Sen. Ben Nevers made a heartfelt plea Wednesday for state lawmakers to put aside their aversion to President Barack Obama's health care law and approve coverage for poor Louisiana residents. "I'm not asking you to vote for Obamacare ... There's...
Reported by nola.com 9 hours ago.
Why won't legislators help families struggling without health insurance?: Editorial
↧
↧
HUFFPOLLSTER: Polls Still Show Rising Support For Same Sex Marriage
Pollsters measure and contemplate the rapid rise in support for same sex marriage. Democrats continue to dominate among Millennials. And there's a "reality gap" in perceptions of the ACA. This is HuffPollster for Friday, May 1, 2015.
*SUPPORT FOR SAME-SEX MARRIAGE REMAINS HIGH* - Quinnipiac University Poll: "American voters support same-sex marriage 58 - 34 percent, with strong support from every party, gender and age group except Republicans, who are opposed 59 - 33 percent, and voters over 55 years old, who support same-sex marriage by a narrow 48 - 43 percent....*By a smaller 58 - 35 percent margin, voters say businesses should not be allowed to refuse service to gays and lesbians*, even if it violates a business owner's religious beliefs. Again, there is strong agreement among all groups except Republicans, who say 56 - 37 percent a business owner should be allowed to deny service based on religious belief." [Quinnipiac]
*Americans choose religious freedom over gay rights, but..* - Emily Swanson: "Most Americans think the government should protect religious liberties over gay rights when the two come into conflict, a new Associated Press-GfK poll finds, though fewer think most businesses should be allowed to turn away gay couples because of religious beliefs.....Americans are more likely to say that religious liberties are more important for the government to protect than the rights of gays and lesbians, by a 56 percent to 40 percent margin, the poll found. Just a quarter of Americans call gay rights a very or extremely important issue to them personally, while half call religious liberties a very or extremely important issue. But *fewer Americans — just 40 percent — think most business owners should be allowed to refuse service to gays and lesbians on religious grounds*. That finding goes to the heart of the significant political fallout over Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which critics charged was intended to allow businesses discriminate against gays and lesbian." [AP]
*Religious Americans support same-sex marriage* - Robert Jones: "Although public opinion has shifted dramatically, especially among religious Americans, many leaders of the conservative Christian political movement continue to act as if public opinion were frozen in the 1970s. But in fact, more religiously affiliated Americans now support same-sex marriage than oppose it....84 percent of Buddhists, 77 percent of Jews, approximately six in ten white mainline Protestants (62 percent), white Catholics (61 percent) and Hispanic Catholics (60 percent), and 56 percent of Eastern Orthodox Christians now support allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry legally. Conceding the loss of some religious groups in their ranks, many conservative religious leaders nonetheless continue to assert that religious Americans overall continue to oppose same-sex marriage. *Even among religiously affiliated Americans, however, supporters today actually slightly outnumber opponents*. Among all religiously affiliated Americans, 47 percent favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry, compared to 45 percent who oppose. (The survey’s huge sample-size makes even this narrow margin statistically significant.)" [The Atlantic]
*Majority of Republicans would attend a gay wedding* - Jeff Mason: "A majority of U.S. Republicans would attend the same-sex wedding of a loved one, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed on Wednesday, highlighting the political risks for Republican presidential candidates who stake out positions against gay marriage....The poll showed *56 percent of Republicans would attend the gay wedding of a loved one if invited*. That compares with 80 percent of Democrats and 70 percent of independents, who said they would go.Overall, 68 percent of Americans would attend, the poll showed, while 19 percent would not and 13 percent were unsure." [Reuters]
*There's 'no going back'* - Mark Mellman (D): "Years ago, I argued that opinions on gay rights generally, and same-sex marriage in particular, were changing faster than those on almost any subject in the history of polling. That revolution continues...*Why the sudden and dramatic change? A combination of factors seems to be at work.* What I euphemistically call 'the inexorable forces of generational replacement' contributed significantly. Younger people have long been more supportive of same-sex marriage than their elders....Increased contact propelled support among young and old. As more people have come out in recent years, more of their friends and relatives have become aware of the fact that people they know and love are part of the LGBT community....Politics also had an impact. As I’ve regularly demonstrated, voters often follow their political leaders on issues. An ABC/Washington Post poll found support for gay marriage increasing 18 points among African-Americans just after President Obama announced his support....Whatever the cause of the change, the effect has been nothing short of seismic." [The Hill]
*How many Americans are in same-sex marriages or partnerships?* - Gary J. Gates and Frank Newport: "Approximately 0.3% of adults in the U.S. are married to a same-sex spouse, and another 0.5% identify as being in a same-sex domestic partnership. In examining the total population of 243 million U.S. adults, these survey estimates suggest nearly *2 million adults are part of a same-sex couple, of whom 780,000 are married.* The Census Bureau, however, has cautioned that the ACS estimates of married same-sex couples may not be reliable as they have determined that a large portion of recorded married same-sex couples may actually be married heterosexual couples who miscoded the sex of one of the spouses." [Gallup]
*NEW RESEARCH ON GENERATIONS & PARTISANSHIP* - Pew Research: "Over the past decade, there has been a pronounced age gap in American politics. Younger Americans have been the Democratic Party’s strongest supporters in both vote preferences and partisanship, while older Americans have been the most reliably Republican...Using the more than 25,000 interviews conducted over the course of 2014 that allowed for a deep dive into party identification released April 7, we are able to see variations within generations as well as between them....*Millennials generally are more likely than other generations to lean Democratic. The Silent Generation is more likely to lean Republican*. The partisan preferences of the two generations in between – Generation X and the Baby Boomers – are closer to the average partisan leanings of the public." [Pew]
*Differences among Millennials* - More Pew: "[T]he differences within generations are as notable as the differences among them....Millennials of all ages favor the Democratic Party by large margins, though *the [Democrats'] advantage in leaned identification is greater among the oldest Millennials*. Among Millennials born between 1981 and 1986 (28 to 33 in 2014), the Democratic Party leads by 18 points (51% Dem/lean Dem, 33% Rep/lean Rep). Among the youngest adult Millennials (18 to 23 in 2014) the Democratic Party’s advantage is a still sizeable, though slightly narrower, 14 points (51% Dem/lean Dem, 37% Rep/lean Rep)." [Pew]
*Harvard IOP: Hillary dominates among Millennials* - "A new national poll of America’s 18- to 29- year-olds by Harvard’s Institute of Politics (IOP)...finds no front-runner among prospective Republican candidates in a still-emerging presidential primary race – with no candidate capturing more than ten percent. Hillary Clinton is in command of a hypothetical Democratic presidential primary with 47%... Overall – *a solid majority of 18- to 29- year-olds prefer a Democrat (55%) winning the 2016 campaign for president over a Republican (40%)*... Among potential Republican primary voters (definite, probable or 50-50; n=486), not one of 16 prospective Republican presidential candidates garnered more than ten percent of the vote." [Harvard release]
*MORE OF THIS WEEK'S NATIONAL POLLS*
-*Gallup: Fewer Americans now identify as middle class* - "Currently, 51% of Americans say they are middle class or upper-middle class, while 48% say they are lower class or working class. In multiple surveys conducted from 2000 through 2008, an average of more than 60% of Americans identified as middle or upper-middle class." [Gallup]
-*HuffPost/YouGov: GOP now seen as more extreme* - HuffPollster: "In a shift of opinion since the 2014 midterms, Americans now consider the Republican Party more extreme than the Democratic Party, a new HuffPost/YouGov poll finds. In the days just after the GOP retook the Senate last November, Americans were evenly split as to which party they thought was more extreme. They now say by an 8-point margin that Republicans are further from the mainstream. *Half of Americans now say the GOP is too extreme, up 7 points since November.*...Forty-eight percent of independents now say the GOP is too extreme, up 9 points from last year. The percentage of Republicans calling their own party too extreme also rose by 6 points." [HuffPost]
-*Pew: Americans split on views of union membership* -"Over the past three decades, the share of wage and salary workers in the United States who belong to labor unions has fallen by about half. The public expresses mixed views of the impact of the long-term decline in union membership on the country: 45% say this has been mostly a bad thing, while 43% see it as mostly a good thing." [Pew]
*HuffPost/YouGov: Republicans say their party was justified in opposing Lynch* - HuffPollster: "Senate Republicans who opposed Loretta Lynch's nomination as attorney general lost the battle to keep her from being confirmed, but many Americans, including the vast majority of their party, think they were justified in disputing her nomination for political reasons…In a new HuffPost/YouGov poll, 41 percent say senators are justified in voting against a nominee if they disagree with that nominee's political opinions. *More than 70 percent in the GOP agree that senators should have the discretion to oppose cabinet nominees.* Three-quarters of Republicans say it was appropriate for GOP senators to oppose [Lynch's] nomination because she supported President Barack Obama's executive actions on immigration. Just 19 percent of Democrats agree. [HuffPost]
-*Pew: A mobile majority* - "At the start of 2015, 39 of the top 50 digital news websites have more traffic to their sites and associated applications coming from mobile devices than from desktop computers, according to Pew Research Center’s analysis of comScore data."[Pew]
*BERNIE SANDERS' BIG CHALLENGE* - Harry Enten: "Let’s be real right out of the gate: Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont is almost certainly not going to be the Democratic nominee for president in 2016....Polls show Sanders doesn’t match up well against Clinton. He trails her by nearly 57 percentage points nationally, 54 percentage points in Iowa and 40 percentage points in New Hampshire. More than that, *there seems to be very little desire on the left for a challenger to Clinton*. She regularly earns 60 percent support among self-described 'liberal' and 'very liberal voters, according to national polls. And Sanders’s colleagues in the Senate with the most liberal voting records — those who would be key to starting a mutiny against Clinton — have already endorsed her."[538]
*Not enough liberals among Democrats* - Nate Cohn: "[T]here is another, strangely simple reason Mrs. Clinton will have an easy road to the nomination: The left wing of the Democratic Party just isn’t big enough to support a challenge to the left of a mainstream liberal Democrat like Mrs. Clinton...*The majority of Democrats and Democratic primary voters are self-described moderates or even conservatives*, according to an Upshot analysis of Pew survey data from 2014 and exit polls from the 2008 Democratic primary." [NYT]
*THE OBAMACARE PERFORMANCE 'REALITY GAP'* - Jonathan Cohn and HuffPollster: "In a new [YouGov] survey, *more than half of self-identified Republicans said they didn’t think the Affordable Care Act is increasing the number of people with health insurance*, with a fifth of respondents saying it has actually reduced the number of people with coverage. For the record, the evidence suggests these people are flat-out wrong....Among Democrats, 77 percent said the number of people with insurance had risen, while just 9 percent said it had decreased. But among Republicans, just 43 percent thought the number of people with insurance had increased, while 21 percent said it had decreased… Every major study -- including official estimates by the federal government and analyses by independent researchers -- has shown that the number of people with health insurance has risen substantially since the Affordable Care Act took full effect...*It’s likely that perceptions of the Affordable Care Act are affecting the way some people assess its performance, rather than the other way around*." [HuffPost]
*HUFFPOLLSTER VIA EMAIL!* - You can receive this weekly update every Friday morning via email! Just click here, enter your email address, and click "sign up." That's all there is to it (and you can unsubscribe anytime).
*THIS WEEK'S 'OUTLIERS'* - Links to the best of news at the intersection of polling, politics and political data:
-Jeb Bush isn't winning the invisible primary. [538]
-President Obama continues to be the more trusted economic actor in Washington. [Gallup]
-Americans are slowly and steadily warming up to Obamacare. [YouGov]
-Ed Kilgore sees some gold in early polls; Jonathan Bernstein responds. [Washington Monthly, Bloomberg]
-Bill McInturff (R) sees no real growth in "hard" independents. [POS]
-DeepRootX (R) shares an interactive visualization of 2012 Republican primary ads. [National Journal]
-Karlyn Bowman summarizes recent polling on income inequality. [AEI]
-Alex Tribou and Keith Collins chart America's fast social evolution. [Bloomberg via @joshuatopolsky]
-The Census Bureau explains why the American Community Survey (ACS) asks so many questions about our lives. [MarketingResearch.org]
-The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research wins the "Data Seal of Approval." [Roper]
-American Viewpoint, the firm of Republican pollster Linda Divall, celebrates its 30th year anniversary. [AmView]
-What the probability of precipitation really means. [WashPost]-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 7 hours ago.
