Clinton vs. Trump: A Nonpartisan Candidate Guide For The 2016 Presidential Race

October 3, 2016, 1:16 pm

≫ Next: These are the most, and least, insured counties in New Mexico

≪ Previous: A Medical Journal Asked Both Candidates About Health Care. Guess Who Responded

$

0

0

Are you looking for a voter guide that breaks through the spin with an unbiased comparison of presidential candidate positions? Campus Election Engagement Project is a national nonpartisan initiative working to increase student electoral participation. At the request of the schools we work with, we’ve created concise nonpartisan candidate guides for the presidential race and key senate and governor races. We’ve also created a guide showing the importance of the 2016 election on major Supreme Court decisions. Our lead researcher spent 19 years as a senior editor at Encyclopedia Britannica, and we invite readers to share our guides as widely as possible.

Here are the issue-by-issue stands for Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Visit our Nonpartisan Candidate Guides home page to find links to a Spanish language version of this guide, a version that includes the Libertarian and Green Party candidates, and all our other guides, with most available in both online/mobile friendly and printable PDF formats.

*Abortion:* Should abortion be highly restricted?

Clinton: No.

Trump: Yes.

*Campaign Finance:* Do you support the DISCLOSE Act, requiring political ads to list key funders?

Clinton: Yes.

Trump: Individual position unclear; party platform opposes.

*Campaign Finance:* Support Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, allowing unlimited corporate & union campaign contributions?

Clinton: No. Proposes Constitutional amendment to overturn.

Trump: Ambiguous. Condemns money in politics. Praises Justice Scalia who voted in favor of decision.

*Climate Change: *Is human activity causing climate change? Should government limit greenhouse gas emissions?

Clinton: Yes on both: “an urgent threat and a defining challenge of our time.” Supports EPA coal plant restrictions.

Trump: No on both. “Climate change is a hoax.” “Cancel Paris climate agreement.” Opposes EPA coal plant restrictions.

*Climate change: *Support renewable energy subsidies?

Clinton: Yes.

Trump: No. Let market decide.

*Contraception:* Let employers withhold contraceptive coverage due to personal religious beliefs?

Clinton: No.

Trump: Yes.

*Courts: *Should the Senate have confirmed Obama’s Supreme Court nominee for Justice Scalia's seat?

Clinton: Yes.

Trump: No.

*Economy: *To grow the economy increase government infrastructure spending? Or reduce taxes?

Clinton: More infrastructure investment.

Trump: Both reduced taxes and more infrastructure investment.

*Economy: *Prioritize deficit reduction or economic stimulus?

Clinton: Prioritize economic stimulus.

Trump: Prioritize economic stimulus but save $ by cutting depts. like EPA.

*Education:* Abolish the Dept. of Education & leave school funding & regulation to the states?

Clinton: No.

Trump: Yes.

*Education: *Make public college tuition free for students from families earning $125,000 or less? Have government help refinance student loans to lower interest rates?

Clinton: Yes on both, using federal subsidies to cover costs. Expand income-contingent loan repayment.

Trump: Trump position unclear. His education advisor considers tuition subsidies & loan refinancing too costly, advocates private sector handling loans.

*Environment: *Abolish Environmental Protection Agency?

Clinton: No.

Trump: Yes.

*Financial Regulation: *Support Dodd-Frank, which established the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau & regulates banks & financial institutions?

Clinton: Yes.

Trump: No. Will come “close to dismantling.”

*Gay Rights: *Support gay marriage?

Clinton: Yes, since 2013. Supported civil unions since 2000.

Trump: Would appoint Supreme Court Justices who’d reconsider federal mandate & let states decide.

*Gay Rights: *Should federal government prevent discrimination based on sexual orientation?

Clinton: Yes.

Trump: No. Leave decision & legislation to states.

*Guns: *Stricter background checks for gun purchases & ban assault rifles?

Clinton: Yes to both

Trump: No to both

*Healthcare: *Repeal the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare?

Clinton: No. Her plan also lets 50-year-olds buy into Medicare.

