporate tax reform.

The goal is to force Obama to make decisions on popular bills, putting him in a corner where he will have to either veto legislation or begrudgingly accept it without the "firewall" of a Democratic Senate. Obama has vetoed only two bills during his first six years in office, the fewest since President James Garfield's brief, one-year tenure.

"We want to get things in front of the president that define him and his party," the Senate aide said. "Harry Reid has protected him. We want to force him to make a choice."

Analysts consider the finance and energy sectors to potentially see a major boom from a GOP takeover of the Senate. Here's a look at how different areas could be shaped by GOP control of the Senate:

-*Obamacare*-

The Republican Holy Grail — a bill that repeals the Affordable Care Act — will see its best chance for passage next year. But while there will likely be a full vote in the Senate to repeal the entire healthcare law, aides said, the overall GOP strategy will likely be to chip away at parts of the law in bills that could make it to the president's desk.

A full-repeal bill would certainly prompt a presidential veto. One item Republican House and Senate aides think is likely to make it to Obama's desk — and potentially get his signature — is a bill to repeal Obamacare's tax on medical devices. A similar amendment, championed by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), who is in line to become the next chair of the Senate Finance Committee, passed by a 79-20 vote in 2013.

"I think the med-device tax and some other little areas would be the best place to start, because that is the 'possible,'" a senior GOP aide on the Senate Finance Committee told Business Insider of Republicans' pursuit of Obamacare-related legislation in the next session of Congress.

Republicans could also take aim at so-called risk corridors in the health law, a potential fight that some Republican senators have already begun discussing as part of a potential shutdown fight.

The "risk corridors" in question aim to make it easier for insurance companies to transition to the new healthcare system, largely by making it less financially risky for them to sell new insurance plans on the government exchanges established by the Affordable Care Act.

But Republicans have charged the program amounts to a "bailout" for insurance companies, and a bill targeting the provision is something they think could attract Democratic votes.

"Why not just do it separately?" one Republican aide said when asked about the possibility of tying funding for the risk-corridor program to the continuing resolution, which keeps the government funded and needs to be passed by Dec. 11 to prevent a shutdown.

If Republicans tackled the issue of risk corridors in a separate bill, it would simplify messaging and make some Democrats more likely to jump on board.

In general, Senate Republicans will look to follow the House GOP Obamacare playbook of the past four years. They plan to use their subpoena powers to full effect and hold more oversight hearings on the healthcare law.

Some of the issues those potential hearings will focus on include money Republicans claim has been wasted on state insurance exchanges that ended up converting to the federal marketplace, the security of HealthCare.gov and state-exchange websites, and the process for verifying people's incomes to receive subsidies for health insurance.

"Being in the minority, we don't have the ability to call a hearing and to get the witnesses that we'd want," the GOP Finance Committee aide said. But should the GOP take the Senate, he added, "I think oversight of Obamacare would be something you'd see a lot more of." 
-*Foreign Policy*-

One of the GOP's first orders of business, should it win the Senate, may well be mounting a united front to oppose any Obama administration-led deal on Iran's nuclear program. Such a move could win the backing of a decent amount of Democrats.

Such a move could well become the first of many intense fights set for a lame-duck session of Congress.

"Where to start?" said Greg Valliere, the chief political strategist at Potomac Research Group. "After the immigration executive order comes a bitter fight on Iranian sanctions, then a battle over whether to pass a continuing spending resolution or an omnibus, then a fight over tax extenders — and that's just in the lame duck."

One senior Senate Democratic aide told Business Insider: "GOP will surely be less restrained, to put it mildly!"

The Obama administration has signaled it might attempt to maneuver around Congress and avoid allowing a vote on any final agreement with Iran, the deadline of which is set for Nov. 24. But unity among top Republicans and Democrats, including Sens. Mark Kirk (R-Illinois) and Bob Menendez (D-New Jersey), would make that more difficult.

"By threatening to cut out Congress from the Iran nuclear deal, the administration is actually uniting Congress," Kirk said in a recent statement.

"We will not support an Obama-Khamenei deal that condemns our children to a future where the Middle East is full of nuclear weapons," he added, referring to Iran's Supreme Leader.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tennessee) appears next in line to take over from Menendez as chair of the Foreign Relations Committee if Republicans take control of the Senate. Corker has also stressed that any final deal must be approved by Congress. He said on the Senate floor this summer that if Obama did not submit a final approval to Congress by four days after the Nov. 24 deadline, all sanctions relieved under the interim agreement should be restored.
-*Trade*-

But a GOP Senate could also help jump-start a key part of Obama's foreign-policy agenda, where he has run into a roadblock from his own party.

The big obstacle to Obama's ambitious trade agenda has so far been Harry Reid. Obama needs Congress to pass a special authority for him to fast-track certain trade deals that Congress can either accept or reject, but cannot change.

Reid has not allowed a vote on fast-track legislation, and Democrats generally fear expanded trade could cost American jobs and have a negative effect on global wages. But Obama has long advocated a pair of trade agreements with the EU and nations in Asia, saying they will create millions of jobs through a vast expansion of US exports.

Republican aides told Business Insider they are open to working with Obama to get fast-track legislation.

"Trade is an issue that Democrats see as tough medicine," the GOP Finance Committee aide said. "They know we need it. They know it's good in the long run. It's just hard to swallow.

"We feel strongly that if you're another nation who's negotiating with the US, the likelihood of trying to close a deal you can't guarantee is going to get an up-or-down vote in the Senate — there's not a lot of incentive there to close a deal. I think the administration knows they need TPA [Trade Promotion Authority], and it's an issue that splits Democrats much more than it splits Republicans."

-*Immigration*-

A coming Republican Senate will also make Obama more likely to take executive action quickly on immigration, something he delayed until after the elections.

The only question at this point is when, not if. Many analysts expect Obama to announce his executive action before Thanksgiving, and certainly before Congress breaks for Christmas.

Either way, Obama's actions will face heavy pushback from Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the likely next chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama), who will likely take over as chair of the Senate Budget Committee in the GOP Senate. Senate Republicans have stepped up their warnings to the president over the past two weeks, as the electoral map began looking better and better for them.

"The President is assuming for himself the sole and absolute power to decide who can enter, work, live, and claim benefits in the United States. He has exempted virtually every group in the world from America immigration laws," Sessions said in a statement last week.

Any executive action would effectively poison the well for any legislative fix to the nation's immigration system until after Obama leaves office. The legislation passed by the Senate in 2013 expires with the end of this Congress in early January.

Former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said this weekend that a Republican House and Senate would pass immigration legislation. But Republican strategists speculated that any legislation Republicans would try to pass would be more about messaging on a "secure border" than a comprehensive revamping of the nation's immigration laws.

-
-

-Taxes-

Then there's the ever-ambiguous issue of tax reform, which has been floating around Washington for virtually all of Obama's term. It will figure even more prominently next year as it will be a priority for Republicans who think a revamp of the corporate tax code is essential to boosting economic growth. 