*SUPPORT FOR SAME-SEX MARRIAGE REMAINS HIGH* - Quinnipiac University Poll: "American voters support same-sex marriage 58 - 34 percent, with strong support from every party, gender and age group except Republicans, who are opposed 59 - 33 percent, and voters over 55 years old, who support same-sex marriage by a narrow 48 - 43 percent....*By a smaller 58 - 35 percent margin, voters say businesses should not be allowed to refuse service to gays and lesbians*, even if it violates a business owner's religious beliefs. Again, there is strong agreement among all groups except Republicans, who say 56 - 37 percent a business owner should be allowed to deny service based on religious belief." [Quinnipiac]
*Americans choose religious freedom over gay rights, but..* - Emily Swanson: "Most Americans think the government should protect religious liberties over gay rights when the two come into conflict, a new Associated Press-GfK poll finds, though fewer think most businesses should be allowed to turn away gay couples because of religious beliefs.....Americans are more likely to say that religious liberties are more important for the government to protect than the rights of gays and lesbians, by a 56 percent to 40 percent margin, the poll found. Just a quarter of Americans call gay rights a very or extremely important issue to them personally, while half call religious liberties a very or extremely important issue. But *fewer Americans — just 40 percent — think most business owners should be allowed to refuse service to gays and lesbians on religious grounds*. That finding goes to the heart of the significant political fallout over Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which critics charged was intended to allow businesses discriminate against gays and lesbian." [AP]
*Religious Americans support same-sex marriage* - Robert Jones: "Although public opinion has shifted dramatically, especially among religious Americans, many leaders of the conservative Christian political movement continue to act as if public opinion were frozen in the 1970s. But in fact, more religiously affiliated Americans now support same-sex marriage than oppose it....84 percent of Buddhists, 77 percent of Jews, approximately six in ten white mainline Protestants (62 percent), white Catholics (61 percent) and Hispanic Catholics (60 percent), and 56 percent of Eastern Orthodox Christians now support allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry legally. Conceding the loss of some religious groups in their ranks, many conservative religious leaders nonetheless continue to assert that religious Americans overall continue to oppose same-sex marriage. *Even among religiously affiliated Americans, however, supporters today actually slightly outnumber opponents*. Among all religiously affiliated Americans, 47 percent favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry, compared to 45 percent who oppose. (The survey’s huge sample-size makes even this narrow margin statistically significant.)" [The Atlantic]
*Majority of Republicans would attend a gay wedding* - Jeff Mason: "A majority of U.S. Republicans would attend the same-sex wedding of a loved one, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed on Wednesday, highlighting the political risks for Republican presidential candidates who stake out positions against gay marriage....The poll showed *56 percent of Republicans would attend the gay wedding of a loved one if invited*. That compares with 80 percent of Democrats and 70 percent of independents, who said they would go.Overall, 68 percent of Americans would attend, the poll showed, while 19 percent would not and 13 percent were unsure." [Reuters]
*There's 'no going back'* - Mark Mellman (D): "Years ago, I argued that opinions on gay rights generally, and same-sex marriage in particular, were changing faster than those on almost any subject in the history of polling. That revolution continues...*Why the sudden and dramatic change? A combination of factors seems to be at work.* What I euphemistically call 'the inexorable forces of generational replacement' contributed significantly. Younger people have long been more supportive of same-sex marriage than their elders....Increased contact propelled support among young and old. As more people have come out in recent years, more of their friends and relatives have become aware of the fact that people they know and love are part of the LGBT community....Politics also had an impact. As I’ve regularly demonstrated, voters often follow their political leaders on issues. An ABC/Washington Post poll found support for gay marriage increasing 18 points among African-Americans just after President Obama announced his support....Whatever the cause of the change, the effect has been nothing short of seismic." [The Hill]
*How many Americans are in same-sex marriages or partnerships?* - Gary J. Gates and Frank Newport: "Approximately 0.3% of adults in the U.S. are married to a same-sex spouse, and another 0.5% identify as being in a same-sex domestic partnership. In examining the total population of 243 million U.S. adults, these survey estimates suggest nearly *2 million adults are part of a same-sex couple, of whom 780,000 are married.* The Census Bureau, however, has cautioned that the ACS estimates of married same-sex couples may not be reliable as they have determined that a large portion of recorded married same-sex couples may actually be married heterosexual couples who miscoded the sex of one of the spouses." [Gallup]
*NEW RESEARCH ON GENERATIONS & PARTISANSHIP* - Pew Research: "Over the past decade, there has been a pronounced age gap in American politics. Younger Americans have been the Democratic Party’s strongest supporters in both vote preferences and partisanship, while older Americans have been the most reliably Republican...Using the more than 25,000 interviews conducted over the course of 2014 that allowed for a deep dive into party identification released April 7, we are able to see variations within generations as well as between them....*Millennials generally are more likely than other generations to lean Democratic. The Silent Generation is more likely to lean Republican*. The partisan preferences of the two generations in between – Generation X and the Baby Boomers – are closer to the average partisan leanings of the public." [Pew]
*Differences among Millennials* - More Pew: "[T]he differences within generations are as notable as the differences among them....Millennials of all ages favor the Democratic Party by large margins, though *the [Democrats'] advantage in leaned identification is greater among the oldest Millennials*. Among Millennials born between 1981 and 1986 (28 to 33 in 2014), the Democratic Party leads by 18 points (51% Dem/lean Dem, 33% Rep/lean Rep). Among the youngest adult Millennials (18 to 23 in 2014) the Democratic Party’s advantage is a still sizeable, though slightly narrower, 14 points (51% Dem/lean Dem, 37% Rep/lean Rep)." [Pew]
*Harvard IOP: Hillary dominates among Millennials* - "A new national poll of America’s 18- to 29- year-olds by Harvard’s Institute of Politics (IOP)...finds no front-runner among prospective Republican candidates in a still-emerging presidential primary race – with no candidate capturing more than ten percent. Hillary Clinton is in command of a hypothetical Democratic presidential primary with 47%... Overall – *a solid majority of 18- to 29- year-olds prefer a Democrat (55%) winning the 2016 campaign for president over a Republican (40%)*... Among potential Republican primary voters (definite, probable or 50-50; n=486), not one of 16 prospective Republican presidential candidates garnered more than ten percent of the vote." [Harvard release]
*MORE OF THIS WEEK'S NATIONAL POLLS*
-*Gallup: Fewer Americans now identify as middle class* - "Currently, 51% of Americans say they are middle class or upper-middle class, while 48% say they are lower class or working class. In multiple surveys conducted from 2000 through 2008, an average of more than 60% of Americans identified as middle or upper-middle class." [Gallup]
-*HuffPost/YouGov: GOP now seen as more extreme* - HuffPollster: "In a shift of opinion since the 2014 midterms, Americans now consider the Republican Party more extreme than the Democratic Party, a new HuffPost/YouGov poll finds. In the days just after the GOP retook the Senate last November, Americans were evenly split as to which party they thought was more extreme. They now say by an 8-point margin that Republicans are further from the mainstream. *Half of Americans now say the GOP is too extreme, up 7 points since November.*...Forty-eight percent of independents now say the GOP is too extreme, up 9 points from last year. The percentage of Republicans calling their own party too extreme also rose by 6 points." [HuffPost]
-*Pew: Americans split on views of union membership* -"Over the past three decades, the share of wage and salary workers in the United States who belong to labor unions has fallen by about half. The public expresses mixed views of the impact of the long-term decline in union membership on the country: 45% say this has been mostly a bad thing, while 43% see it as mostly a good thing." [Pew]
*HuffPost/YouGov: Republicans say their party was justified in opposing Lynch* - HuffPollster: "Senate Republicans who opposed Loretta Lynch's nomination as attorney general lost the battle to keep her from being confirmed, but many Americans, including the vast majority of their party, think they were justified in disputing her nomination for political reasons…In a new HuffPost/YouGov poll, 41 percent say senators are justified in voting against a nominee if they disagree with that nominee's political opinions. *More than 70 percent in the GOP agree that senators should have the discretion to oppose cabinet nominees.* Three-quarters of Republicans say it was appropriate for GOP senators to oppose [Lynch's] nomination because she supported President Barack Obama's executive actions on immigration. Just 19 percent of Democrats agree. [HuffPost]
-*Pew: A mobile majority* - "At the start of 2015, 39 of the top 50 digital news websites have more traffic to their sites and associated applications coming from mobile devices than from desktop computers, according to Pew Research Center’s analysis of comScore data."[Pew]
*BERNIE SANDERS' BIG CHALLENGE* - Harry Enten: "Let’s be real right out of the gate: Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont is almost certainly not going to be the Democratic nominee for president in 2016....Polls show Sanders doesn’t match up well against Clinton. He trails her by nearly 57 percentage points nationally, 54 percentage points in Iowa and 40 percentage points in New Hampshire. More than that, *there seems to be very little desire on the left for a challenger to Clinton*. She regularly earns 60 percent support among self-described 'liberal' and 'very liberal voters, according to national polls. And Sanders’s colleagues in the Senate with the most liberal voting records — those who would be key to starting a mutiny against Clinton — have already endorsed her."[538]
*Not enough liberals among Democrats* - Nate Cohn: "[T]here is another, strangely simple reason Mrs. Clinton will have an easy road to the nomination: The left wing of the Democratic Party just isn’t big enough to support a challenge to the left of a mainstream liberal Democrat like Mrs. Clinton...*The majority of Democrats and Democratic primary voters are self-described moderates or even conservatives*, according to an Upshot analysis of Pew survey data from 2014 and exit polls from the 2008 Democratic primary." [NYT]
*THE OBAMACARE PERFORMANCE 'REALITY GAP'* - Jonathan Cohn and HuffPollster: "In a new [YouGov] survey, *more than half of self-identified Republicans said they didn’t think the Affordable Care Act is increasing the number of people with health insurance*, with a fifth of respondents saying it has actually reduced the number of people with coverage. For the record, the evidence suggests these people are flat-out wrong....Among Democrats, 77 percent said the number of people with insurance had risen, while just 9 percent said it had decreased. But among Republicans, just 43 percent thought the number of people with insurance had increased, while 21 percent said it had decreased… Every major study -- including official estimates by the federal government and analyses by independent researchers -- has shown that the number of people with health insurance has risen substantially since the Affordable Care Act took full effect...*It’s likely that perceptions of the Affordable Care Act are affecting the way some people assess its performance, rather than the other way around*." [HuffPost]
*HUFFPOLLSTER VIA EMAIL!* - You can receive this weekly update every Friday morning via email! Just click here, enter your email address, and click "sign up." That's all there is to it (and you can unsubscribe anytime).
*THIS WEEK'S 'OUTLIERS'* - Links to the best of news at the intersection of polling, politics and political data:
-Jeb Bush isn't winning the invisible primary. [538]
-President Obama continues to be the more trusted economic actor in Washington. [Gallup]
-Americans are slowly and steadily warming up to Obamacare. [YouGov]
-Ed Kilgore sees some gold in early polls; Jonathan Bernstein responds. [Washington Monthly, Bloomberg]
-Bill McInturff (R) sees no real growth in "hard" independents. [POS]
-DeepRootX (R) shares an interactive visualization of 2012 Republican primary ads. [National Journal]
-Karlyn Bowman summarizes recent polling on income inequality. [AEI]
-Alex Tribou and Keith Collins chart America's fast social evolution. [Bloomberg via @joshuatopolsky]
-The Census Bureau explains why the American Community Survey (ACS) asks so many questions about our lives. [MarketingResearch.org]
-The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research wins the "Data Seal of Approval." [Roper]
-American Viewpoint, the firm of Republican pollster Linda Divall, celebrates its 30th year anniversary. [AmView]
-What the probability of precipitation really means. [WashPost]-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 7 hours ago.