Trump: Yes. Let Americans deduct health insurance cost from taxes.

*Immigration: *How would you address America’s 11 million illegal immigrants? Should undocumented young people who entered the U.S. before age 16 & meet certain conditions get protection from deportation?

Clinton: Comprehensive reform with earned path to citizenship for adults. Expand DREAM Act protection for children who came to U.S. when young.

Trump: Build wall. First said deport all illegal immigrants; then said wouldn’t deport everyone. Also end automatic citizenship for U.S.-born children of immigrant parents.

*Immigration: *Ban immigration by Muslims?

Clinton: No.

Trump: Initial plan, ban all Muslims. Now ban immigration from any nation “compromised by terrorism.”

*Iran: *Support treaty limiting Iran’s nuclear capacity in return for lifting economic sanctions?

Clinton: Yes.

Trump: No.

*Iraq: *Did you support the Iraq war? What about Obama’s draw-down of troops? Should the US commit significant additional ground troops to Iraq to combat ISIS?

Clinton: Voted to give Bush authority for war; then said “made a mistake.” Supported Obama draw-down. Opposes adding more combat troops, but wants more support for Arab & Kurdish ground forces.

Trump: Says opposed war but made no public opposition statements at time, & some indicating support. Later supported troop withdrawal. Now supports 20,000-30,000 additional U.S. troops.

*Marijuana: *Support legalizing marijuana?

Clinton: Let states decide.

Trump: Let states decide.

*Minimum Wage: *Raising the $7.25-an-hour national minimum wage?

Clinton: Yes. Supports $12-per-hour national minimum, & encouraged individual cities & states to require $15 per hour.

Trump: Previously opposed any national minimum wage. Then said open to $10 national minimum.

*Nuclear Weapons: *Would you consider using nuclear weapons against ISIS?

Clinton: No.

Trump: Yes. "I’m never going to rule anything out."

*Obama:* Do you believe Barack Obama is a legal U.S. Citizen?

Clinton: Yes

Trump: Has repeatedly questioned whether Obama was born in the U.S.

*Police: *How would you deal with police violence against citizens & citizen violence against police?

Clinton: Support police, set guidelines on use of force, & budget $1 billion for police training to address racial tensions.

Trump: “I will restore law and order to our country.” “You can’t have true compassion without providing safety.”

*Prisons: *How to address the record U.S. prison population?

Clinton: In 1994 supported more penalties & sentences. Now says “time to end the era of mass incarceration.” Party Platform includes diversion for nonviolent offenders

Trump: Favors privatizing prisons & being “tough on crime." Party Platform includes diversion for nonviolent offenders

*Social Security:* Support partial privatization of Social Security?

Clinton: No

Trump: Has previously supported, no recent stand. Platform supports.

*Taxes: *Increase or decrease taxes on the wealthy & corporations?

Clinton: Increase taxes on both

Trump: Decrease on both as part of tax cut plan

*Torture: *Are approaches like waterboarding that some consider torture acceptable in the fight against terror?

Clinton: No

Trump: Yes

*Trade: *Support or oppose the Trans Pacific Partnership trade deal?

Clinton: Oppose, although previously supported it.

Trump: Oppose.

*Voting Rights: *Support strict voter ID rules even if this prevents some people from voting? Restore Voting Rights Act?

Clinton: No, strict ID laws “disenfranchise people of color, poor people, and young people.” Need to restore Voting Rights Act.

Trump: Yes on voter ID. Otherwise people “will vote 10 times.” No statement on Voting Rights Act.

(Candidate positions as of August 25, 2015)

-- 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 1 day ago.

---

These are the most, and least, insured counties in New Mexico

October 3, 2016, 1:26 pm

≫ Next: Why the Supreme Court Is the Most Important Issue of the Election

≪ Previous: Clinton vs. Trump: A Nonpartisan Candidate Guide For The 2016 Presidential Race

$

0

0

Los Alamos is the most insured county in the state, according to a new SmartAsset study, with almost 83 percent of residents having auto insurance, almost 95 percent having health insurance and 29 percent having life insurance. The least insured county in the state is Mora County, with 77 percent of residents having auto coverage, 80 percent with health insurance and 23 percent with life insurance. The most and least insured counties list mirrors income inequality around the state. The city of… Reported by bizjournals 1 day ago.