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin), considered likely to be the next chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, has put tax reform high on his list of issues to tackle. At a recent campaign stop with Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kansas) in Overland Park, Kansas, Ryan told Business Insider he and Hatch, the likely next chair of the Finance Committee, would work to come up with a proposal by sometime next year.

"We have to reform this tax code," Ryan said. "Because we're taxing American businesses at much higher rates than our foreign competitors are taxing theirs."

Roberts, who will be a senior member on the Senate Finance Committee, said the House and Senate committees would work as "hard as possible to get it done."

"We know it has to be done. It's long overdue," Roberts said. "You elect a Republican majority in the United States Senate, and I can assure you that under Orrin Hatch's leadership, and Paul's leadership, that we will have a proposal for serious tax reform."

But privately, both the administration and Republicans are skeptical the other side would work in good faith on tax reform. Republicans felt jilted by the Obama administration's focus on so-called tax "inversions" this year, which culminated in unilateral action by the Treasury Department to curb the practice earlier this fall. 

Republicans agree that the issue of inversions needs to be addressed, but they prefer that it be done as part of broad tax reform. They believe administration focused on the practice for political gain — though it never ended up fully resonating as an issue with the American public.

Senior Republicans believe there is a risk the administration would do the same thing with broad tax reform, citing a lack of communication from the White House to top GOP lawmakers on the issue thus far.

"There's not a lot of outreach going on about this," one senior Republican Senate aide told Business Insider. "You can already see: They're messaging."

-Court Appointments-

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 Congress. Last year as majority leader, Reid changed Senate rules so that executive and judicial appointees could pass the Senate by a majority vote, taking away most of Republicans' power to filibuster these nominees. 

If they control the Senate, that advantage will disappear. Grassley, the likely next chair of the Judiciary Committee, could block any nominees from even receiving a hearing. And McConnell could prevent them from getting a full vote on the Senate floor.

Three of Obama's nominees to the powerful US Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit were confirmed last year after Reid changed the Senate's rules. Thanks in large part to Obama's appointments, Democratic-appointed judges now hold a majority on nine of the country's 13 appeals courts. When he started his term, Democrats had a majority on only one of the courts.

Many of Obama's appointees are controlling his agenda, writing new rules for financial reform, climate change, and even gun control and immigration.

The rules change has the potential to end up being the most important part of Obama's legacy outside of Obamacare. The D.C. Circuit Court, outside of the Supreme Court, is generally considered the second most powerful court in the nation, with its 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 in 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," Roger Pilon, the chair of the Cato Institute's Center for Constitutional Studies, told Business Insider.

Pilon added: ""Sounds like Harry Reid might be getting his comeuppance."

One of the key tenets of Obama's second-term agenda, for example, is in the area of climate change, on which he has no chance of working with Congress. He has admitted this, and so the Environmental Protection Agency has been writing new rules on climate policy, including new carbon emissions standards for existing power plants.

Any challenges to Obama's new policies could end up in the D.C. Circuit Court. With a Democratic majority now sitting on the court, those challenges are more likely to be dismissed. A full D.C. Circuit Court panel also agreed to rehear a significant case related to Obamacare after a setback to the law by a smaller, Republican-skewed panel on the court.

But a Republican majority will put a significant dent in Obama's ability to reshape the federal judiciary. According to data from the 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.

*SEE ALSO: This 30-Year-Old Rising Star Is Already Being Touted As The Future Of The GOP*

Join the conversation about this story » Reported by Business Insider 7 hours ago.

Many companies planned to offer health insurance without hospital coverage because it met requirements of a "minimum value" formula. But the Treasury Department says those plans aren't legal. Reported by NPR 6 hours ago.

Tuesday night's landslide Republican victories in the midterm elections are being hailed by the GOP as a referendum on President Barack Obama. And the results could end up putting a dent in his signature legislative achievement.

Republicans who now control the Senate plan to chip away at the Affordable Care Act, and they believe they have a chance to push public opinion even further against the law with stepped-up public oversight. And at the state level, the law's supporters suffered setbacks to their hopes of Medicaid expansion in more states.

When all is said and done, Republicans will likely have a 54-46 majority in the Senate next year — which, going into Tuesday night, was one of the best-case scenarios for the party. The party will likely pick up at least two governor's seats, including flipping Democratic strongholds in Maryland, Massachusetts, and Illinois. 

It could mean a weakened Obamacare at the federal level and a stalled push to expand Medicaid in states that have so far resisted.

There's still "not much evidence that the ACA was at the center of this election," Larry Levitt, the senior vice president of the Kaiser Family Foundation, told Business Insider. "But with a Republican majority in the Senate, tweaks to the law will move ahead."

Of Medicaid expansion, he added: "It doesn't seem like there are much prospects for the Medicaid expansion to spread after these results."

The Republican Holy Grail — a bill that repeals the Affordable Care Act — will see its best chance for passage next year, but it would face a certain presidential veto.

But while there will likely be a full vote in the Senate to repeal the entire healthcare law, according to senior Republican aides who spoke to Business Insider, the overall GOP strategy will likely be to chip away at parts of the law in bills that could make it to the president's desk.

Some areas they could target include the law's tax on medical devices and the Independent Payment Advisory Board — which some Republicans have infamously labeled a "death panel," but whose launch has been delayed amid slowing healthcare cost growth. Other possible actions include tweaks to the so-called employer mandate of the law, which has been delayed twice, as well as the individual mandate that requires most Americans to purchase health insurance.

One item Republican House and Senate aides think is likely to make it to Obama's desk — and potentially get his signature — is a bill to repeal Obamacare's tax on medical devices. A similar amendment, championed by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), who is in line to become the next chair of the Senate Finance Committee, passed by a 79-20 vote in 2013.

"I think the med-device tax and some other little areas would be the best place to start, because that is the 'possible,'" a senior GOP aide on the Senate Finance Committee told Business Insider of Republicans' pursuit of Obamacare-related legislation in the next session of Congress.

Republicans could also take aim at so-called risk corridors in the health law, a potential battle that some Republican senators have already begun discussing as part of a potential funding fight that leads down the road to a federal government shutdown.

The "risk corridors" in question aim to make it easier for insurance companies to transition to the new healthcare system, largely by making it less financially risky for them to sell new insurance plans on the government exchanges established by the Affordable Care Act.

But Republicans have charged the program amounts to a "bailout" for insurance companies, and a bill targeting the provision is something they think could attract Democratic votes to get past a 60-vote filibuster firewall. 

"Why not just do it separately?" one Republican aide said when asked about the possibility of tying funding for the risk-corridor program to the continuing resolution, which keeps the government funded and needs to be passed by Dec. 11 to prevent a shutdown.

If Republicans tackled the issue of risk corridors in a separate bill, senior aides said, it would simplify messaging and make some Democrats more likely to jump on board.

In general, Senate Republicans will look to follow the House GOP Obamacare playbook of the past four years. They plan to use their subpoena powers to full effect and hold more oversight hearings on the healthcare law.