↧
Assurant narrows its focus to housing insurance
Assurant is shifting its focus to housing insurance programs as it pulls back from its health insurance and employee benefits -More-
Reported by SmartBrief 6 hours ago.
↧
Your Money Adviser: Health Insurance Deadline Passes for Most, but There Are Exceptions
The Affordable Care Act’s open enrollment period for health insurance expired on April 30, but people with special circumstances can still get coverage.
Reported by NYTimes.com 6 hours ago.
↧
Governor Wolf Asks Federal Government for State-Based Marketplace to Protect 382,000 Pennsylvanians
HARRISBURG, Pa., May 1, 2015 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Governor Tom Wolf today outlined a contingency plan to protect 382,000 Pennsylvanians from losing subsidies that help them afford health insurance coverage. Governor Wolf sent a letter to the federal Department of Health and Human...
Reported by PR Newswire 5 hours ago.
↧
↧
UnitedHealth ramps up coverage of video doc visits
UnitedHealthcare is broadening its coverage of video-based physician visits through new partnerships with telemedicine companies, the insurer announced Thursday. The health insurance arm of Minnetonka-based UnitedHealth Group Inc. (NYSE: UNH) will offer 24-hour video access to a doctor through a mobile device or desktop computer. The company presently only offers the option to its self-funded employer customers. UnitedHealthcare's telemedicine partners are NowClinic (which UnitedHealth owns through…
Reported by bizjournals 3 hours ago.
↧
Pennsylvania Governor Acts To Ensure Federal Health Care Subsidies
May 1 (Reuters) - Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf said on Friday the state will set up its own healthcare exchange if needed to save insurance subsidies for thousands of residents under the federal government's 2010 Affordable Care Act.
The announcement comes ahead of a ruling expected in June from the U.S. Supreme Court in a lawsuit concerning the eligibility of tax subsidies for people in states where the federal government runs health insurance marketplaces.
"In order to protect 382,000 Pennsylvanians from potentially losing subsidies that help them afford health care coverage, I have written to the federal government outlining a contingency plan to set up a state-based marketplace to ensure no one loses their health coverage," Wolf, a Democrat, said in a statement.
He added that his letter to the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services does not mean that Pennsylvania must set up a state-based marketplace.
Up to 7.5 million people in at least 34 states that use the federal exchange could lose their tax subsidies if the court disallows the tax subsidies, according to the consulting firm Avalere Health, dealing a possibly fatal blow to the program.
Most of the 50 states have not created their own exchanges. (Reporting By Karen Pierog; Editing by Alan Crosby)
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 3 hours ago.
The announcement comes ahead of a ruling expected in June from the U.S. Supreme Court in a lawsuit concerning the eligibility of tax subsidies for people in states where the federal government runs health insurance marketplaces.
"In order to protect 382,000 Pennsylvanians from potentially losing subsidies that help them afford health care coverage, I have written to the federal government outlining a contingency plan to set up a state-based marketplace to ensure no one loses their health coverage," Wolf, a Democrat, said in a statement.
He added that his letter to the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services does not mean that Pennsylvania must set up a state-based marketplace.
Up to 7.5 million people in at least 34 states that use the federal exchange could lose their tax subsidies if the court disallows the tax subsidies, according to the consulting firm Avalere Health, dealing a possibly fatal blow to the program.
Most of the 50 states have not created their own exchanges. (Reporting By Karen Pierog; Editing by Alan Crosby)
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 3 hours ago.
↧
New Reparations Claims Jolt Canada
Within the Canadian context, there are several groups seeking some form of redress and reparations for historical acts of injustices brought against their ancestors, and in some cases survivors, by governments in Canada. —Canadian Race Relations Foundation Newsletter.
Plaintiff: Canadians Who Look Just Like Americans
Claim: Pain and suffering have been inflicted on Canadians who look just like Americans ever since Confederation (1867) established a distinct Canadian identity. This dramatizes the federal government’s continuing failure to provide any means of distinguishing Canadian citizens—thereby denying the superior moral status accruing from the nation’s universal health insurance, sensible gun laws, and record forty-two wins of the United Nations’ coveted Mister Nice Guy of Nations award. Reported by The New Yorker 1 hour ago.
Plaintiff: Canadians Who Look Just Like Americans
Claim: Pain and suffering have been inflicted on Canadians who look just like Americans ever since Confederation (1867) established a distinct Canadian identity. This dramatizes the federal government’s continuing failure to provide any means of distinguishing Canadian citizens—thereby denying the superior moral status accruing from the nation’s universal health insurance, sensible gun laws, and record forty-two wins of the United Nations’ coveted Mister Nice Guy of Nations award. Reported by The New Yorker 1 hour ago.
↧
Your Money Adviser: Health Insurance Deadline Passes for Most, but There Are Exceptions
The Affordable Care Act’s open enrollment period for health insurance expired on April 30, but people with special circumstances can still get coverage.
Reported by NYTimes.com 2 minutes ago.
↧
↧
Nigeria Government Reshuffle Sparks Charges of Patronage Politics
Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan has fired the head of the police and other powerful government agencies weeks before he is to hand over his office to incoming president Muhammadu Buhari. Some analysts say the moves are evidence of last-minute score settling and patronage appointments by the outgoing administration. In the past few weeks, Jonathan has fired the heads of the police, the National Health Insurance Scheme, and the Ports Authority. He also made two appointments at the...
Reported by VOA News 1 day ago.
↧
WEDI Contributes to Newly Released U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) Study on Potential Use of Electronically Readable Medicare Cards
WEDI selected to provide guidance on ways to improve security and enhance administrative processes in the care continuum
RESTON, Va. (PRWEB) May 01, 2015
The Workgroup for Electronic Data Interchange (WEDI), the nation’s leading nonprofit authority on the use of health IT to create efficiencies in healthcare information exchange, served as a key contributing resource to the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) for a study on the use of electronically readable cards in Medicare. The report, “Potential Uses of Electronically Readable Cards for Beneficiaries and Providers” was released to the public on Apr. 24, 2015 and examines the ways in which electronically readable cards could be used for Medicare to replace paper Medicare cards, which display beneficiaries’ Social Security numbers.
GAO reviewed industry reports on the potential benefits associated with electronically readable cards and interviewed industry officials to examine the potential benefits and limitations associated with the use of electronically readable cards in Medicare. The GAO also wanted to understand the steps CMS and Medicare providers would need to take in order to implement and use electronically readable cards. As part of the development of the study, GAO interviewed officials from federal agencies and stakeholder organizations with knowledge and expertise related to the potential uses of electronically readable cards, including WEDI executives Devin Jopp, Ed.D, president and CEO; Jim Daley, then-chair; and Peter Barry, Health ID Card Sub-Workgroup co-chair.
The report found that “CMS—the agency that administers Medicare—could use electronically readable cards in Medicare for a number of different purposes. Three key uses include authenticating beneficiary and provider presence at the point of care, electronically exchanging beneficiary medical information, and electronically conveying beneficiary identity and insurance information to providers.”
“WEDI has a long standing history in the health ID card space and is well known for the standard that is in use across the industry today,” said Jopp. “We applaud the GAO report and are pleased to see WEDI’s thought leadership recognized in the report. Looking ahead, WEDI is working, in partnership with the Sullivan Institute for Healthcare Innovation, MGMA, and HIMSS on bringing the next generation of health ID cards to bear that will leverage mobile technology to streamline the patient check-in process by using applications rather than cards to provide benefit information and essential health records.”
The new partnership, entitled the Virtual Clipboard Initiative, is being designed to facilitate the patient intake process, including automating the collection of critical health insurance and demographic information.
About WEDI
The Workgroup for Electronic Data Interchange (WEDI) is the leading authority on the use of health IT to improve healthcare information exchange in order to enhance the quality of care, improve efficiency, and reduce costs of our nation’s healthcare system. WEDI was formed in 1991 by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) and was designated in the 1996 HIPAA legislation as an advisor to HHS. WEDI’s membership includes a broad coalition of organizations, including: hospitals, providers, health plans, vendors, government agencies, consumers, not-for-profit organizations, and standards development organizations. To learn more, visit http://www.wedi.org. Reported by PRWeb 1 day ago.
RESTON, Va. (PRWEB) May 01, 2015
The Workgroup for Electronic Data Interchange (WEDI), the nation’s leading nonprofit authority on the use of health IT to create efficiencies in healthcare information exchange, served as a key contributing resource to the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) for a study on the use of electronically readable cards in Medicare. The report, “Potential Uses of Electronically Readable Cards for Beneficiaries and Providers” was released to the public on Apr. 24, 2015 and examines the ways in which electronically readable cards could be used for Medicare to replace paper Medicare cards, which display beneficiaries’ Social Security numbers.
GAO reviewed industry reports on the potential benefits associated with electronically readable cards and interviewed industry officials to examine the potential benefits and limitations associated with the use of electronically readable cards in Medicare. The GAO also wanted to understand the steps CMS and Medicare providers would need to take in order to implement and use electronically readable cards. As part of the development of the study, GAO interviewed officials from federal agencies and stakeholder organizations with knowledge and expertise related to the potential uses of electronically readable cards, including WEDI executives Devin Jopp, Ed.D, president and CEO; Jim Daley, then-chair; and Peter Barry, Health ID Card Sub-Workgroup co-chair.
The report found that “CMS—the agency that administers Medicare—could use electronically readable cards in Medicare for a number of different purposes. Three key uses include authenticating beneficiary and provider presence at the point of care, electronically exchanging beneficiary medical information, and electronically conveying beneficiary identity and insurance information to providers.”
“WEDI has a long standing history in the health ID card space and is well known for the standard that is in use across the industry today,” said Jopp. “We applaud the GAO report and are pleased to see WEDI’s thought leadership recognized in the report. Looking ahead, WEDI is working, in partnership with the Sullivan Institute for Healthcare Innovation, MGMA, and HIMSS on bringing the next generation of health ID cards to bear that will leverage mobile technology to streamline the patient check-in process by using applications rather than cards to provide benefit information and essential health records.”
The new partnership, entitled the Virtual Clipboard Initiative, is being designed to facilitate the patient intake process, including automating the collection of critical health insurance and demographic information.
About WEDI
The Workgroup for Electronic Data Interchange (WEDI) is the leading authority on the use of health IT to improve healthcare information exchange in order to enhance the quality of care, improve efficiency, and reduce costs of our nation’s healthcare system. WEDI was formed in 1991 by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) and was designated in the 1996 HIPAA legislation as an advisor to HHS. WEDI’s membership includes a broad coalition of organizations, including: hospitals, providers, health plans, vendors, government agencies, consumers, not-for-profit organizations, and standards development organizations. To learn more, visit http://www.wedi.org. Reported by PRWeb 1 day ago.
↧
Friday Talking Points -- Run, Bernie, Run!
We've got everything from hippies to Satanists to cover this week, so let's just dive right in, shall we?
The Supreme Court heard a monumental case on marriage equality, which could indeed be their last case ever on the subject (if Justice Kennedy votes the way many expect him to, resulting in gay marriage in all 50 states). Feelings, as always, ran high on both sides of the issue, but more and more it's looking like a lost cause for all the "defenders of traditional marriage."
Interestingly enough, the best quote I read this week was from a Republican from Illinois, Senator Mark Kirk. For some context, Kirk faces a tough re-election race in a blue state, but even so, the sentiment is a brilliant one. Speaking to the crowd in front of the Supreme Court building, Kirk said: "As a history nerd, you could make the case that we could've lost World War II but for one British gay mathematician named Alan Turing. And we are a much more powerful country because of our gay community." Well said, Senator! We still hope Illinois replaces you with a Democrat, but credit is due where credit is due. Kirk is now the second Republican senator to come out in support of marriage equality (Rob Portman was the first). Even the Republicans running for president are reportedly beginning to realize what a tightrope the issue is going to become for them in June, when the court rules.