Why the Supreme Court Is the Most Important Issue of the Election

October 3, 2016, 2:07 pm

≫ Next: Miami-based Head Lice Removal Company, Lice Troopers, Becomes Certified Vendor of Miami-Dade Public Schools

≪ Previous: These are the most, and least, insured counties in New Mexico

$

0

0

Election 2016 is the probably the most important election we will ever take part in. Why? Because extremely important issues are at the forefront of this election, especially for women and minorities. At this time, there are eight Supreme Court Justices, four are conservative, and four are liberal-ish. Only one is under 60 years old. Three are 78, 80, and 83. The next President will determine the make up of the Court for at least the next generation, and probably longer. Supreme Court Justices serve for life. With the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, a far right conservative, in 2016, the Court is already short one Justice. Since the Congress refused to act on the nomination of Merrick Garland, a moderate, the next President will very likely be called upon to nominate not just one, but potentially four, Justices. A conservative Court could cost many Americans dearly, and Trump has promised to nominate very conservative justices. The Supreme Court is of paramount importance, and here is why:

1. The right of women to make health decisions regarding their own bodies was established by Roe v. Wade in 1973. The Court ruled 7-2 that a right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion, but that this right must be balanced against the state's two legitimate interests in regulating abortions: protecting women's health and protecting the potentiality of human life. Roe v. Wade has been challenged several times, but as yet, the Supreme Court has upheld the right to privacy for women. The right of a woman to choose is dependent on the Court, and conservative Justices on the Court will almost certainly overturn Roe v. Wade, throwing women back into the days of back alley, illegal abortions. As I have said before, no one in their right mind is "pro abortion", but women deserve the right to choose what is best for their health, and for their consciences.

2. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was signed into law by President Obama on March 23rd, 2010 and upheld in the Supreme Court on June 28, 2012. The ACA has many benefits for women, and if overturned, would result in the loss of several rights, for everyone, not just women. Women can no longer be denied coverage or charged more just because of their gender (yes, we have only had this right since 2010!); between 2010 and 2015, the uninsured rate among women ages 18 to 64 decreased from 19.3 percent to 10.8 percent, a relative reduction of 44%; an estimated 56 million women with private health insurance have access to recommended preventive services like mammograms or flu shots with no co-pay or deductible, a right which women did not have prior to the ACA; 65 million women with pre-existing conditions can no longer be discriminated against or charged higher premiums for their health coverage which was common practice prior to 2010; 9 million American women with individual insurance coverage gained coverage for maternity services because of the health care law. The Democratic Platform, in part created and agreed upon by Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, supports paid parental leave (not just maternity leave, but leave for both parents) and assistance with childcare, as does every nation in the developed world except the United States. Millennials may not remember a time when people suffered from the ability of insurance companies to refuse them coverage. After years of dropped coverage and barriers to healthcare, everyone's coverage has improved because we have new protections. No one can be dropped just because they get sick, and millions of people now have coverage for trips to the emergency room, prescriptions and getting the preventive services they need. Prior to the ACA, or Obamacare, this was not the case. A Conservative Court could overturn the Affordable Care Act and throw people back into the days before health care rights. Because of the ACA, insurance companies must insure children until the age of 26, but that right will be gone if the ACA is destroyed.

3. Marriage Equality has recently been granted to all Americans, but a Conservative Court would most likely overturn it. Donald Trump is against marriage equality. The Democratic Platform and Hillary Clinton want to protect marriage equality for everyone, no matter whom they love.