Some of the issues those potential hearings will focus on include money Republicans claim has been wasted on state insurance exchanges that ended up converting to the federal marketplace, the security of HealthCare.gov and state-exchange websites, and the process for verifying people's incomes to receive subsidies for health insurance.

The potential political boon is palpable.

"Being in the minority, we don't have the ability to call a hearing and to get the witnesses that we'd want," the GOP Finance Committee aide said of Republicans' status in the current Congress. "I think oversight of Obamacare would be something you'd see a lot more of" in the next one.

Meanwhile, on the gubernatorial side, Levitt said the most likely chance for movement on Medicaid expansion would be in Alaska, where independent candidate Bill Walker is leading Republican incumbent Sean Parnell.

There is also the potential for "backsliding" in states like Arkansas — where Republican Asa Hutchinson won a seat currently governed by a Democrat. Arkansas features a "private option" as an alternative to Medicaid expansion, but it has always only been narrowly popular. 

Democrats also hoped strong candidates in the Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Maine, and Wisconsin gubernatorial races would win and work toward expanding Medicaid. But all five of those candidates lost. 

"It's hard to imagine those Republican governors opposed to the expansion getting religion based on these results," Levitt said.

Levitt, however, said the intensified battles to come on the law are normal for major healthcare legislation. And he doesn't expect any changes to become law that get to the heart of the Affordable Care Act.

"For the foreseeable future, the law remains intact. We're now maybe entering a stage where — in some ways, it's surprising it's taken this long where Republicans try to move the law in a more conservative direction," Levitt said.

"This is normal. This has been happening for years in Medicare and Medicaid. But programs themselves remain intact."

Join the conversation about this story » Reported by Business Insider 5 hours ago.

Do I Need To Upgrade My Health Insurance During The Open Enrollment Period This Year? Reported by ajc.com 4 hours ago.

Republicans seem to have convinced the average American that what is good for billionaires, oil and gas companies, pharmaceutical companies, health insurance companies, banks, chemical companies and defense contractors is good for them. With this midterm election, we gave the country over lock, stock and barrel to our new corporate overlords.

We watched this disaster approach in slow motion over the last few weeks, but in fact it's been approaching for the last few months and even years. The problem wasn't just that the Republicans purged their moderates; the problem is that the Democrats purged their principles.

And that's what did us in.

Corporate America is not dumb; it's worked hard to sew up both political parties in its nefarious schemes to place their short-term economic interests before the health and well-being of the average American. One major party was more than glad to go along; the other one went along with all this angst and agita in the background perhaps, but it still went along.

And that's what did us in.

The Republican corporatists are worse than the Democratic corporatists, but only to a degree. And Republican corporatists are at least true to their principles, however abhorrent those principles might be to some of us. The Democratic corporatists, however, are the real culprits here. Having sucked the soul out of the Democratic party, they have leeched out of it whatever moral authority it had left. Why weren't they able to activate the base?? Because they decimated the base!

And that's what did us in.

It's time for the Democratic corporatists to move over now, and let people who actually stand for something take it from here. Yes, the corporatists won some short-term power but at the expense of long-term viability. A funny thing happens when you act against your own principles: karma gets 'ya.

The Democratic party needs its soul back, and if the midterm results prove anything it's that people aren't impressed by its current corporatist formation. The Republicans have the elite policies but in a strange way a more egalitarian relationship to its own constituency. The Democrats have more egalitarian policies but in a strange way a more elitist relationship to its own constituency. You're not really a party for the people if you're not a party of the people. Corporatists have led the Democratic party for twenty years now, but this midterm election should leave no doubt in anyone's mind that the Democratic leadership needs to change. Real progressives within the Democratic party are ignored as voters, and marginalized as leaders.

And that's what did us in.

Our mid-term elections this year marked the end of one era and the beginning of another. What has ended? Any illusion whatsoever that big money doesn't rule this country. What's begun? Hopefully, the retrieval of the revolutionary spirit that is core to who we are as a nation. Because that is what we need now. We need a massive movement -- a peaceful, non-violent rebellion against the new corporate order of things. We need to give up the illusion that the Democratic party is the nurturing mother who will balance the excesses of the critical father. Like hell it is. It's become the silent mother who stands in the hall just wringing her hands while Daddy takes his whip out and wallops us. We can't just wait for Mommy to stand up to this anymore. We ourselves simply have to grow up.

The new era begins today, as the Democratic corporatists start lining up for the Presidential nomination in 2016. What can we do? Make it clear - make it really, really clear - that hell no, we will not support a corporatist nominee. He or she would do as well in 2016 as the Democrats did this midterm. Why? Because we will not go along anymore. The only hope for the Democrats, and the only hope for America, is to nominate someone who tells it like it really is, reclaims the principles that the Democrats historically stood for and shows the bravery and courage we so desperately need to see right now.

Democratic strategy this year was to arouse people's anger at what the Republicans were doing. It didn't work. What they needed to address was how depressed people are at what the Democrats have been doing, and not doing, to live up to its own principles. The mid-term is over, but the 2016 Presidential race is on the horizon. And the new revolution has only just begun.

Marianne Williamson is a best-selling author and lecturer. www.marianne.com Reported by Huffington Post 4 hours ago.

For Democrats, the lone bright spot in Tuesday's election was supposed to be potential Democratic victories in governors' races across the country, and with it, greater adoption of the Medicaid expansion under President Obama's health-care law. Reported by Washington Post 3 hours ago.

The Republican wave at the polls Tuesday didn't just give the GOP more power to obstruct Obamacare in Congress and block Medicaid expansion in more than 20 states. It also could jeopardize health benefits already extended to Americans living near the poverty level.

Republican governors will replace Democrats in four states -- Arkansas, Illinois, Maryland and Massachusetts -- that have expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. And the Republican succeeding Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) is dubious about that state's expansion.

Heading into Election Day, advocates for more Medicaid were hopeful that Democrats would win gubernatorial races in Florida, Maine, Wisconsin and other states where Republican governors have blocked the policy, leaving millions uninsured. Instead, the only place where the tide could turn in favor of Medicaid expansion, which the Supreme Court made optional for the states in 2012, is Alaska. The race there remains undecided between independent Bill Walker, who supports the policy, and Gov. Sean Parnell (R).

Moreover, the new Republican governors in Arizona, Arkansas, Illinois, Maryland and Massachusetts will have the power to threaten health coverage for hundreds of thousands who have enrolled in expanded Medicaid. None has publicly threatened to do so, but the program has become more vulnerable in those states. Here's what the governors-elect have said about Medicaid.

*Doug Ducey, Arizona*

Gov. Brewer infuriated Republican lawmakers when she strong-armed the Medicaid expansion through the Arizona legislature last year. More than 230,000 Arizonans enrolled under the new rules as of last month, the state reported.

Ducey isn't making noise about undoing the expansion, but he wants the state to seek federal approval to alter the program, including adding a requirement that beneficiaries deposit money in health savings accounts. Ducey has also vowed to constrain Arizona's spending on Medicaid as federal funding for the expansion drops from 100 percent through 2016 to 90 percent by 2022.