In other gay Republican news (there's a segue I never thought I'd write...), a state representative in North Dakota, Randy Boehning, came out as bisexual after he was "caught sending explicit photos on a gay dating app." Maybe now that he's out and proud, he'll actually vote for gay rights instead of against them (as he's done even in the past few weeks).
And in Republican family-values ("do as we say, not as we do") news, a Senate staffer for Mississippi's Thad Cochran told law enforcement that he planned to exchange the 181.5 grams of methamphetamine found in his house for "sexual favors." This is on top of the package of date-rape drugs from China that was intercepted in the mail (the reason his house was searched). This raises two puzzling questions, namely: "Why would you think you need date-rape drugs if you're already trading drugs for sex?" and: "181.5 freakin' grams of crank!?! That must mean a whole bunch of sexual favors! Are you sure you're healthy enough for that much sex?" More of those down-home, good ol' Republican family values, folks!
In other Republicans-behaving-strangely news, the Republican Party is apparently going to woo Latino voters by going on the attack against "anchor babies" and birthright citizenship. Representative Steve King (of course) introduced legislation and a hearing was held on it. The only problem was, the expert the Republicans came up with to speak is actually a stone-cold, flat-out racist. This was one of only three witnesses the Republicans called (the Democrats weren't allowed to call any), mind you. Nothing like that Republican minority outreach, eh?
Even stranger news from Republicanland: some people are convinced that the United States military is about to attack Texas. No, really. A training exercise ("Jade Helm") has entered the realm of the black helicopters (boy, doesn't that take you back to the 1990s?) in some people's imagination, making them cower in fear of an imminent Second Civil War. Or something. It's hard to figure out the ravings of lunatics, at times.
Of course, the option always exists to just have some fun with them, instead. Much of the conservative media just got punked, after a guy made up a story (and told it to a credulous conservative blogger) that Harry Reid's recent injuries were the result of a fight with his intoxicated brother Larry. The story then just took off and rattled around the rightwing echo chamber, much to the amusement of the guy punking them.
Enough Republican follies, let's instead turn to the Democrats. Hillary Clinton gave a pretty progressive speech on sentencing reform this week, as she begins to lay out the policy details of her campaign. She also tweeted a fun rainbow flag icon about the marriage equality case. But the real news on the Democratic side was that Hillary now faces an official, declared candidate: Senator Bernie Sanders from Vermont. It's not even entirely clear, at this point, whether Sanders is going to officially join the Democratic Party (he's always called himself a "Democratic Socialist"). We'll have much more on his campaign later in the program, but the truly interesting question right now is whether the throngs (and the millions of dollars) behind the "Draft Elizabeth Warren" movement will now be satisfied to transfer their energies (and money) over to a candidate who is actually, you know, running. We'll see....
Obama made news at the start of the week by cracking jokes ("Bucket!") at the White House Correspondents Dinner confab (also known as the "nerd prom," for obvious reasons). Later in the week, it was announced that his presidential library will be in Chicago.
We've got one "you can't make this stuff up" horror story from the War On Drugs, and then we'll get to the atheists and Satanists. In a story that aptly begins with the line "The drug war means never having to say you're sorry," it was revealed that a federal judge agreed with the Drug Enforcement Agency that the government is not liable for one thin dime in damages, even though they acted abominably. A D.E.A. undercover informant essentially stole a truck from a small (two trucks, total) trucking company, drove it down to the border for a drug sting, loaded it up with drugs, and then got caught in a shootout that killed him. The trucking company sued but will not even be reimbursed for the "cost of repairing the bullet holes" in the truck, which was out of commission for two months. Not only does the D.E.A. get off scot-free, but there won't even be a trial which would expose all the facts of the case. Your tax dollars at work, folks! The article ends with:
It's interesting that this ruling comes down a week after D.E.A. administrator Michele Leonhart resigned after allegations that D.E.A. attended cartel-funded sex parties in South America. The D.E.A. took a truck, filled it with drugs, then screwed up and put the truck in the middle of a shootout that damaged the truck and killed its driver. Yet Leonhart was forced to resign because of sex parties.
It isn't the illicit stuff the D.E.A. does that should worry us; it's all the horrific stuff the agency does that we've somehow permitted to be protected by law.
Amen to that.
Speaking of guns and government, what exactly was a loaded gun doing in John Boehner's private bathroom on Capitol Hill? A child found the gun, which is (even more astonishingly) not the first time guns have been found in Capitol bathrooms. Draw your own conclusions.
And, finally, we have some good atheist news to report. Warren City, Michigan is about to get a "reason station" inside City Hall. It will be manned by Douglas Marshall, who just won his lawsuit to force the city to accept his booth, since they already allowed "prayer stations" run by churches in the same venue. He "plans to set up his reason station weekly with pamphlets that advocate for logic and separation of church and state," after the judge agreed with his point that free speech has to be open to all.
The Satanists, meanwhile, have also been busy on the legal front. A Missouri woman is invoking the same basic argument that was used in the Hobby Lobby case to challenge the state's new 72-hour waiting period to get an abortion. She wants a waiver from the law, stating: "I regard a waiting period as a state sanctioned attempt to discourage abortion by instilling an unnecessary burden as part of the process to obtain this legal medical procedure. The waiting period interferes with the inviolability of my body and thereby imposes an unwanted and substantial burden on my sincerely held religious beliefs."
This is the part that those advocating against strict church/state separation always seem to miss: laws that presume to promote "religious freedom" can be used by anyone from any religion, not just Christianity. The Constitution demands no less. Look for more and more of this sort of court case in the future, as the unintended result of theocratic legislating. Both the Satanists and the atheists are forcing everyone to realize the full extent of such laws, and should be applauded for doing so.
Seven Democrats in the House should also be commended for a letter to President Obama they wrote this week. An *Honorable Mention* goes out to all of them: Earl Blumenauer, Steve Cohen, Sam Farr, Barbara Lee, Zoe Lofgren, Jared Polis, and Eric Swalwell.
The letter encourages President Obama to name a new head of the D.E.A. who will better reflect (instead of fighting against) the administration's new policies on marijuana enforcement. It bluntly states that outgoing (in disgrace) D.E.A. chief Michele Leonhart "leaves behind a legacy of strident opposition to efforts to reform our nation's drug policy."
These seven Democratic House members are right. This is an opportunity for Obama to truly change the course of the ship of state. With a new Attorney General and a new leader at the D.E.A., the federal government could go a long way towards catching up with the states on the marijuana issue. In fact, we're kind of surprised there aren't more names on that letter.
But our *Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week* award goes to newly-announced presidential candidate Bernie Sanders. Sanders is going to face withering contempt from the inside-the-Beltway "serious people" in the media, so we thought we'd start his candidacy out by instead giving him a little respect.
Don't believe me? Well, it took the Washington Post about ten freakin' seconds after Sanders announced his candidacy to call him a hippie. Seriously. The article starts off with "Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) could be our first socialist hippie president," and then quickly moves on to talking about the "hippie migration" to Vermont in the 1970s. There's no quote from Sanders using the word to describe himself, mind you, instead they just cite an eight-year-old article from another publication that called Sanders a hippie. Actually, the full quote (which the Post felt the need to reprint) was: "a humorless aging hippie peacenik Socialist from Brooklyn."
We suppose we should be happy they didn't go full throttle and just call him a "dirty hippie." We've got a whole lot of this sneering punditocracy disdain ahead, folks, so buckle up.
We see Bernie Sanders and his campaign in a different light, of course. We see him instead as the best hope for Progressives in the 2016 campaign. He will be out there talking about the issues that matter to him, and those are the same issues that matter to a whole lot of Democrats out there. It'll be interesting to see what happens in the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire in the next few weeks, that's for sure. Right now, Hillary Clinton has (at worst) something like a 50-point lead over Sanders, but those polls were taken before he declared his candidacy.
To put this another way, Bernie Sanders deserves the *MIDOTW* this week because he threw his hat in the ring. No, he is not Elizabeth Warren. But, more importantly, he is running to become president, which she is not (and will not this time around). To us, that's impressive enough, for now.
[Congratulate Senator Bernie Sanders on his Senate contact page, to let him know you appreciate his candidacy.]
Kind of a dry week this week for disappointment. A conservative tried to gin up some scandals with a new Hillary Clinton book, but we're ignoring all that as partisan mudslinging nonsense for the time being. Ever notice how Republicans only have a problem with people getting rich when they're Democrats? When it's a rich Republican, well, he got there through hard work and smarts and plenty of bootstrap-pulling, but Democrats somehow never get the same treatment. Funny, that. I mean, does Jeb Bush truly want to get into his family relations with Saudi Arabia? Didn't think so.
We had one instance of monumental stupidity this week, which we have a sneaking suspicion came from (or was authorized by) a Democrat, but it's pretty small potatoes and therefore only really deserves a *(Dis-)Honorable Mention*. The Community Relations Board -- an official city board, mind you -- sent out two tweets asking: "Should Cleveland be burned down" like Baltimore and Ferguson. Again, these are people paid by the city, assumably to advance community relations. Somehow I don't think asking folks if the city should be burned down is quite covered by that mission statement. Kudos to Councilman Matt Zone for tweeting back: "are u out of ur mind" and putting the spotlight on the idiocy.
But, again, somehow a Cleveland city board screwup doesn't rise (or sink, we should say) to the level of a *Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week* award, so we're not going to hand one out this week. Unless, of course, we've missed someone, so feel free (as always) to offer nominations in the comments, below.
*Volume 344* (5/1/15)
As a counterbalance to most of the rest of the media (except for Rolling Stone, who published a pretty good bio article), we thought we'd give Bernie Sanders the respect and dignity of treating his ideas with the seriousness they deserve (but are not likely to get, if the first week is any indication).
So we're going to turn over this week's talking points to him. The following all can be found at his campaign website's issues page, where he explains what he'll be running on. The truly sad thing is that most all of these used to be pretty "mainstream" Democratic positions, but are now seen as some sort of "hard left" views. This only proves how much the party got yanked to the right in the 1980s and 1990s, really.
Our suggestion: when reading the following, ask yourself whether it'd be a popular position to take with a majority of the American public or not. Without further ado, here is who Bernie Sanders is and what he's running for, in his own words. These are presented unedited (except for one, where we joined two parts of his position on health care together) from the original webpage, which we encourage everyone to read in full.
* A progressive agenda*
The American people must make a fundamental decision. Do we continue the 40-year decline of our middle class and the growing gap between the very rich and everyone else, or do we fight for a progressive economic agenda that creates jobs, raises wages, protects the environment and provides health care for all? Are we prepared to take on the enormous economic and political power of the billionaire class, or do we continue to slide into economic and political oligarchy? These are the most important questions of our time, and how we answer them will determine the future of our country.
The long-term deterioration of the middle class, accelerated by the Wall Street crash of 2008, has not been pretty. Today, we have more wealth and income inequality than any major country on earth. We have one of the highest childhood poverty rates and we are the only country in the industrialized world which does not guarantee health care for all. We once led the world in terms of the percentage of our people who graduated college, but we are now in 12th place. Our infrastructure, once the envy of the world, is collapsing.
* Rebuild America*
It's shameful that we've allowed this to happen. We are not a developing nation, dependent on foreign aid to survive. We are the richest nation in the history of the world. We were the birthplace of Yankee ingenuity in the 19th century, the arsenal of democracy in World War II, and the undisputed economic powerhouse of the last century. Once, our infrastructure was the envy of the world. Today, we're judged to be in 12th place internationally. While bridges are collapsing around us, we're spending only half as much as Europe on infrastructure and just over a quarter as much as the Chinese.