4. The Supreme Court dealt a blow to President Obama's Immigration Reform by tying four to four on the decision. You can see the details here: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/06/22/us/who-is-affected-by-supreme-court-decision-on-immigration.html?_r=0. For those who want a legal path to citizenship or the right to stay in the country for parents or children, a conservative court will refuse to grant a legal pathway. Donald Trump believes the USA should deport millions and millions of individuals from the country, and additionally, wants to ban immigration based on religion. Banning immigration based on religion is about the most UN-American opinion I can imagine in this nation of immigrants and religious freedom. How can we continue to be the nation of immigrants if we ban immigrants?

So many of our rights and freedoms depend on the makeup of the Supreme Court. As one of our three branches of government, the Judicial decides what laws are constitutional, and which are not. We are at an important tipping point for the Supreme Court, whether the decisions of the next generation will continue the rights of women, patients, and minorities, or whether the Court will overturn these rights.

There are so many issues at stake in this election, but none are more important than the nominations to the Supreme Court. An election is not just about personalities, about who you like and do not like, it is about issues, and the future. Too often our votes are based on emotion, and the GOP candidate has unearthed the worst in the American psyche.The Supreme Court is a powerful, and has the final say on the constitutionality of all issues brought before it, and must be a major consideration when it comes to voting. When the stakes are this high, protest votes are useless. Let's vote the issues, not personalities.

-- 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 1 day ago.

Miami-based Head Lice Removal Company, Lice Troopers, Becomes Certified Vendor of Miami-Dade Public Schools

October 4, 2016, 12:07 am

≫ Next: State Farm Agent Henry Sandate Appointed to JCCC Board of Trustees

≪ Previous: Why the Supreme Court Is the Most Important Issue of the Election

$

0

0

Local treatment service becomes certified vendor for Miami-Dade schools, partnering with local school districts in the fight against head lice.

Miami, Florida (PRWEB) October 04, 2016

Lice Troopers is excited to announce that the company is now a certified vendor of the Miami-Dade Public Schools. The school district is the fourth largest in the country and one of the largest businesses in the state. It aims to establish relationships with and offer opportunities to a variety of local and trusted businesses.

“We’re honored, to say the least, because we take pride in being a resource for school administrators, parents and the community when it comes to head lice. Our certification by the school district shows parents that we are not just an effective treatment center, but a trusted local partner,” CEO, Arie Harel stated.

For Lice Troopers, this certification means a better connection with some of their most frequent clients-- school-aged children and their families. The company specializes in an all-natural lice removal treatment and chemical-free products that are 100% safe for all ages. And since schools are a major breeding ground for lice epidemics and children 3 to 11 years old are the most common hosts according to the CDC, this type of relationship with the school district is important.

On the other hand, the certification of a company that offers these services is equally important to parents. Miami Dade Public Schools has policies in place that enforce children being excluded from school if they are found to have nits or lice. So having a company that is recognized by the school board provides parents in the district a trusted, safe and local solution to head lice in the case that their child is infested.

For more information, visit http://www.licetroopers.com or call 800.403.5423.

Lice Troopers is the all-natural, guaranteed head lice removal service that manually treats and removes head lice safely and discreetly in child-friendly treatment centers, or other chosen location. Providing safe solutions for frantic families, the Lice Troopers team has successfully treated thousands of families with pediatrician-recommended services that may be reimbursed by many major health insurance carriers, flexible spending accounts and health savings accounts. Reported by PRWeb 14 hours ago.

State Farm Agent Henry Sandate Appointed to JCCC Board of Trustees

October 4, 2016, 1:06 am

≫ Next: Gap Insurance for Deductibles: The Insurance Industry's Latest Profiteering Ploy

≪ Previous: Miami-based Head Lice Removal Company, Lice Troopers, Becomes Certified Vendor of Miami-Dade Public Schools

$

0

0

Henry Sandate, of State Farm, named to Board of Trustees for Johnson County Community College.

Kansas City, KS (PRWEB) October 04, 2016

Johnson County Community College (JCCC) began the Fall 2016 semester with a new Trustee on its Board: Henry Sandate was recently appointed to fill the vacancy from a slate of several candidates. His service began on July 1, 2016, and Sandate will be up for re-election in November 2017. “It is an honor and a privilege to be a part of the Board of Trustees for JCCC,” said Sandate.