In a statement on DougDucey.com, he said:
I will lead the effort to negotiate a Medicaid waiver for Arizona and to protect our state from Obamacare, one of the worst laws ever signed by any American president. ... The expansion of Medicaid as part of Obamacare receives significant federal money ... for the first three years. After that the rules will change, and Arizona taxpayers may need to pay considerably more. As governor I will prepare for all scenarios, and I will not allow a massive new entitlement to grow into a huge financial burden for future generations of Arizonans. We will keep a lid on health care costs, period.

*Asa Hutchinson, Arkansas*

Arkansas led the nation in creating an alternative model for expanding Medicaid that uses private insurance plans to provide health coverage. Gov. Mike Beebe (D) devised the so-called private option with the GOP-controlled state legislature. More than 200,000 people enrolled in Arkansas, and states with Republican governors like Ohio and Pennsylvania adopted similar policies. But the private option was nearly defunded this year because Arkansas law requires spending bills to receive a 75 percent vote in both houses of the legislature.

After Hutchinson's gubernatorial victory on Tuesday and gains by Republicans in the state legislature, winning that 75 percent will be even harder next year. Hutchinson has said he wouldn't have signed the bill creating the private option had he been governor at the time, but he has stopped short of calling for its repeal. Here's what he said in March after the legislature voted to keep the program alive:
Ultimately, I would have designed the health care plan for Arkansas differently. But as Governor, I will inherit the decisions the Governor and General Assembly made in the fiscal session. ... I view the Private Option as a pilot project; a pilot project that can be ended if needed. As Governor, I will assess the benefit of the Private Option and measure the long-term costs to the state taxpayers. As Governor, I will weigh the cost and benefits of the program and determine whether the program should be terminated or continued.
*Bruce Rauner, Illinois*

Rauner's position on the Land of Lincoln's Medicaid expansion, which has covered nearly 470,000 people, is clear: He's not going to fight the Democratic-controlled legislature over it, even though he wouldn't have adopted it in the first place.

According to the Chicago Tribune, Rauner said:
I would not have accepted expansion of Medicaid. ... It's been done now and I'm not advocating a rollback. But what I am advocating and always have and always will is we've got to restructure Medicaid in Illinois. It is filled with waste and fraud.
*Larry Hogan, Maryland*

Hogan's stance on the Medicaid expansion is difficult to parse, and his campaign didn't immediately respond to an email requesting clarification. Although he hammered his Democratic opponent, Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown, over Maryland's botched health insurance exchange, Medicaid expansion -- which has covered about 377,000 Marylanders -- wasn't a notable issue during the gubernatorial campaign. Hogan also faces a Democratic-led state legislature.

In an October interview with the Washington Times, Hogan seemed to indicate that he won't pick a fight over Medicaid:
He said that trying to take on Medicaid or powerful labor unions, as Republican governors have done in other states, would be a “fool’s errand.”

“We’re going to try to win the battles we can win. That’s tough enough as it is,” said Mr. Hogan. “It’s baby steps in Maryland.”
*Charlie Baker, Massachusetts*

Baker, a former health insurance executive, is one of the many, many Bay Staters frustrated by the bungled marriage of Massachusett's pre-Obamacare health care reforms with the federal Affordable Care Act. Problems included a poorly functioning website and people forced to accept temporary coverage under government programs instead of the private insurance they wanted. The issue of Medicaid expansion, however, wasn't part of Baker's platform, and his campaign didn't immediately reply to an email requesting comment.

Baker has pledged to cut the Massachusetts health care program loose from Obamacare. But given that generous Medicaid coverage was available in the state before the Affordable Care Act, scrapping the expansion would seem incompatible with protecting the program signed by then-Gov. Mitt Romney (R) in 2006. Moreover, the state legislature remains in the hands of Democrats.

According to CharlieBaker2014.com:
Massachusetts should be able to return to its own system that worked and as governor Charlie will aggressively pursue a waiver for Massachusetts from the ACA.
To date, 27 states and the District of Columbia have adopted the Medicaid expansion under Obamacare, which makes Medicaid available to anyone who earns up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level -- or about $11,500 for a single person. Reported by Huffington Post 3 hours ago.

Best pet insurance rates are now supplied to owners of dogs using the Quotes Pros insurer portal at http://quotespros.com.

Philadelphia, PA (PRWEB) November 05, 2014

Owners of the most popular types of dog breeds can now search for insurance coverage when using the Quotes Pros website. Some of the best pet insurance rates for dog owners can now be searched or quoted using the portal at http://quotespros.com.

The coverage policies that can be located through use of the finder system this year are based on the current offerings of national companies. The pet plans that some companies are providing can be easily reviewed upon entry of a zip code into the nationwide location system.

"Owners of dogs and other animals can seek plans of coverage while using our location system to obtain the best annual or monthly price structures from insurers," said a Quotes Pros source.

The quotes for short or long-term insurance policies that are now possible to retrieve using the Quotes Pros website are accurate as of this year. Plans are now underway to integrate a larger source of agencies to help consumers find additional policies to protect family pets in the next year.

"The quotations that our system helps consumers to obtain are instantly calculated by insurers across the country and our system does not collect user data," the source said.

The Quotes Pros company has made improvements to its national system over the past couple of years to introduce the standard types of coverage that agencies offer. The system is currently promoting motorcycle, automotive, renter and health policies to interested consumers at http://quotespros.com/health-insurance.html.

About QuotesPros.com

The QuotesPros.com company has emerged as a trusted source to find or easily review agencies in the insurance industry. The connected portal that exists from the company homepage gives access to agency information to consumers. The QuotesPros.com company has built its search system to be easy to navigate and it can be accessed when using nearly any type of device with a regular or mobile Internet connection in the USA. Reported by PRWeb 3 hours ago.

SACRAMENTO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Last night, Proposition 45 was defeated by a 59.8 percent to 40.2 percent margin, thanks in part to the aggressive campaigning of the insurance agent coalition – Agents of Action. “California voters sent a message, loud and clear, that Proposition 45 was wrong for California,” said Patrick Burns, California Association of Health Underwriter’s (CAHU) board president. “Through the Agents of Action campaign, health insurance agents played an essential role in letting c Reported by Business Wire 3 hours ago.

Tuesday's Republican wave of election victories did not reflect public opinion or the public mood. Instead it was the result of the GOP's triumph in changing the rules of democracy to favor big business and conservative interest groups, including the triumphs of corporate money and voter suppression. But while Democrat candidates were going down to defeat, liberals and progressives won some impressive but little-publicized victories on important issues -- including minimum wage hikes -- especially in red and purple states, suggesting that voters are not as conservative as the pundits are pontificating. One of the most significant victories occurred in Richmond, California, where progressives defeated a slate funded by Chevron, the nation's third largest corporation, which poured at least $3 million (about $150 for each likely voter) into this municipal election in this working class Bay Area city of 105,000 people.