Is this the best our country can do? No. We can and we must do better. That's why we need to invest at least $1 trillion over five years to rebuild America. This will not only make us safer, more productive and more efficient, but it will generate income and create jobs -- lots of jobs. The estimate is that this $1 trillion investment will create and maintain 13 million jobs -- which is exactly what our economy needs. We have ignored our infrastructure crisis for too long. The time to act is now.
* Bold action on climate change*
The United States must lead the world in tackling climate change and make certain that this planet is habitable for our children and grandchildren. We must transform our energy system away from fossil fuels and into energy efficiency and sustainable energies. Millions of homes and buildings need to be weatherized, our transportation system needs to be energy efficient and we need to greatly accelerate the progress we are already seeing in wind, solar, geothermal, biomass and other forms of sustainable energy. Transforming our energy system will not only protect the environment, it will create good paying jobs.
Unless we take bold action to address climate change, our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren are going to look back on this period in history and ask a very simple question: Where were they? Why didn't the United States of America, the most powerful nation on earth, lead the international community in cutting greenhouse gas emissions and preventing the devastating damage that the scientific community was sure would come?
* Progressive tax reform*
At a time of massive wealth and income inequality, we need a progressive tax system in this country which is based on ability to pay. It is not acceptable that major profitable corporations have paid nothing in federal income taxes, and that corporate CEOs in this country often enjoy an effective tax rate which is lower than their secretaries. It is absurd that we lose over $100 billion a year in revenue because corporations and the wealthy stash their cash in offshore tax havens around the world. The time is long overdue for real tax reform.
* Expand Social Security*
Millions of seniors live in poverty and we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of any major country. We must strengthen the social safety net, not weaken it. Instead of cutting Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and nutrition programs, we should be expanding these programs.
* Single-payer!*
The goal of an effective health care system is to do everything possible to enable people to live long and healthy lives. Sadly, the American system fails to do that and falls behind many other countries. While we devote 18 percent of our gross domestic product to health care, we rank 33rd in life expectancy and 34th in infant mortality, and trail in many other health outcomes. A Harvard University study indicated that, incredibly, some 45,000 Americans die needlessly each year because they do not get to a doctor in time.
I start my approach to health care from a very basic premise: health care is a right, not a privilege. Unfortunately, uniquely among major nations, that statement is not true for the United States, where access to health care depends on how much money you have and what your employer is willing to provide.
. . .
If our goal is to provide high-quality health care in a cost-effective way, what should we be doing?
Clearly, we must move toward a single-payer system.
The health insurance lobby and other opponents of single-payer care make it sound scary. It's not. In fact, a large-scale single-payer system already exists in the United States. It's called Medicare. People enrolled in the system give it high marks. More importantly, it has succeeded in providing near-universal coverage to Americans over the age of 65.
* $15.00 an hour*
The current federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is a starvation wage. We need to raise the minimum wage to a living wage -- $15 an hour over the next few years. No one in this country who works 40 hours a week should live in poverty.
Chris Weigant blogs at:Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Become a fan of Chris on Huffington Post
Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com
All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 20 hours ago.
The Supreme Court heard a monumental case on marriage equality, which could indeed be their last case ever on the subject (if Justice Kennedy votes the way many expect him to, resulting in gay marriage in all 50 states). Feelings, as always, ran high on both sides of the issue, but more and more it's looking like a lost cause for all the "defenders of traditional marriage."
Interestingly enough, the best quote I read this week was from a Republican from Illinois, Senator Mark Kirk. For some context, Kirk faces a tough re-election race in a blue state, but even so, the sentiment is a brilliant one. Speaking to the crowd in front of the Supreme Court building, Kirk said: "As a history nerd, you could make the case that we could've lost World War II but for one British gay mathematician named Alan Turing. And we are a much more powerful country because of our gay community." Well said, Senator! We still hope Illinois replaces you with a Democrat, but credit is due where credit is due. Kirk is now the second Republican senator to come out in support of marriage equality (Rob Portman was the first). Even the Republicans running for president are reportedly beginning to realize what a tightrope the issue is going to become for them in June, when the court rules.
In other gay Republican news (there's a segue I never thought I'd write...), a state representative in North Dakota, Randy Boehning, came out as bisexual after he was "caught sending explicit photos on a gay dating app." Maybe now that he's out and proud, he'll actually vote for gay rights instead of against them (as he's done even in the past few weeks).
And in Republican family-values ("do as we say, not as we do") news, a Senate staffer for Mississippi's Thad Cochran told law enforcement that he planned to exchange the 181.5 grams of methamphetamine found in his house for "sexual favors." This is on top of the package of date-rape drugs from China that was intercepted in the mail (the reason his house was searched). This raises two puzzling questions, namely: "Why would you think you need date-rape drugs if you're already trading drugs for sex?" and: "181.5 freakin' grams of crank!?! That must mean a whole bunch of sexual favors! Are you sure you're healthy enough for that much sex?" More of those down-home, good ol' Republican family values, folks!
In other Republicans-behaving-strangely news, the Republican Party is apparently going to woo Latino voters by going on the attack against "anchor babies" and birthright citizenship. Representative Steve King (of course) introduced legislation and a hearing was held on it. The only problem was, the expert the Republicans came up with to speak is actually a stone-cold, flat-out racist. This was one of only three witnesses the Republicans called (the Democrats weren't allowed to call any), mind you. Nothing like that Republican minority outreach, eh?
Even stranger news from Republicanland: some people are convinced that the United States military is about to attack Texas. No, really. A training exercise ("Jade Helm") has entered the realm of the black helicopters (boy, doesn't that take you back to the 1990s?) in some people's imagination, making them cower in fear of an imminent Second Civil War. Or something. It's hard to figure out the ravings of lunatics, at times.
Of course, the option always exists to just have some fun with them, instead. Much of the conservative media just got punked, after a guy made up a story (and told it to a credulous conservative blogger) that Harry Reid's recent injuries were the result of a fight with his intoxicated brother Larry. The story then just took off and rattled around the rightwing echo chamber, much to the amusement of the guy punking them.
Enough Republican follies, let's instead turn to the Democrats. Hillary Clinton gave a pretty progressive speech on sentencing reform this week, as she begins to lay out the policy details of her campaign. She also tweeted a fun rainbow flag icon about the marriage equality case. But the real news on the Democratic side was that Hillary now faces an official, declared candidate: Senator Bernie Sanders from Vermont. It's not even entirely clear, at this point, whether Sanders is going to officially join the Democratic Party (he's always called himself a "Democratic Socialist"). We'll have much more on his campaign later in the program, but the truly interesting question right now is whether the throngs (and the millions of dollars) behind the "Draft Elizabeth Warren" movement will now be satisfied to transfer their energies (and money) over to a candidate who is actually, you know, running. We'll see....
Obama made news at the start of the week by cracking jokes ("Bucket!") at the White House Correspondents Dinner confab (also known as the "nerd prom," for obvious reasons). Later in the week, it was announced that his presidential library will be in Chicago.
We've got one "you can't make this stuff up" horror story from the War On Drugs, and then we'll get to the atheists and Satanists. In a story that aptly begins with the line "The drug war means never having to say you're sorry," it was revealed that a federal judge agreed with the Drug Enforcement Agency that the government is not liable for one thin dime in damages, even though they acted abominably. A D.E.A. undercover informant essentially stole a truck from a small (two trucks, total) trucking company, drove it down to the border for a drug sting, loaded it up with drugs, and then got caught in a shootout that killed him. The trucking company sued but will not even be reimbursed for the "cost of repairing the bullet holes" in the truck, which was out of commission for two months. Not only does the D.E.A. get off scot-free, but there won't even be a trial which would expose all the facts of the case. Your tax dollars at work, folks! The article ends with:
It's interesting that this ruling comes down a week after D.E.A. administrator Michele Leonhart resigned after allegations that D.E.A. attended cartel-funded sex parties in South America. The D.E.A. took a truck, filled it with drugs, then screwed up and put the truck in the middle of a shootout that damaged the truck and killed its driver. Yet Leonhart was forced to resign because of sex parties.
It isn't the illicit stuff the D.E.A. does that should worry us; it's all the horrific stuff the agency does that we've somehow permitted to be protected by law.
Amen to that.
Speaking of guns and government, what exactly was a loaded gun doing in John Boehner's private bathroom on Capitol Hill? A child found the gun, which is (even more astonishingly) not the first time guns have been found in Capitol bathrooms. Draw your own conclusions.
And, finally, we have some good atheist news to report. Warren City, Michigan is about to get a "reason station" inside City Hall. It will be manned by Douglas Marshall, who just won his lawsuit to force the city to accept his booth, since they already allowed "prayer stations" run by churches in the same venue. He "plans to set up his reason station weekly with pamphlets that advocate for logic and separation of church and state," after the judge agreed with his point that free speech has to be open to all.
The Satanists, meanwhile, have also been busy on the legal front. A Missouri woman is invoking the same basic argument that was used in the Hobby Lobby case to challenge the state's new 72-hour waiting period to get an abortion. She wants a waiver from the law, stating: "I regard a waiting period as a state sanctioned attempt to discourage abortion by instilling an unnecessary burden as part of the process to obtain this legal medical procedure. The waiting period interferes with the inviolability of my body and thereby imposes an unwanted and substantial burden on my sincerely held religious beliefs."
This is the part that those advocating against strict church/state separation always seem to miss: laws that presume to promote "religious freedom" can be used by anyone from any religion, not just Christianity. The Constitution demands no less. Look for more and more of this sort of court case in the future, as the unintended result of theocratic legislating. Both the Satanists and the atheists are forcing everyone to realize the full extent of such laws, and should be applauded for doing so.
Seven Democrats in the House should also be commended for a letter to President Obama they wrote this week. An *Honorable Mention* goes out to all of them: Earl Blumenauer, Steve Cohen, Sam Farr, Barbara Lee, Zoe Lofgren, Jared Polis, and Eric Swalwell.
The letter encourages President Obama to name a new head of the D.E.A. who will better reflect (instead of fighting against) the administration's new policies on marijuana enforcement. It bluntly states that outgoing (in disgrace) D.E.A. chief Michele Leonhart "leaves behind a legacy of strident opposition to efforts to reform our nation's drug policy."
These seven Democratic House members are right. This is an opportunity for Obama to truly change the course of the ship of state. With a new Attorney General and a new leader at the D.E.A., the federal government could go a long way towards catching up with the states on the marijuana issue. In fact, we're kind of surprised there aren't more names on that letter.
But our *Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week* award goes to newly-announced presidential candidate Bernie Sanders. Sanders is going to face withering contempt from the inside-the-Beltway "serious people" in the media, so we thought we'd start his candidacy out by instead giving him a little respect.
Don't believe me? Well, it took the Washington Post about ten freakin' seconds after Sanders announced his candidacy to call him a hippie. Seriously. The article starts off with "Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) could be our first socialist hippie president," and then quickly moves on to talking about the "hippie migration" to Vermont in the 1970s. There's no quote from Sanders using the word to describe himself, mind you, instead they just cite an eight-year-old article from another publication that called Sanders a hippie. Actually, the full quote (which the Post felt the need to reprint) was: "a humorless aging hippie peacenik Socialist from Brooklyn."
We suppose we should be happy they didn't go full throttle and just call him a "dirty hippie." We've got a whole lot of this sneering punditocracy disdain ahead, folks, so buckle up.
We see Bernie Sanders and his campaign in a different light, of course. We see him instead as the best hope for Progressives in the 2016 campaign. He will be out there talking about the issues that matter to him, and those are the same issues that matter to a whole lot of Democrats out there. It'll be interesting to see what happens in the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire in the next few weeks, that's for sure. Right now, Hillary Clinton has (at worst) something like a 50-point lead over Sanders, but those polls were taken before he declared his candidacy.
To put this another way, Bernie Sanders deserves the *MIDOTW* this week because he threw his hat in the ring. No, he is not Elizabeth Warren. But, more importantly, he is running to become president, which she is not (and will not this time around). To us, that's impressive enough, for now.