Additionally, the Kansas Housing Resource Corporation recently held its Annual Housing Conference where the Argentine Neighborhood Development Association (ANDA) was presented the Preservation in Housing Award for its senior housing development. Sandate is Chairman of ANDA, which has made a significant impact in the Argentine community in housing, commercial development, infrastructure, and healthy lifestyles.

“The development includes the conversion and rehabilitation of two historic properties in the neighborhood: the former Simmons Funeral Home and El Centro building,” said Sandate. “Both properties are historic and were gutted and converted to quality housing for seniors. The Simmons building is a Designated Federal Historic Building and El Centro is on the State of Kansas Designated Historical Properties list. The Simmons building will have seven units and El Centro will have eleven units.”

ANDA’s mission is to revitalize Kansas City’s Argentine neighborhood, a mature urban neighborhood with a stable population that was showing signs of decay despite the community vitality and loyalty of its residents. ANDA was formed in 2004 to revitalize the neighborhood and counteract the symptoms of decay.

About Henry Sandate, State Farm
Henry Sandate State Farm offers auto, home and property, life and health insurance, as well as annuities. For more information, please call (913) 438-2299, or visit http://www.hsandate.com. The office is located at 10281 W. 87 Street, Suite 102, Overland Park, KS 66212.

About the NALA™
The NALA offers small and medium-sized businesses effective ways to reach customers through new media. As a single-agency source, the NALA helps businesses flourish in their local community. The NALA’s mission is to promote a business’ relevant and newsworthy events and achievements, both online and through traditional media. For media inquiries, please call 805.650.6121, ext. 361. Reported by PRWeb 13 hours ago.

Gap Insurance for Deductibles: The Insurance Industry's Latest Profiteering Ploy

October 4, 2016, 4:55 am

≫ Next: In a Populist Moment, Clinton Offers a Left-Leaning Economic Vision

≪ Previous: State Farm Agent Henry Sandate Appointed to JCCC Board of Trustees

$

0

0

As the cost of health insurance and care continues to go up with little restraint by the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the insurance industry is getting ever more creative in finding new revenue streams to cover gaps in coverage. The latest new market is to offer insurance to cover the cost of insurance. High deductibles have become a growing burden of out-of-pocket expenses for individuals, families, and employers. As one marker, deductibles for employer-sponsored health insurance have gone up by 255 percent over the last ten years. (1)

The ACA was intended to rein in insurers' abuses by regulating the industry. However, large and self-insured employers were exempted from its requirements. Another provision outlawed "mini-med" plans that would cap annual benefits at, say $2,000. About 2 million people were covered in 2013 by limited benefit mini-med plans, marketed mostly by Aetna and Cigna. New ACA rules were enacted in 2013 that allow a number of limited-benefit plans to be offered as supplementary insurance. A variety of such plans are now being marketed, including critical illness plans (e.g. for cancer), indemnity plans (that pay only a pre-determined amount regardless of the total charges), "hospital cash" policies," and short-term plans that less than 12 months. (2). These kinds of plans provide relatively small, one-time lump sum payments toward the generally much higher costs incurred by patients if they experience a major illness or hospitalization. These skimpy plans can be offered at low premiums, at least for younger healthier people, with high profits for insurers. As bare-bones policies, they have been called "junk insurance" by Consumer Reports. (3)

Since these gap plans are not major health insurance, they escape scrutiny and regulation by the ACA. Insurers can ask potential enrollees about their health status and deny coverage for pre-existing conditions. More than 90 percent of people purchasing insurance through the ACA's exchanges in 2016 chose plans with an average annual deductible of $3,000 or more. As one example, a 26 year-old healthy person with a $6,000 deductible can expect to pay $600 a year for a gap policy for deductibles. (4)

Gap policies call into question whether or not they are worth it. They are just another way to evade the ACA's requirements and another grab for profits in a failing health insurance industry. They also represent another failure of the ACA to rein in health insurers in the public interest. These latest gap policies for high deductibles are losers for patients and families and unearned winners for health insurers.