*Progressive Victories*

*Richmond, California.* All progressive eyes around the country were focused on this blue-collar city of about 700,000, where Big Oil and Wall Street sought to oust a progressive local government that has been battling big business for the past decade. Instead, the lefties won against overwhelming odds. Under Mayor Gayle McLaughlin and her progressive allies on the City Council, Richmond has challenged Chevron, which owns a huge refinery in the city, to clean up its pollution, pay more taxes into the city coffers, and be a more responsible and accountable corporate citizen. Faced with a decade of predatory lending and an epidemic of foreclosures and "underwater" mortgages, Richmond city officials pushed back against Wall Street banks, demanding that they help troubled homeowners save their homes. In Tuesday's election, community groups, labor unions, the Richmond Progressive Alliance (RPA) and others mobilized a grassroots campaign to protect their gains and elect a progressive slate against candidates hand-picked and funded by Chevron and the real estate lobby.

The progressives won, despite operating on a shoe-string budget. City Councilman Tom Butt was elected mayor with 51.4 percent of the vote. He defeated Nat Bates, a longtime councilman who was heavily funded by Chevron but only managed to win 35 percent of the vote. The progressive slate of council candidates appears to have swept the four available seats. McLaughlin, the city's termed-out mayor, won her City Council race, as did her allies Jovanka Beckles and Eduardo Martinez. As of early Wednesday morning, progressive-backed incumbent Jal Myrick trounced fellow City Councilman Corky Booze for a two-year seat. If these leads hold, no Chevron-backed candidates will have won, despite dramatically outspending their progressive opponents. The RPA, the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment and SEIU waged a major grassroots get-out-the-vote campaign that triumphed over the Chevron-funded assault that included an expensive flood of mailers, phone calls and an oil-stained local online "newspaper."

*Minimum Wages.* Voters in four "red" states -- Arkansas, Alaska, Nebraska and South Dakota -- approved measures on Tuesday to raise the minimum wage against the concerted and well-funded opposition of national and local big business groups. In doing so, they raised pay levels for over 1.7 million workers. Even while voters in Arkansas elected a Republican senator and governor, 65 percent of them supported a statewide pay increase to $8.50 (by 2017) for low-wage workers. In Alaska, a gradual wage hike to $9.75/hour by 2016 was winning 69 percent of the vote with 28 percent of precincts reporting. The victory margins, in early returns, were 59 percent in Nebraska ($9 by 2016) and 53 percent in South Dakota ($8.50 in 2015). The victories in Alaska and South Dakota pegged wage hikes to inflation, an important progressive idea. Voters in Illinois supported a non-binding advisory referendum to raise the minimum wage by a margin of 12 points. In San Francisco and Oakland, voters overwhelmingly endorsed citywide minimum wage boosts to $15 and $12.25, respectively.

These victories follow several years of increasing grassroots pressure by low-wage workers around the country -- especially employees of fast-food chains and Wal-Marts -- demanding a living wage so that full-time workers don't remain trapped in poverty. Seattle adopted a $15/hour citywide minimum wage earlier this year. Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti has proposed a $13.25 municipal minimum while six City Council members countered with a $15 plan. To co-opt pressure to adopt a citywide minimum wage, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel ordered city contractors to pay at least $13 an hour. Many other cities have minimum wage plans on the table. Across the country, 23 states have minimum wages higher than the current federal level of $7.25, and that figure will grow to 26 when minimum wages hikes take effect in West Virginia, Maryland and Hawaii. Sixteen states have enacted minimum wage increases in the past two years -- 10 of them this year alone.

Public opinion polls show that most Americans -- including a majority of both Democrats and Republicans -- support an increase in the federal minimum wage, but President Obama's call to raise it to $10.10/hour has been stymied by Republican opposition.

*Other Progressive Triumphs*. Below the radar of most national media, progressive wages success campaigns on a variety of other issues.

*Paid Sick Leave*. Even while voters in Massachusetts elected a Republican governor, about 60 percent of them also passed a ballot measure guaranteeing paid sick days to about million workers. In Montclair and Trenton, New Jersey, voters passed ballot initiatives allowing workers who provide food service, child care or home health care, or who work for companies with 10 or more employees, to earn up to 40 hours of paid sick leave each year. All other employees would have access to up to 24 hours. (Paterson, Irvington, East Orange and Passaic, New Jersey already have similar laws). In Oakland, California, voters adopted a similar measure. These triumphs capped an historic year for advocates of paid sick leave. With Tuesday's victories, three states and sixteen cities have now passed paid sick days legislation -- including two states and 10 cities in 2014 alone. And the momentum is growing, as activists plan campaigns in Chicago, Tacoma, Washington and several other states.

*Abortion*. Voters in Colorado and North Dakota defeated proposals granting personhood to fetuses at the moment of conception. In North Dakota, 64.3 percent of voters said "no" on Measure 1. Planned Parenthood and its allies played key roles in beating back this assault on women's rights.

*Public safety.* More than two-thirds of California voters approved the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act, which will revise some of the lowest-level petty crimes from felonies to misdemeanors and targets the financial savings into crime prevention and school programs. This was a major victory against the prison-industrial complex, especially the growing number of private corporations that now run state prisons and support laws to incarcerate as many people as possible. And in Washington state, voters beat back the National Rifle Association and approved a ballot measure to impose criminal background checks on people who purchase firearms online or at gun shows.

*Soda tax*. Despite an expensive campaign wage by the soft drink industry, Berkeley, California, became the first city in the country to adopt a tax on soda and sugary drinks to combat diabetes and other illness. About three-quarters of voter supported the measure. As of last week, the American Beverage Association, which includes the three largest soda manufacturers (Coca-Cola Co., PepsiCo and the Dr Pepper Snapple Group) had spent $2.1 million to oppose the soda tax through full-page newspaper ads, television and radio spots, and telephone and door-to-door canvassing. The "yes" campaign spend only $273,000, primarily on door-to-door canvassing and phone calls. A similar measure in San Francisco won majority support, but failed to reach a two-thirds vote threshold needed for passage.

*Workers rights*. Arizona voters defeated Proposition 487, put on the ballot by business and Republican interest groups to undermine public employee pensions.

*Pot*. In Oregon, voters legalized recreational use of marijuana, joining Washington state and Colorado, who adopted similar measures in 2012. In Washington, DC, voters passed a measure to let residents grow cannabis indoors and possess as much as two ounces.

*Plutocratic Political Gains*

These progressive victories are impressive, but they don't offset the huge GOP triumphs around the country. Democrats knew they had an uphill fight. Among the 36 Senate races, 21 were seats held by Democrats, including six in states that Mitt Romney won in 2012. Five factors, in particular, contributed to Tuesday's GOP gains. It was a victory for plutocracy and profit over democracy, a triumph for the super-rich and Republicans who changed the rules to favor their own interests.