[Congratulate Senator Bernie Sanders on his Senate contact page, to let him know you appreciate his candidacy.]
Kind of a dry week this week for disappointment. A conservative tried to gin up some scandals with a new Hillary Clinton book, but we're ignoring all that as partisan mudslinging nonsense for the time being. Ever notice how Republicans only have a problem with people getting rich when they're Democrats? When it's a rich Republican, well, he got there through hard work and smarts and plenty of bootstrap-pulling, but Democrats somehow never get the same treatment. Funny, that. I mean, does Jeb Bush truly want to get into his family relations with Saudi Arabia? Didn't think so.
We had one instance of monumental stupidity this week, which we have a sneaking suspicion came from (or was authorized by) a Democrat, but it's pretty small potatoes and therefore only really deserves a *(Dis-)Honorable Mention*. The Community Relations Board -- an official city board, mind you -- sent out two tweets asking: "Should Cleveland be burned down" like Baltimore and Ferguson. Again, these are people paid by the city, assumably to advance community relations. Somehow I don't think asking folks if the city should be burned down is quite covered by that mission statement. Kudos to Councilman Matt Zone for tweeting back: "are u out of ur mind" and putting the spotlight on the idiocy.
But, again, somehow a Cleveland city board screwup doesn't rise (or sink, we should say) to the level of a *Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week* award, so we're not going to hand one out this week. Unless, of course, we've missed someone, so feel free (as always) to offer nominations in the comments, below.
*Volume 344* (5/1/15)
As a counterbalance to most of the rest of the media (except for Rolling Stone, who published a pretty good bio article), we thought we'd give Bernie Sanders the respect and dignity of treating his ideas with the seriousness they deserve (but are not likely to get, if the first week is any indication).
So we're going to turn over this week's talking points to him. The following all can be found at his campaign website's issues page, where he explains what he'll be running on. The truly sad thing is that most all of these used to be pretty "mainstream" Democratic positions, but are now seen as some sort of "hard left" views. This only proves how much the party got yanked to the right in the 1980s and 1990s, really.
Our suggestion: when reading the following, ask yourself whether it'd be a popular position to take with a majority of the American public or not. Without further ado, here is who Bernie Sanders is and what he's running for, in his own words. These are presented unedited (except for one, where we joined two parts of his position on health care together) from the original webpage, which we encourage everyone to read in full.
* A progressive agenda*
The American people must make a fundamental decision. Do we continue the 40-year decline of our middle class and the growing gap between the very rich and everyone else, or do we fight for a progressive economic agenda that creates jobs, raises wages, protects the environment and provides health care for all? Are we prepared to take on the enormous economic and political power of the billionaire class, or do we continue to slide into economic and political oligarchy? These are the most important questions of our time, and how we answer them will determine the future of our country.
The long-term deterioration of the middle class, accelerated by the Wall Street crash of 2008, has not been pretty. Today, we have more wealth and income inequality than any major country on earth. We have one of the highest childhood poverty rates and we are the only country in the industrialized world which does not guarantee health care for all. We once led the world in terms of the percentage of our people who graduated college, but we are now in 12th place. Our infrastructure, once the envy of the world, is collapsing.
* Rebuild America*
It's shameful that we've allowed this to happen. We are not a developing nation, dependent on foreign aid to survive. We are the richest nation in the history of the world. We were the birthplace of Yankee ingenuity in the 19th century, the arsenal of democracy in World War II, and the undisputed economic powerhouse of the last century. Once, our infrastructure was the envy of the world. Today, we're judged to be in 12th place internationally. While bridges are collapsing around us, we're spending only half as much as Europe on infrastructure and just over a quarter as much as the Chinese.
Is this the best our country can do? No. We can and we must do better. That's why we need to invest at least $1 trillion over five years to rebuild America. This will not only make us safer, more productive and more efficient, but it will generate income and create jobs -- lots of jobs. The estimate is that this $1 trillion investment will create and maintain 13 million jobs -- which is exactly what our economy needs. We have ignored our infrastructure crisis for too long. The time to act is now.
* Bold action on climate change*
The United States must lead the world in tackling climate change and make certain that this planet is habitable for our children and grandchildren. We must transform our energy system away from fossil fuels and into energy efficiency and sustainable energies. Millions of homes and buildings need to be weatherized, our transportation system needs to be energy efficient and we need to greatly accelerate the progress we are already seeing in wind, solar, geothermal, biomass and other forms of sustainable energy. Transforming our energy system will not only protect the environment, it will create good paying jobs.
Unless we take bold action to address climate change, our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren are going to look back on this period in history and ask a very simple question: Where were they? Why didn't the United States of America, the most powerful nation on earth, lead the international community in cutting greenhouse gas emissions and preventing the devastating damage that the scientific community was sure would come?
* Progressive tax reform*
At a time of massive wealth and income inequality, we need a progressive tax system in this country which is based on ability to pay. It is not acceptable that major profitable corporations have paid nothing in federal income taxes, and that corporate CEOs in this country often enjoy an effective tax rate which is lower than their secretaries. It is absurd that we lose over $100 billion a year in revenue because corporations and the wealthy stash their cash in offshore tax havens around the world. The time is long overdue for real tax reform.
* Expand Social Security*
Millions of seniors live in poverty and we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of any major country. We must strengthen the social safety net, not weaken it. Instead of cutting Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and nutrition programs, we should be expanding these programs.
* Single-payer!*
The goal of an effective health care system is to do everything possible to enable people to live long and healthy lives. Sadly, the American system fails to do that and falls behind many other countries. While we devote 18 percent of our gross domestic product to health care, we rank 33rd in life expectancy and 34th in infant mortality, and trail in many other health outcomes. A Harvard University study indicated that, incredibly, some 45,000 Americans die needlessly each year because they do not get to a doctor in time.
I start my approach to health care from a very basic premise: health care is a right, not a privilege. Unfortunately, uniquely among major nations, that statement is not true for the United States, where access to health care depends on how much money you have and what your employer is willing to provide.
. . .
If our goal is to provide high-quality health care in a cost-effective way, what should we be doing?
Clearly, we must move toward a single-payer system.
The health insurance lobby and other opponents of single-payer care make it sound scary. It's not. In fact, a large-scale single-payer system already exists in the United States. It's called Medicare. People enrolled in the system give it high marks. More importantly, it has succeeded in providing near-universal coverage to Americans over the age of 65.
* $15.00 an hour*
The current federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is a starvation wage. We need to raise the minimum wage to a living wage -- $15 an hour over the next few years. No one in this country who works 40 hours a week should live in poverty.
Chris Weigant blogs at:Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Become a fan of Chris on Huffington Post
Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com
All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 20 hours ago.
↧
Hawaii lawmakers poised to give $2M to Hawaii Health Connector
Hawaii lawmakers advanced a bill Friday that would appropriate $2 million in general funds to the Hawaii Health Connector — $3.4 million less than originally considered. Senators and representatives int he House finalized Senate Bill 1028 SD1 HD1 after the Senate Ways and Means committee and House Finance committee agreed to the appropriation for the online health insurance exchange, covering fiscal year 2016, which begins in July. Lawmakers previously considered a measure to provide $28 million…
Reported by bizjournals 19 hours ago.
↧
↧
ZoomCare Applies to be on Oregon Exchange
The ZOOM+ Personal Health Insurance System will soon be available to small businesses and individuals
Portland, OR (PRWEB) May 02, 2015
ZoomCare, the Portland-based innovator of on-demand healthcare announces today that it has submitted plans to offer its new healthcare insurance to individuals and small businesses on the Oregon Exchange. The ZOOM+ Personal Health Insurance System is the nation’s first health insurance system built from the ground up to enhance human performance. ZOOM+ Personal Health Insurance was ZoomCare’s first such filing including rates and a healthcare delivery system that are subject to review and regulation by the Oregon Insurance Division. Once approved by the Insurance Commissioner, Oregonians will be able to purchase membership in ZOOM+ Personal Health Insurance Plans directly at http://www.zoomcare.com/shop or by using available brokers and Insurance Exchanges.
“We’re delivering a new kind of health insurance for Oregonians who want to be more creative, productive, faster, happier, more fit. Health insurance you can actually use everyday to be as healthy as you want to be. Our new Personal Health Insurance will give people full access to our on-demand urgent, primary and advanced care neighborhood clinics that you control with your phone,” said Dave Sanders, M.D., the Co-Founder and CEO of ZoomCare.
ZoomCare was certified as a Healthcare Insurance Carrier in 2014 and has been actively selling in the “Large Employer” market segment.
[reporters note: complete rate filing information will be available from the Oregon Insurance Commissioner’s Office after May 1, 2015. Denise Honzel, President of Zoom Health Insurance will be available by phone to answer questions about ZoomCare’s filings]
About ZoomCare:
ZoomCare, the Portland-based innovator of On-Demand healthcare, is creating the nation’s first health insurance system built from the ground up to enhance human performance. By seamlessly combining the security of traditional health insurance with membership-based brain, cellular and strength/stamina training and coaching, ZOOM+ Personal Health Insurance is empowering people to reach their full potential. Co-founded in 2006 in Portland, Oregon by healthcare entrepreneurs David Sanders, M.D., and Albert DiPiero, M.D., ZoomCare was built on the promise of delivering “Twice the Health At Half the Cost With Ten Times the Delight.” ZoomCare is a privately held company currently operating 26 neighborhood clinics in Portland, Vancouver and Seattle. ZoomCare was selected one of the most admired healthcare companies in Oregon in 2014 and has been a finalist for the Oregon Entrepreneur Network's Growth Company of the Year.
ZoomCare has been responsible for many retail healthcare firsts. The company built the first mobile online scheduler with same-day access to over 500 no-wait appointments; created the innovative neighborhood retail clinic format; invented the "Magic Minute" and "Painless Procedure;" helped pass legislation allowing clinics to provide prescription medications; published transparent prices on the website; offered convenient office hours 365 days a year, in some cases until midnight.
For additional information about ZoomCare, please visit ZoomCare.com and our Facebook page. Reported by PRWeb 13 hours ago.
Portland, OR (PRWEB) May 02, 2015
ZoomCare, the Portland-based innovator of on-demand healthcare announces today that it has submitted plans to offer its new healthcare insurance to individuals and small businesses on the Oregon Exchange. The ZOOM+ Personal Health Insurance System is the nation’s first health insurance system built from the ground up to enhance human performance. ZOOM+ Personal Health Insurance was ZoomCare’s first such filing including rates and a healthcare delivery system that are subject to review and regulation by the Oregon Insurance Division. Once approved by the Insurance Commissioner, Oregonians will be able to purchase membership in ZOOM+ Personal Health Insurance Plans directly at http://www.zoomcare.com/shop or by using available brokers and Insurance Exchanges.
“We’re delivering a new kind of health insurance for Oregonians who want to be more creative, productive, faster, happier, more fit. Health insurance you can actually use everyday to be as healthy as you want to be. Our new Personal Health Insurance will give people full access to our on-demand urgent, primary and advanced care neighborhood clinics that you control with your phone,” said Dave Sanders, M.D., the Co-Founder and CEO of ZoomCare.
ZoomCare was certified as a Healthcare Insurance Carrier in 2014 and has been actively selling in the “Large Employer” market segment.
[reporters note: complete rate filing information will be available from the Oregon Insurance Commissioner’s Office after May 1, 2015. Denise Honzel, President of Zoom Health Insurance will be available by phone to answer questions about ZoomCare’s filings]
About ZoomCare:
ZoomCare, the Portland-based innovator of On-Demand healthcare, is creating the nation’s first health insurance system built from the ground up to enhance human performance. By seamlessly combining the security of traditional health insurance with membership-based brain, cellular and strength/stamina training and coaching, ZOOM+ Personal Health Insurance is empowering people to reach their full potential. Co-founded in 2006 in Portland, Oregon by healthcare entrepreneurs David Sanders, M.D., and Albert DiPiero, M.D., ZoomCare was built on the promise of delivering “Twice the Health At Half the Cost With Ten Times the Delight.” ZoomCare is a privately held company currently operating 26 neighborhood clinics in Portland, Vancouver and Seattle. ZoomCare was selected one of the most admired healthcare companies in Oregon in 2014 and has been a finalist for the Oregon Entrepreneur Network's Growth Company of the Year.