It is beyond time to abandon cost-sharing as a means to control health care spending. As a main premise of consumer-directed health care (CDHC), the "more skin in the game" concept has been discredited as a cost containment mechanism by more than 25 years of experience. It is now obvious that the more cost-sharing increases with patients and families, the more they delay or forgo necessary care and have worse outcomes. (5) Yet it persists and grows into even new forms, such as now "insuring" us against high deductibles, all in insurers' interest and not in ours as patients. As Dr. Don McCanne, senior health policy fellow for Physicians for a National Health Program, observes:
We don't need insurance to insure our insurance. We need a national health program that would ensure that everyone has affordable access to all essential health care services. This will never happen with our current system; ACA patches cannot possibly accomplish that. Single-payer Medicare for All, without gaps, is what we need. (6)
John Geyman, M.D. is the author of The Human Face of ObamaCare: Promises vs. Reality and What Comes Next and How Obamacare is Unsustainable: Why We Need a Single-Payer Solution For All Americans

visit: http://www.johngeymanmd.org

References:
1. Woolhandler, S, Himmelstein, DU. Healthcare inequality on the rise. The Hill, August 2, 2016.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/healthcare/290128-healthcare-inequality-on-the-rise

2. Andrews, M. Short-term plans can skirt health law requirements. Kaiser Health News, October 28, 2013.
http://khn.org/news/102913-michelle-andrews-364-day-insurance-plans/

3. Appleby, J, Hancock, J. Bare bones health plans expected to survive health law. Kaiser Health News, August 25, 2013.
http://khn.org/news/bare-bones-health-insurance-health-law/

4. Sable-Smith, B. Would you like some insurance with your insurance? Kaiser Health News, September 21, 2016.
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2016/sep/13/would-you-like-some-insurance-with-your-insurance/

5. Geyman, JP. Moral hazard and consumer-directed health care: A fundamentally flawed concept. Intl. J Health Services 37 (2): 333-346, 2007.

6. McCanne, D. Doubling down by insuring against losses from insurance gaps. Quote of the Day, September 22, 2016. (don@mccanne.org)
http://pnhp.org/blog/2016/09/22/doubling-down-by-insuring-against-losses-from-insurance-gaps/

-- 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 9 hours ago.

In a Populist Moment, Clinton Offers a Left-Leaning Economic Vision

October 4, 2016, 7:27 am

≫ Next: Cognosante Tasked by CMS With Creation of Consumer Help Center for Complex Health Insurance Eligibility and Enrollment Cases

≪ Previous: Gap Insurance for Deductibles: The Insurance Industry's Latest Profiteering Ploy

$

0

0

Hillary Clinton gave a speech on the economy in Toledo, Ohio on Monday. Her primary topics, corporate predation and a broken economy, leaned left. Some of the speech's most important ideas were hidden in plain sight but could have long-lasting significance.

The speech wasn't perfect, and some will undoubtedly question her sincerity. But it showed just how far the candidate, and her party's leadership, have come in a very short time.

Characteristically, Clinton's speech blunted its message with hedging phrases like, "There are lots of principled law-abiding business leaders out there who are horrified by all this."

And Clinton couldn't resist boasting that "I've been endorsed by very successful people," while "not a single CEO of a Fortune 100 company supports the Trump campaign."

To millions of American voters, that will look less like validation and more like guilt by association. Those CEOs aren't avoiding Trump because they're patriots. They're probably more concerned that his unpredictability would be bad for business. And many would lose out if Trump ever followed through on his anti-trade-deal rhetoric.

She spent a good portion of the speech attacking Donald Trump, of course. It would be political malpractice for a candidate in her position not to dwell on her opponent's venality, vulgarity, and greed.

But the outsized and cartoonish nature of Trump's villainy can also be an impediment, a distraction from the deeper debate that is needed. Every moment spent discussing Trump's personal failings is a moment spent not addressing the fundamental injustices built into our economy.

At least Clinton put her Donald-baiting to good use, by linking his faults to broader concerns. "Trump represents the same rigged system that he claims he's going to change," she said. "He's taken corporate excess and makes a business model out of it."