*Big Money*. Donors spent more than $4 billion in this midterm election. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, this was the most expensive midterm election in American history. This was a triumph for the Supreme Court's Citizens United and McCutcheon rulings that permitted unlimited money to buy elections. The biggest donors, billionaires like the Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson, poured "dark money" -- hidden from public scrutiny by arcane campaign finance laws -- into key races that certainly helped elect Republicans. Karl Rove's Crossroads organizations and the US Chamber of Commerce spent hundreds of millions of dollars to help elect conservative Republicans in the House, Senate and governors races. We may never know the full extent of the billionaires' bankroll, especially in key battleground Senate races where they targeted much of their war chest.

The Republicans increase in Senate seats -- from 45 to at least 52 -- depended on outspending Democrats by a wide margin in those key races in where Republicans captured seats held by Democrats in Colorado, Arkansas, Iowa, Montana, North Carolina, South Dakota, and West Virginia. Three incumbent Democratic senators -- Senators Kay Hagan of North Carolina, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, and Mark Udall of Colorado -- lost their seats.

As the Center for Responsive Politics reported a week before the election, "outside groups, which are overwhelmingly fueled by large donors, are picking up more of the tab" of election costs, increasingly by funding issue ads and funneling money to shadowy so-called "social welfare" organizations that can hide their donations but focus most of their money to help Republican candidates.

*Voter Suppression and Low Turnout*. Midterm elections always see much lower turnout than in presidential years. On Tuesday, less than 40 percent of American voters went to the polls, and the ones who voted hardly reflected the American people. The midterm electorate was much whiter, wealthier and more elderly than the voters in 2012 or even those in the last midterm election four years ago. As Bloomberg News reported, "Those 65 and older represented a quarter of the national electorate, up from 21 percent four years earlier." This demographic debacle was compounded by Republican efforts to suppress the vote of African-Americans, Latinos, young people and the poor. -- voters who lean heavily toward Democrats when they vote. These groups voted in significantly smaller numbers this year than they did two years ago. This was the first election since the Supreme Court eviscerated the Voting Rights Act and many states - particularly those with a large number of eligible African-American voters -- adopted laws making it more difficult to vote, aimed at reducing turnout by these Democratic constituencies.

*Gerrymandering.* After the 2010 Census, Republicans succeeded in redrawing House districts to favor their party, creating increasingly "safe" districts for GOP candidates. The GOP's control of the majority of state legislatures and governors's offices gave them an advantage that made it possible to redraw the districts to their liking. In 2012, Democrats won 1.3 million more votes than Republican in all 435 House race - 59.6 million and 58.2 million. In other words, Democrats won 55 percent of the two-party vote but GOP candidates won 54 percent of the 435 House seats. In Pennsylvania, for example, Democrats won 83,000 more votes than Republicans, but Republicans won 13 seats and Democrats won 5 seats. On Tuesday, the Pennsylvania Republicans increased their margin to 14 seats. Nationwide, the GOP widened their congressional majority to by at least another 8 seats to 243. This was more a reflection of partisan mapmaking than voter preferences.

*The Obama Factor.* According to exit polls 59 percent of all voters said they were frustrated at or angered by Obama's job performance. Some of this anti-Obama sentiment is clearly driven by racism -- a reality that political pundits tend to downplay, despite overwhelming evidence that many white voters still haven't gotten used to having a black president. But there are other factors that have contributed to Obama's falling favorability, especially among the slice of the electorate who voted on Tuesday, and which played an important role in many GOP victories, particularly in the key Senate battleground states, such as Colorado and Iowa. The president has been unable to translate his legislative and executive order victories to his own political advantage. The most obvious example is the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare") which has been a policy success and a political liability. Thanks to this law, an additional 10 million Americans have health insurance, and millions more, especially those with pre-existing health conditions, have better coverage. But it is likely that a significant number of those who benefitted from Obamacare didn't vote on Tuesday, and some surely voted for Republican candidates. Obama has been a terrible salesman for his own accomplishments. Few Americans can identify Obama's achievements on women's rights, the environment and especially the economy.

*Economic Hard Times*. Elections are often a referendum on the economy. The party that controls the White House typically loses seats in Congress during midterm elections and this is particularly the case when the economy is in trouble. Despite strong indicators of persistent economic growth during the Obama years (especially the past two years), that growth has been dangerously uneven, with the wealthiest one-fifth of the population getting most of the gains, and the bottom four-fifths stuck with stagnant incomes. Given the Republicans credit for checkmating almost every Obama effort to reduce inequality and increase wages, including their intransigence on raising the federal minimum wage.

*Progressives Ask: What Now?*

What should progressives and liberals do in the face of GOP control of both the Senate and House, with the dynamic duo of Mitch McConnell and John Boehner controlling the flow of legislation? The Republicans will certainly seek to weaken environmental laws and to remove the EPA's ability to regulate the coal industry, a major lobby group behind McConnell. Republicans in both houses will try to weaken Obamacare. They will certainly oppose any effort to raise the federal minimum wage. In fact, at a meeting of billionaire GOP funders in June, hosted by the Koch brothers, McConnell promised that if he became Senate majority leader, "we're not going to be debating all these gosh darn proposals" like the minimum wage.

The new GOP chairs of key Senate committees, along with their counterparts in the House, will now have the authority to hold hearings designed entirely to attack the Democrats' legislative ideas. For example, Oklahoma Seantor James Inhofe, who denies that climate change is a serious problem, will probably chair the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. (He'll probably want to change the committee's name, since he opposes both the environment and public works). He will certainly be a mouthpiece for the Koch brothers and other fossil fuel fat-cats who want to roll back laws to protect the environmental and public health.

Republicans in both houses will surely pass an immigrant bill that will increase border security but not provide a path to citizenship. The GOP majority in both houses will certainly try to weaken the Dodd-Frank law that imposed tough regulations on banks and credit card companies, whose predatory practices crashed the economy in 2007 and ripped off millions of consumers.

Look for Republicans to try to increase military spending and for John McCain, the new chair of the Senate Foreign Relations committee, to rattle sabers for a bigger U.S. presence in Syria and for an attack on Hillary Clinton's actions as secretary of state; in particular, he will try to undermine her presidential ambitions by focusing attention on the attack of the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, under her watch. And with at least three right-wing Republican senators - Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and Marco Rubio -- vying for the party's presidential nomination, they will attempt to mount a campaign to impeach President Obama. In a post-election tirade Tuesday night, Cruz said he would wage a campaign to challenge Obama's "lawlessness."

In the House, California Republican Darrell Issa will continue to use his chairmanship of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to do the Chamber of Commerce's bidding against all Democratic plans to protect consumers, workers and the environment from corporate abuse.

Obama can still use his executive powers to adopt rules that will help improve the lives of most Americans even in the face of Tuesday's election results. He can cancel the Keystone XL Pipeline. He can reduce deportation of undocumented immigrants who have committed no crimes. He can issue an executive order to require companies with federal contracts to pay a living wage and adhere to workplace health and safety standards or risk losing their government subsidies. He can also raise workers' wages by requiring companies with federal contracts to limit CEO pay to some multiple -- say 30 to 1 -- of average workers' pay. Right now CEOs make about 300 times more than their average workers, the widest gap of any major country.