ZoomCare has been responsible for many retail healthcare firsts. The company built the first mobile online scheduler with same-day access to over 500 no-wait appointments; created the innovative neighborhood retail clinic format; invented the "Magic Minute" and "Painless Procedure;" helped pass legislation allowing clinics to provide prescription medications; published transparent prices on the website; offered convenient office hours 365 days a year, in some cases until midnight.
For additional information about ZoomCare, please visit ZoomCare.com and our Facebook page. Reported by PRWeb 13 hours ago.
↧
Debora Ristau Joins AEPG® Wealth Strategies
AEPG® Wealth Strategies is pleased to announce that Debora Ristau has just joined the firm as Vice President, Group Benefits.
Warren, NJ (PRWEB) May 02, 2015
AEPG® Wealth Strategies is pleased to announce that Debora Ristau has just joined the firm as Vice President, Group Benefits. Deb provides employers with a comprehensive market review of their current health insurance, helps evaluate their options, and creates and implements the best solution for them. Deb is an advocate for her clients and partners with them to reduce insurance claim costs and avoid penalties. She provides expertise on compliance and reporting and develops customized plans for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) environment to meet her clients’ needs.
Deb stated her reason for joining AEPG®: “I joined AEPG® because I am an advocate for my clients, and I wanted to work for a firm where I could provide the ‘ultimate’ in customer service experience. AEPG®’s quality regarding fiduciary commitment to its clients and ‘white glove’ customer service is superior to anything I have experienced in this marketplace. AEPG® provides clients with options that are customized to meet their industry and specific needs of their employees. In addition, AEPG®’s service team is assigned one-on-one relationships with clients, providing direct access to the professionals with the expertise necessary to provide clients with the answers they need. The AEPG® motto, “Consistently Good Advice in a Constantly Changing World®” is a clear indication of its commitment to maintaining expertise in today’s market. It is a privilege to work for an organization that is so committed to all their clients and their employees.”
Chris Schiffer, COO said, “I am pleased that Deb has joined our team of dedicated experts. Deb's experience and credentials complements the rest of the team.” Bill Corson, Vice President Group Benefits added, “Deb’s background in large self-funded cases gives us a great opportunity to serve clients of all sizes.”
Deb brings over 15 years of experience in working with the expert design, management and administration of a wide range of health and benefit plans for companies nationwide.
She holds the National Association for Health Underwriters (NAHU) Self Funded Certification and is licensed in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Delaware for Life and Health. Deb has earned a bachelor’s degree with honors in accounting from Wilmington University.
Deb has served as president and vice president of the South Jersey Association of Health Underwriters (SJAHU). She has been a passionate advocate for fighting hunger and she has volunteered with food banks for over 30 years. She is currently involved with a “backpack” program that provides children in need with food to eat on the weekends.
Deb can be reached at: dristau(at)aepg(dot)com, (908) 821-9769.
About AEPG® Wealth Strategies: http://www.aepg.com
For over 30 years, the clients of AEPG® Wealth Strategies have benefited from personalized, comprehensive wealth management and financial advisory services. Our services to individuals, business owners, physicians and corporations include: group and individual insurance, 401(k), retirement plan solutions, comprehensive financial planning, investment management, and estate planning. Reported by PRWeb 13 hours ago.
Warren, NJ (PRWEB) May 02, 2015
AEPG® Wealth Strategies is pleased to announce that Debora Ristau has just joined the firm as Vice President, Group Benefits. Deb provides employers with a comprehensive market review of their current health insurance, helps evaluate their options, and creates and implements the best solution for them. Deb is an advocate for her clients and partners with them to reduce insurance claim costs and avoid penalties. She provides expertise on compliance and reporting and develops customized plans for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) environment to meet her clients’ needs.
Deb stated her reason for joining AEPG®: “I joined AEPG® because I am an advocate for my clients, and I wanted to work for a firm where I could provide the ‘ultimate’ in customer service experience. AEPG®’s quality regarding fiduciary commitment to its clients and ‘white glove’ customer service is superior to anything I have experienced in this marketplace. AEPG® provides clients with options that are customized to meet their industry and specific needs of their employees. In addition, AEPG®’s service team is assigned one-on-one relationships with clients, providing direct access to the professionals with the expertise necessary to provide clients with the answers they need. The AEPG® motto, “Consistently Good Advice in a Constantly Changing World®” is a clear indication of its commitment to maintaining expertise in today’s market. It is a privilege to work for an organization that is so committed to all their clients and their employees.”
Chris Schiffer, COO said, “I am pleased that Deb has joined our team of dedicated experts. Deb's experience and credentials complements the rest of the team.” Bill Corson, Vice President Group Benefits added, “Deb’s background in large self-funded cases gives us a great opportunity to serve clients of all sizes.”
Deb brings over 15 years of experience in working with the expert design, management and administration of a wide range of health and benefit plans for companies nationwide.
She holds the National Association for Health Underwriters (NAHU) Self Funded Certification and is licensed in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Delaware for Life and Health. Deb has earned a bachelor’s degree with honors in accounting from Wilmington University.
Deb has served as president and vice president of the South Jersey Association of Health Underwriters (SJAHU). She has been a passionate advocate for fighting hunger and she has volunteered with food banks for over 30 years. She is currently involved with a “backpack” program that provides children in need with food to eat on the weekends.
Deb can be reached at: dristau(at)aepg(dot)com, (908) 821-9769.
About AEPG® Wealth Strategies: http://www.aepg.com
For over 30 years, the clients of AEPG® Wealth Strategies have benefited from personalized, comprehensive wealth management and financial advisory services. Our services to individuals, business owners, physicians and corporations include: group and individual insurance, 401(k), retirement plan solutions, comprehensive financial planning, investment management, and estate planning. Reported by PRWeb 13 hours ago.
↧
As CVS And Walgreen Play Doctor, Insurance Picks Up The Tab
Insurance coverage for retail health clinics, once a cash-only proposition, now accounts for more than four in five dollars reimbursed at such centers run by CVS Health (CVS) and Walgreens Boots Alliance (WBA). Commercial coverage and reimbursement from the Medicare health insurance program for the elderly and Medicaid programs for low income [...]
Reported by Forbes.com 6 hours ago.
↧
Middletown woman sentenced to prison for $500K health insurance scam
Donna Dzienisewski was sentenced to the prison term ager admitting she tried to scam Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield out of more than $500,000.
Reported by NJ.com 6 hours ago.
↧
↧
In Congress, Income Inequality Comes With Breakfast, Lunch
WASHINGTON (AP) — Income inequality is more than a political sound bite to workers in the Capitol. It's their life.
Many of the Capitol's food servers, who make the meals, bus the tables and run the cash registers in the restaurants and carryouts that serve lawmakers, earn less than $11 an hour. Some make nothing at all when Congress is in recess.
Members of the House and Senate collect their $174,000 annual salaries whether Congress is making laws, taking a break or causing a partial government shutdown.
"This is the most important building in the world," said Sontia Bailey, who works the cash register and stocks the shelves at the "Refectory" takeout on the Capitol's Senate side. "You'd think our wages would be better."
Bailey, 34, makes $10.33 an hour, a hair above the $10.10 hourly minimum for federal contractors. She had to move from her apartment to a rented room when the 2013 temporary government shutdown interrupted her income, she said.
KFC pays her better. Bailey works weekends and two evenings a week there, making $12 an hour.
In the Capitol food service world, she said, "everybody has second jobs."
Down an ornate hallway is 21-year-old Abraham Tesfahun. He serves lunch in the Senate members' dining room and handles the afternoon cash register in the busy Senate takeout, one floor below. Tesfahun said his hourly pay is $10.30. But he receives an additional $3 an hour in cash, which otherwise would go toward health insurance. He is covered by his mother's insurance policy under President Barack Obama's health care law.
That doesn't mean Tesfahun, who emigrated from Ethiopia as a teenager, is tight with his mom.
"She kind of kicked me out of the house," he said sheepishly, when he quit community college after one year to work seven days a week. Now, he said, he rents a basement room and works full time in the Capitol. On Saturdays and Sundays, he works at a Dunkin' Donuts, for $8 an hour. That's above the federal minimum wage of $7.25, although some states have higher minimums.
"People are much nicer" in the Capitol, Tesfahun said. But he said he generally has no work or pay when Congress is out of session, and he sometimes collects unemployment benefits. The Senate is scheduled to be in recess 13 weeks this year.
Both Bailey and Tesfahun said they once received a pay raise of 3 cents an hour.
In Congress and the 2016 presidential race, candidates in both parties promise to help U.S. workers narrow the gap with high earners. The Capitol's food workers — many of whom can't afford cars, let alone vacations — are prime examples of people without college degrees who have fallen far behind in the high-tech global economy.
Capitol food workers with at least seven years' experience fare better than Bailey and Tesfahun, making about $16 or $17 an hour. But even one of those, cook Shawnee Ellis, said she does catering on the side because "I have to make extra money" to pay her bills.
All work for Restaurant Associates, a major New York-based contractor that handles food services for the House and Senate.
In a statement, the contractor said it "takes pride in paying above-market competitive wages." It would not comment on individual employees.
The House privatized its food operations decades ago. The Senate ran its own operations, at heavy losses, until 2008. That's when the then-Democratic majority said taxpayer subsidies were unsustainable, and Restaurant Associates won the contract to take over.
"There are parts of government that can be run like a business and should be run like businesses," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., then the head of the Senate Rules Committee, which oversees such contracts.
A few Democrats objected. "You cannot stand on the Senate floor and condemn the privatization of workers, and then turn around and privatize the workers here in the Senate and leave them out on their own," Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey said at the time.
Nonetheless, senators approved the 2008 switch in a voice vote, which any dissenter could have blocked. Through a spokesman, Feinstein declined to comment for this story.
Capitol employees' struggles are causing discomfort for lawmakers — including some running for president — as national debate churns over income inequality. In April, dozens of Capitol workers staged a one-day protest.
Senate cook Bertrand Olotara wrote in The Guardian, "I serve food to some of the most powerful people on Earth." They often talk of expanded opportunity for workers, he wrote, but "most don't seem to notice or care that workers in their own building are struggling to survive."
The Washington region is among the nation's most expensive.
After The Washington Post, CNN and others profiled Charles Gladden, a Senate food worker who is homeless, several Democratic senators urged Republican leaders — now in the majority — to press Restaurant Associates to increase workers' pay. GOP Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri, who leads the Rules Committee, said "their concerns will be kept in mind as the contract comes up for renegotiation" later this year.
The House contract with Restaurant Associates expires in August; requests for bids went out last fall. Congressional officials say the House and Senate food-service contracts do not specify the hourly rates for workers.
At a hearing last week, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, the national Democratic Party leader, called on the House to choose contractors who pay workers a "living wage" according to local economic standards. Her amendment failed.
"It's really not within the scope of this committee nor subcommittee to micromanage all contracts," said Rep. Tom Graves, R-Ga.
Several Republican presidential candidates are making implicit or explicit pledges to reduce income inequality.
Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky says income inequality "is worse in towns run by Democrat mayors."
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, also eyeing the GOP nomination, said if the economy isn't growing, "you're not going to deal with income inequality."
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 7 hours ago.
Many of the Capitol's food servers, who make the meals, bus the tables and run the cash registers in the restaurants and carryouts that serve lawmakers, earn less than $11 an hour. Some make nothing at all when Congress is in recess.
Members of the House and Senate collect their $174,000 annual salaries whether Congress is making laws, taking a break or causing a partial government shutdown.