Trade is the one subject where Trump has a populist edge. While Clinton could not bring herself to condemn past trade deals, she said that she would "ramp up enforcement of trade rules by appointing a new chief trade prosecutor and tripling the number of enforcement officers." And she repeated her recent, more forceful language on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, saying "I oppose TPP now, I will oppose it after the election, I will oppose it as president - because it is one-sided and unfair to American workers."

That language would be more convincing if Clinton were to personally lobby Democrats in Congress, asking them to vote against TPP in the lame-duck session. And if Clinton opposes the TPP because "it sets up a dispute resolution system that favors large corporations over everyone else," she should fight to renegotiate or remove the same provision from NAFTA. A recent study confirmed that it has benefited extremely wealthy individuals and very large corporations.

Still, her words of opposition are a step in the right direction, reflecting the deep unpopularity and poor outcomes of past trade deals.

Rhetorically, Clinton got the Wells Fargo scandal exactly right. "One of the nation's biggest banks, bullying thousands of employees into committing fraud against unsuspecting customers" - that's a good summary of the scandal. Then there was this:"It is outrageous that eight years after a cowboy culture on Wall Street wrecked our economy, we are still seeing powerful bankers playing fast and loose with the law."At this point, some left-leaning readers will undoubtedly be doubting the sincerity of Clinton's outrage, given her history with Wall Street. That's a legitimate concern. Clinton even boasted in Monday's speech about Warren Buffett's endorsement, and Buffett is a major investor in Wells Fargo, reportedly losing $1 billion in a single day as the latest scandal broke.

But, by reflecting and channeling the public's anger, Clinton is acknowledging that the political reality about Wall Street fraud has changed. Bernie Sanders and his millions of supporters, along with Elizabeth Warren and other key players, have moved her to the left on this subject, at least rhetorically. Activists can use these fierce words to press for additional bank reform, should she become president.

"Often we find unjustified spikes in the prices of longstanding, life-saving drugs," Clinton said of Big Pharma. "We should slap penalties on companies trying to cheat people who need those drugs."

Clinton also expressed support for importing drugs from Canada, speeding up the approval process for generic alternatives, and allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices.

(Her other major drug proposal, to cap the out-of-pocket cost working families pay for medicine, is not unreasonable. Unfortunately, it would shift the cost burden from individual families to the public at large without ending the drug company exploitation that is the root cause of the problem.)

While more can be done to rein in Big Pharma - the Bayh-Dole Act, for example, provides a president with additional tools -- this is a much stronger agenda against pharmaceutical predation than any presidential candidate has offered in the recent past. *
*

Most of the speech's media coverage missed its most potentially transformative proposals - understandably, because they sounded technical. But, if properly executed, they could change the way the nation does business.

The first was a call to end mandatory arbitration in corporate agreements. As Clinton noted, "there was a provision in the very fine print of (Wells Fargo customer) contracts that kept them from going to court to sue the bank for being cheated. Instead, they are forced into a closed-door arbitration process without the important protections that you get in a court of law."

Most major corporations - including banks, credit card companies, and telecommunications providers - use arbitration to rig the system in their own favor. They have considerable influence over the arbitrators, while customers are robbed of the class-action suits that are often their only path to justice.

"We are not going to let corporations like Wells Fargo use these fine print 'gotchas' to escape accountability," said Clinton. If that policy was enforced strictly, and broadly, it would change the way large corporations treat their exploited customers.

Clinton also said this:"In most of the country, the three largest health insurance companies in each state control 80 percent of the market. No wonder premiums are going up. As president, I will appoint tough, independent authorities to strengthen anti-trust enforcement and really scrutinize mergers and acquisitions, so the big don't keep getting bigger and bigger."If Clinton were to honor that pledge as president, the effects could be far-reaching. In recent decades the federal government has done little to address monopoly and near-monopoly conditions in a number of markets. It stood idle as mergers and acquisitions created one dominant player after another. An aggressive antitrust policy could lower prices, give consumers more choices, and reduce the political power of today's mega-corporations. It might even slow premium growth for health insurance.