But come January, the big question for Obama will be whether he is willing to use his veto pen to thwart the GOP's reactionary legislation, or whether he will try to find compromises to provide some semblance of bipartisanship. Liberals and progressives might want to send tens of thousands of veto pens to the White House to remind Obama that he's still the president, even if a weakened one.

Meanwhile, there is much for liberals and progressives to do at the local level, where their allies have in the past year won a growing number of victories by candidates for mayor and City Council in New York City, Minneapolis, Seattle, Phoenix, Pittsburgh and elsewhere. More and more cities will push to adopt minimum wages, paid family leave and other progressive measures.

In addition, the opportunities for Democrats to take back the Senate in 2016 look favorable. More incumbent Republican senators will face re-election in two years than was the situation this year, including a significant number in battleground states. In 2016, 24 Senate republicans will be up for re-election (including five in states that President Obama won twice), while Democrats must defend 10 seats.

If Democrats and their constituencies do their job, minorities, women (particularly single women), young people and low-income workers will turn out in greater numbers. Democratic candidates will be able to focus voters' attention on the Republicans' increasingly conservative agenda, including attacks on immigration; declining incomes and living standards; deepening college student debt; assaults on basic voting rights; efforts to deprive women of access to basic reproductive health care and abortions; and the denial of serious climate change.

If grassroots movements for workers' rights, environmental responsibility (including the growing campaign for divestment of fossil fuels occurring on college campuses and big cities), marriage equality for gays and lesbians, and women's rights, voting rights, and opposition to the gun lobby can expand, they, along with Democrat liberals, can increase voter turnout, elect more Democratic governors, take back the Senate, and elect a Democrat to the White House.

On the presidential front, many liberal and progressives hope that Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders will make a White House run within Democratic primaries. Although it is unlikely that he can defeat Hillary Clinton, a Sanders campaign would raise issues and mobilize voters to shift the debate around the corporate takeover of politics, widening inequality, declining living standards, consumer and environmental protection and push back on GOP efforts to suppress voting rights.

*Peter Dreier teaches politics and chairs the Urban & Environmental Policy Department at Occidental College. His latest book is The 100 Greatest Americans of the 20th Century: A Social Justice Hall of Fame (Nation Books, 2012). This s article originally appeared on BillMoyers.Com. * Reported by Huffington Post 2 hours ago.

ST. LOUIS (AP) — A judge overturned Missouri's ban on gay marriage on Wednesday in a ruling that could add the state to a growing list of those where same-sex marriages are legal.

St. Louis Circuit Judge Rex Burlison, who heard arguments on Sept. 29, determined the law is unconstitutional. The city of St. Louis issued a handful of marriage licenses to same-sex couples in June, setting up a court case over the state's 2004 constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. Assistant Attorney General Jeremiah Morgan argued that 71 percent of Missourians voted for the referendum defining marriage as between a man and a woman, and he said the U.S. Supreme Court has time and again allowed states to define marriage.

St. Louis City Counselor Winston Calvert countered that the existing law treats same-sex couples as "second-class citizens." He said an increasing number of states are allowing gay couples to wed, including most of the states surrounding Missouri.

St. Louis officials issued only the four licenses, intentionally allowing the courts to settle the debate. It wasn't immediately clear if or when St. Louis or other jurisdictions in the state would begin granting licenses to same-sex couples.

It was the second defeat for Missouri gay marriage opponents in recent months. Earlier, in Kansas City, Jackson County Circuit Judge J. Dale Youngs ordered the state to recognize same-sex marriages legally performed in other states. That order allowed married gay couples to be eligible to sign up for a wide range of tax, health insurance, veterans and other benefits now afforded to opposite-sex married couples.

Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster has said he won't appeal the Kansas City ruling, stating: "Missouri's future will be one of inclusion, not exclusion."

Nanci Gonder, a spokeswoman for Koster, didn't immediately return a phone call or email seeking comment about Wednesday's ruling.

A federal court case in Kansas City also challenges Missouri's gay marriage ban.

The lawsuits in Missouri mirror dozens of others across the country that argue state bans on gay marriage violate the due process and equal protection rights of same-sex couples. The suits are based on the same arguments that led the U.S. Supreme Court last year to overturn part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act that denied a range of tax, health and veterans benefits to legally married gay couples. Reported by Huffington Post 2 hours ago.

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama vowed to protect the core elements of his health care reform law after Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) pledged to attack it anew next year, in light of big Republican gains in Tuesday’s midterm elections.

Republicans will take control of the Senate in January, adding it to the majority they have had in the House since 2011 -- during which time they voted in more than 50 instances to kill Obamacare. The party's opposition to Obamacare is virtually unanimous.

In remarks at a White House press conference Wednesday, Obama expressed openness to small changes to the Affordable Care Act, but pre-emptively rejected any Republican proposals that would undermine the law, which remade the health insurance market and has extended health coverage to millions of previously uninsured people.

"On health care, there are certainly some lines I'm going to draw," Obama said. "Repeal of the law I won't sign. Efforts that would take away health care from the 10 million people who now have it and the millions more who are now eligible to get it, we're not going to support. "

Obama specifically declared he would not consider doing away with the law's individual mandate, which requires most Americans to obtain health care coverage or face tax penalties. Polls show this to be the most unpopular part of the Affordable Care Act, and it was the subject of a constitutional challenge that went all the way to the Supreme Court, which upheld the policy in 2012.

"The individual mandate is a line I can't cross," Obama said.

Obama's comments appear to leave only a small opening for soon-to-be Senate Majority Leader McConnell and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) to make modifications to the Affordable Care Act over the next two years, and they won't squelch Republican zeal for undoing or severely damaging the law.

"We are, I think, really proud of the work that's been done," Obama said. "If, in fact, one of the items on Mitch McConnell's agenda and John Boehner's agenda is to make responsible changes to the Affordable Care Act to make it work better, I'm going to be very open and receptive to hearing those ideas. But what I will remind them is that, despite all the contention, we now know that the law works."

The tea party wing of the Republican Party will settle for nothing less than a complete repeal of Obamacare, an objective McConnell acknowledged is all but impossible so long as the man whose name it carries is president.

"He's still there," McConnell said at a news conference in Louisville, Kentucky, on Wednesday. "The veto pen is a pretty big thing." Before the elections, McConnell suggested he may employ a parliamentary tactic known as budget reconciliation to dismantle Obamacare, which would require only 51 votes as opposed to the 60 needed to overcome a Democratic filibuster. Congressional Democrats used this mechanism to pass Obamacare in 2010 with zero GOP votes.

McConnell nevertheless emphasized he favors repealing the law outright, and said Republicans stand united in opposition to Obamacare. "It's no secret that every one of my members thinks that Obamacare was a huge legislative mistake," he said.