"This is the most important building in the world," said Sontia Bailey, who works the cash register and stocks the shelves at the "Refectory" takeout on the Capitol's Senate side. "You'd think our wages would be better."
Bailey, 34, makes $10.33 an hour, a hair above the $10.10 hourly minimum for federal contractors. She had to move from her apartment to a rented room when the 2013 temporary government shutdown interrupted her income, she said.
KFC pays her better. Bailey works weekends and two evenings a week there, making $12 an hour.
In the Capitol food service world, she said, "everybody has second jobs."
Down an ornate hallway is 21-year-old Abraham Tesfahun. He serves lunch in the Senate members' dining room and handles the afternoon cash register in the busy Senate takeout, one floor below. Tesfahun said his hourly pay is $10.30. But he receives an additional $3 an hour in cash, which otherwise would go toward health insurance. He is covered by his mother's insurance policy under President Barack Obama's health care law.
That doesn't mean Tesfahun, who emigrated from Ethiopia as a teenager, is tight with his mom.
"She kind of kicked me out of the house," he said sheepishly, when he quit community college after one year to work seven days a week. Now, he said, he rents a basement room and works full time in the Capitol. On Saturdays and Sundays, he works at a Dunkin' Donuts, for $8 an hour. That's above the federal minimum wage of $7.25, although some states have higher minimums.
"People are much nicer" in the Capitol, Tesfahun said. But he said he generally has no work or pay when Congress is out of session, and he sometimes collects unemployment benefits. The Senate is scheduled to be in recess 13 weeks this year.
Both Bailey and Tesfahun said they once received a pay raise of 3 cents an hour.
In Congress and the 2016 presidential race, candidates in both parties promise to help U.S. workers narrow the gap with high earners. The Capitol's food workers — many of whom can't afford cars, let alone vacations — are prime examples of people without college degrees who have fallen far behind in the high-tech global economy.
Capitol food workers with at least seven years' experience fare better than Bailey and Tesfahun, making about $16 or $17 an hour. But even one of those, cook Shawnee Ellis, said she does catering on the side because "I have to make extra money" to pay her bills.
All work for Restaurant Associates, a major New York-based contractor that handles food services for the House and Senate.
In a statement, the contractor said it "takes pride in paying above-market competitive wages." It would not comment on individual employees.
The House privatized its food operations decades ago. The Senate ran its own operations, at heavy losses, until 2008. That's when the then-Democratic majority said taxpayer subsidies were unsustainable, and Restaurant Associates won the contract to take over.
"There are parts of government that can be run like a business and should be run like businesses," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., then the head of the Senate Rules Committee, which oversees such contracts.
A few Democrats objected. "You cannot stand on the Senate floor and condemn the privatization of workers, and then turn around and privatize the workers here in the Senate and leave them out on their own," Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey said at the time.
Nonetheless, senators approved the 2008 switch in a voice vote, which any dissenter could have blocked. Through a spokesman, Feinstein declined to comment for this story.
Capitol employees' struggles are causing discomfort for lawmakers — including some running for president — as national debate churns over income inequality. In April, dozens of Capitol workers staged a one-day protest.
Senate cook Bertrand Olotara wrote in The Guardian, "I serve food to some of the most powerful people on Earth." They often talk of expanded opportunity for workers, he wrote, but "most don't seem to notice or care that workers in their own building are struggling to survive."
The Washington region is among the nation's most expensive.
After The Washington Post, CNN and others profiled Charles Gladden, a Senate food worker who is homeless, several Democratic senators urged Republican leaders — now in the majority — to press Restaurant Associates to increase workers' pay. GOP Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri, who leads the Rules Committee, said "their concerns will be kept in mind as the contract comes up for renegotiation" later this year.
The House contract with Restaurant Associates expires in August; requests for bids went out last fall. Congressional officials say the House and Senate food-service contracts do not specify the hourly rates for workers.
At a hearing last week, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, the national Democratic Party leader, called on the House to choose contractors who pay workers a "living wage" according to local economic standards. Her amendment failed.
"It's really not within the scope of this committee nor subcommittee to micromanage all contracts," said Rep. Tom Graves, R-Ga.
Several Republican presidential candidates are making implicit or explicit pledges to reduce income inequality.
Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky says income inequality "is worse in towns run by Democrat mayors."
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, also eyeing the GOP nomination, said if the economy isn't growing, "you're not going to deal with income inequality."
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 7 hours ago.
↧
National Debt Relief Talks About Long Term Care
National Debt Relief recently shared some insights in an article so consumers can understand long term care better. The article gives an insight on how different long term care can be from the regular health insurance that consumers know too well.
Philadelphia, PA (PRWEB) May 03, 2015
National Debt Relief recently shared some insights an article published April 30, 2015 so consumers can understand long term care better. The article titled “7 Things You Need To Know About Long-Term Care” gives an insight on how different long term care can be from the regular health insurance that consumers know too well.
The article starts off by explaining how different long term care can be from the regular medical needs of a senior citizen. Long term care includes a number of different supports and services for an old patient. This covers assistance with some personal tasks and does not even include medical care. These are usually referred to as Activities of Daily Living or ADL.
These can include simple daily tasks as dressing or putting on clothes, taking a bath, using the toilet, caring for incontinence, transferring from the bed in the morning to a chair and back on the bed at night. Long term care also includes assistance in a simple task as eating at least three time a day for an old person.
Activities of daily living can also include money management for the elderly, monitoring and taking prescription medicines, some necessary housework, buying and groceries and clothes or even pet care for the elderly who has canine or feline companions at home. Long term care is not necessarily medical in nature and has a lot more to do with everyday living.
The article shares that there are a number of misconceptions about who pays for long-term care. While older citizens would be covered by Medicare for long-term care but only if skilled services or rehabilitative care are required in a nursing home for a maximum of 100 days but Medicare only covers 22 days of stay in a nursing home.
The article points out that long-term care insurance is unlike traditional health insurance. It is specifically designed to cover long-term supports and services including custodial and personal care in a home home, a community organization or a facility. To read the full article, click this link: [http://www.nationaldebtrelief.com/7-things-you-need-to-know-about-long-term-care/ Reported by PRWeb 9 hours ago.
Philadelphia, PA (PRWEB) May 03, 2015
National Debt Relief recently shared some insights an article published April 30, 2015 so consumers can understand long term care better. The article titled “7 Things You Need To Know About Long-Term Care” gives an insight on how different long term care can be from the regular health insurance that consumers know too well.
The article starts off by explaining how different long term care can be from the regular medical needs of a senior citizen. Long term care includes a number of different supports and services for an old patient. This covers assistance with some personal tasks and does not even include medical care. These are usually referred to as Activities of Daily Living or ADL.
These can include simple daily tasks as dressing or putting on clothes, taking a bath, using the toilet, caring for incontinence, transferring from the bed in the morning to a chair and back on the bed at night. Long term care also includes assistance in a simple task as eating at least three time a day for an old person.
Activities of daily living can also include money management for the elderly, monitoring and taking prescription medicines, some necessary housework, buying and groceries and clothes or even pet care for the elderly who has canine or feline companions at home. Long term care is not necessarily medical in nature and has a lot more to do with everyday living.
The article shares that there are a number of misconceptions about who pays for long-term care. While older citizens would be covered by Medicare for long-term care but only if skilled services or rehabilitative care are required in a nursing home for a maximum of 100 days but Medicare only covers 22 days of stay in a nursing home.
The article points out that long-term care insurance is unlike traditional health insurance. It is specifically designed to cover long-term supports and services including custodial and personal care in a home home, a community organization or a facility. To read the full article, click this link: [http://www.nationaldebtrelief.com/7-things-you-need-to-know-about-long-term-care/ Reported by PRWeb 9 hours ago.
↧
If DACA Works, Why Not Implement DAPA?
By Yamid A. Macias and Janet Hernandez, NCLR
Carla Mena, a young aspiring American living in Raleigh, North Carolina, who received Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) in 2012, continues to be a committed and engaged member of her community. She is a sitting member of the Wake Health Services Board of Trustees and spends most of her spare time empowering youth through her work on the Youth Council at El Pueblo, Inc. This NCLR Affiliate taught Carla about the importance of helping Latinos achieve positive social change by building consciousness, capacity, and community action, a belief that has been part of their mission for over 20 years.Most recently, thanks to her hard work and determination, Carla was promoted to Bilingual Project Coordinator, a full-time position at Duke University's Global Health Institute. Now that she is a permanent employee, Carla enjoys an array of benefits including, among others, health insurance and a well-deserved salary increase. With these benefits, she can not only increase monetary contributions to her family but also contribute more to the local economy. These opportunities, however, wouldn't have been possible had it not been for her new status resulting from DACA.
Carla recalls that she first learned about DACA on June 15, 2012. This date had a special significance to her and her family, as it marked the 10th anniversary of their arrival to the United States. "I had recently graduated from college, and learning about this opportunity was a relief," she said. "The first question I had was, when can I apply? My family and I hugged and cried from the emotion and the opportunity that this represented."
Today those memories are bittersweet, particularly because Carla fears that her parents -- as well as thousands of other parents in the same situation -- cannot join her in living the American Dream.
Although Carla's story represents the reality that hundreds of thousands of young DACA recipients currently face, it also corroborates an undeniable fact: DACA works. This program's effectiveness suggests that the implementation of Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) could have an even greater impact on our country's economy and workforce.
DAPA would provide opportunities for millions of skilled immigrants to work in fields where they can earn and contribute more. If DACA recipients have demonstrated in just three years what this program can do for communities like Raleigh, perhaps it's time to consider something more stable. As Carla puts it, "Temporary programs are helpful, but a more permanent and more inclusive solution could be better." Carla's story attests to the social and economic benefits of administrative relief, however, the overhaul of our immigration policies remain a critical task that congress must undertake.
This was first posted to the NCLR Blog.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 18 minutes ago.
Carla Mena, a young aspiring American living in Raleigh, North Carolina, who received Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) in 2012, continues to be a committed and engaged member of her community. She is a sitting member of the Wake Health Services Board of Trustees and spends most of her spare time empowering youth through her work on the Youth Council at El Pueblo, Inc. This NCLR Affiliate taught Carla about the importance of helping Latinos achieve positive social change by building consciousness, capacity, and community action, a belief that has been part of their mission for over 20 years.Most recently, thanks to her hard work and determination, Carla was promoted to Bilingual Project Coordinator, a full-time position at Duke University's Global Health Institute. Now that she is a permanent employee, Carla enjoys an array of benefits including, among others, health insurance and a well-deserved salary increase. With these benefits, she can not only increase monetary contributions to her family but also contribute more to the local economy. These opportunities, however, wouldn't have been possible had it not been for her new status resulting from DACA.
Carla recalls that she first learned about DACA on June 15, 2012. This date had a special significance to her and her family, as it marked the 10th anniversary of their arrival to the United States. "I had recently graduated from college, and learning about this opportunity was a relief," she said. "The first question I had was, when can I apply? My family and I hugged and cried from the emotion and the opportunity that this represented."
Today those memories are bittersweet, particularly because Carla fears that her parents -- as well as thousands of other parents in the same situation -- cannot join her in living the American Dream.
Although Carla's story represents the reality that hundreds of thousands of young DACA recipients currently face, it also corroborates an undeniable fact: DACA works. This program's effectiveness suggests that the implementation of Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) could have an even greater impact on our country's economy and workforce.
DAPA would provide opportunities for millions of skilled immigrants to work in fields where they can earn and contribute more. If DACA recipients have demonstrated in just three years what this program can do for communities like Raleigh, perhaps it's time to consider something more stable. As Carla puts it, "Temporary programs are helpful, but a more permanent and more inclusive solution could be better." Carla's story attests to the social and economic benefits of administrative relief, however, the overhaul of our immigration policies remain a critical task that congress must undertake.
This was first posted to the NCLR Blog.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 18 minutes ago.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