Short of achieving repeal, McConnell promised to take aim at a handful of specific provisions of the Affordable Care Act. "There are pieces of it that are deeply, deeply unpopular with the American people," he said.

McConnell said Republicans would seek to scrap the individual mandate -- which Obama won't support -- a tax on medical device sales, and a rule requiring companies with 50 or more employees to offer health benefits to anyone who works at least 30 hours a week or pay penalties to the government. Other elements of the law also could be targeted for changes.

Obama wouldn't comment on a reporter's question about whether he would agree to eliminating the medical device tax. Obama also hasn't said whether he would be willing to accept changes to the so-called employer mandate, but he has twice delayed implementation of this part of Obamacare, which was supposed to take effect this year but now won't fully be in place until 2016.

More people oppose the Affordable Care Act than support it, with 43 percent holding an unfavorable view of the law compared with 36 percent who see it favorably, according to an October poll by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. The same survey, however, revealed more than two-thirds of Americans believe Congress should work to improve Obamacare. Reported by Huffington Post 1 hour ago.

Auto insurance rates are now searchable nationwide for PIP coverage using the updated Quotes Pros website at http://quotespros.com/auto-insurance.html.

Austin, TX (PRWEB) November 05, 2014

Some U.S. states now require motorists to carry what is known as personal insurance protection in addition to regular state coverage when operating a vehicle. The Quotes Pros website is now providing use of its search tool to find auto insurance rates for PIP coverage nationally at http://quotespros.com/auto-insurance.html.

The insurer tool that is open and offered to the public this year can be a useful system to help the public find affordable policies from top companies. The PIP quotes for insurance that can be located through usage of the finder system are considered to be accurate through the selected companies that are positioned in the database.

"Our national price locator system is easy to use and there are no data entry requirements to find coverage pricing except for a zip code," said a Quotes Pros source.

The personal insurance protection quotes that are searchable through use of the finder this year are now combined with additional policies that can be explored. Apart from PIP liability protection plans, drivers can instantly search for full coverage or broad form policies that agencies supply.

"The usage of our search tool is now one option that motorists have when exploring price changes and discounts that insurers offer for plans of coverage in the U.S.," said the source.

The Quotes Pros company has plans to continue the access to its search database throughout next year and will upgrade its count of providers. The non-auto industry agencies that exist inside of the exploration system additionally supply health, homeowner and renter policy pricing at http://quotespros.com/health-insurance.html.

About QuotesPros.com

The QuotesPros.com company supplies immediate use of its database of insurers to the general public on its website. The current system holds agency information from companies in all parts of the U.S. The QuotesPros.com company uses a unique zip finder tool that categorizes all companies quoting plans of coverage in an easy to explore list to find coverage rates in real time. Reported by PRWeb 1 hour ago.

With open enrollment just 10 days away, officials racing to ready Minnesota's health insurance exchange say there are risks ahead and they'll need all the remaining time for final testing. Reported by TwinCities.com 59 minutes ago.

A few days ago, Bob Clary, the Marketing Manager at Webucator, asked if I'd be interested in writing a blog post about what keeps me writing fiction, and novels in particular, in honor of National Novel Writing Month. That led me to think about how I started writing fiction long before NaNoWriMo existed, and how the idea of writing an entire novel in a month seemed ludicrous to me when I first heard about it.

Now, though, I'm a fan. Why? Because NaNoWriMo gives writers a community as well as a deadline, and those are two key motivators when you want to complete a novel.

It took me over 25 years to publish my first novel. Despite having an agent who believed in me, I wrote many novels that were rejected before I finally self-published my favorite out of some combination of desperation and determination. I found the Indie publishing world to be an exciting and generous place and was prepared to do it again, especially when I realized I could make a little money that way. However, nanoseconds later, my agent called to say that he'd sold my newest manuscript to an editor at Penguin Random House.

I have now published two novels with Penguin and have a third scheduled to launch in April 2015, with a contract for a fourth book right on the heels of that one. I'm happy to share my experiences with other writers out there who might be dreaming of one day seeing their own books in print--especially those of you taking on the challenge of writing a draft in November. Here are my answers to Bob's questions:

*What were your goals when you started writing?*

When I first began writing fiction, I had no goals beyond entertaining myself. Seriously! I was a biology major on my way to medical school (or so I thought) and I needed an elective, so I took creative writing. I was immediately hooked, and all I wanted to do with my spare time after that was write fiction. I wrote short stories and tried to get them published in literary journals. I succeeded a few times, but never, ever, did I imagine making money from my fiction. Nor did I think I had it in me to write an entire novel. I had never even met a novelist at that point in my life. A year after graduating from college, however, I decided to go back to graduate school for a Master of Fine Arts in creative writing. There I met actual living, breathing, fiction writers who not only wrote novels, but sold them! Those mentors inspired me to do the same.

*What are your goals now?*

The nice thing about being a novelist is that it's not a limited career -- we're not ballerinas or ball players who will age out of the game. My goals as a writer now are simply to keep writing better books. I hope my novels will make readers laugh, cry, think, and come away with fresh perspectives. I don't ever consider money when I'm actually in the process of writing fiction. It's still very weird to me that someone is willing to pay me to make up stories!

*What pays the bills now?*

I'm extremely lucky, in that I have a husband whose job provides us with a steady income and health insurance. I'm an equal contributor to the household finances on an annual basis, but because I work as a freelance writer, my income is sporadic. Some months we're flush, while others are pretty tight if a client doesn't pay on time. I would say that, at this point, writing fiction provides me with about half of the income I need for our household to stay afloat. (Bear in mind that we have five children, with one still left to put through college.)

*Assuming writing doesn't pay the bills, what motivates you to keep writing?*

I find nothing more satisfying than inhabiting a world that I create, inhabited by complex characters whose conflicts I can make bigger or smaller as I choose. I have a rich emotional life both on and off the page. I wouldn't want it any other way. I think I would find it impossible to stop writing.

*And optionally, what advice would you give young authors hoping to make a career out of writing?*

That depends on what you mean by "career." If it's money you're after, then you can earn a good salary as a writer if you go after diverse jobs, as I do, and don't mind thinking of yourself as a technician who is paid by the hour or by the job. For instance, in a single month I might be working on a novel, a magazine article, a college marketing brochure, and a ghost-written memoir for a celebrity.

If you're trying to make a living as a fiction writer, I certainly know a great many self-published writers who are able to do that -- typically the ones who write mysteries or romances in a series. Literary writers, or even commercial writers like me, have a tougher time making a solid income from our fiction. Do whatever it takes to support your fiction writing habit, whether that means working on your fiction during intensive weekend retreats, in the evenings while holding down a full-time job, or through arranging part-time work and living more frugally so that you can devote half of every working day to writing fiction. Follow your passion. Write what intrigues and entertains you, and take every opportunity that comes your way, whether that's an editor's rejection letter that includes suggestions for revisions, or a contest that might earn you a place in a magazine and recognition by an agent. The only sure way you will not succeed as a writer is if you give up. Reported by Huffington Post 1 minute ago.