The question will inevitably asked, "Does she mean it?"

A shadow fell across the Clinton campaign's left flank this week when leaked audio of Clinton from a February fundraiser contained dismissive comments about Bernie Sanders and his millennial supporters. Clinton has long described herself as a "centrist," telling the February crowd that she occupies a political space "from the center-left to the center-right."

So, does she mean the progressive things she says now?

Clinton undoubtedly has "centrist" tendencies. But she has also been willing to embrace the rhetoric and policies of the left in recent months. Whatever is in her heart, this much is clear: Hillary Clinton has shown that she can be moved. That suggests a way forward for progressive activists.

In what is almost certainly an apocryphal story, Franklin D. Roosevelt was said to have told a activist (sometimes in the story it's Sidney Hillman, sometimes it's A. Philip Randolph), "I agree with you, now go out and make me do it."

Does Hillary Clinton really support the left-leaning economic agenda she laid out on Monday, or doesn't she? There's no way to know. Either way, if she becomes president the mission will be the same: someone will have to go out and make her do it.

-- 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.

Cognosante Tasked by CMS With Creation of Consumer Help Center for Complex Health Insurance Eligibility and Enrollment Cases

October 4, 2016, 7:47 am

≫ Next: Bill Clinton: Obamacare Is 'The Craziest Thing In The World'

≪ Previous: In a Populist Moment, Clinton Offers a Left-Leaning Economic Vision

$

0

0

MCLEAN, VA--(Marketwired - October 04, 2016) - Cognosante announced today its selection by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to create a Complex Case Help Center (CCHC) where caseworkers will help resolve complex enrollment issues with Marketplace health plans. The CCHC provides additional support to CMS for consumers whose eligibility and enrollment needs cannot be resolved through Marketplace call centers and other existing means. Reported by Marketwired 6 hours ago.

---

Bill Clinton: Obamacare Is 'The Craziest Thing In The World'

October 4, 2016, 8:25 am

≫ Next: There are 2.5 million Americans leaving money on the table while buying health insurance

≪ Previous: Cognosante Tasked by CMS With Creation of Consumer Help Center for Complex Health Insurance Eligibility and Enrollment Cases

$

0

0

Watch Video"It's the craziest thing in the world," Bill Clinton said.

That was former President Bill Clinton criticizing the Affordable Care Act while campaigning for his wife in Michigan on Monday.

Clinton was speaking about government-run marketplaces under President Obama's signature legislation when he ripped into the system.

"It doesn't make any sense. The insurance model doesn't work here," Clinton said.

He added, "You've got this crazy system where all of a sudden 25 million more people have health care and then the people who are out there busting it … wind up with their premiums doubled and their coverage cut in half."

*SEE MORE: Those Record Low Obamacare Rates Might Be Short-Lived*

Of course, Republicans jumped at the opportunity to post clips of Clinton's comments online. The party has made similar critiques against Obamacare since its creation.

But Clinton has dissed Obama a few times while campaigning for Hillary Clinton in her bid for president.

"If you believe we've finally come to the point where we can put the awful legacy of the last eight years behind us and the seven years before that, where we were practicing trickle-down economics ... then you should vote for her," Clinton said in March.

Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton has said if she becomes president, she plans to defend Obamacare and build on its successes.

Estimates say roughly 20 million Americans have gotten health insurance between 2010 — when the Affordable Care Act was passed — and early 2016. Reported by Newsy 6 hours ago.

There are 2.5 million Americans leaving money on the table while buying health insurance

October 4, 2016, 8:32 am

≫ Next: Are you 1 of the 44K N.J. residents paying too much for health insurance?

≪ Previous: Bill Clinton: Obamacare Is 'The Craziest Thing In The World'

$

0

0

Millions of American are leaving money on the table by buying insurance outside of Obamacare's exchanges, according to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Currently, people who do not receive insurance from their employer or a government-sponsored plan such as Medicaid or Medicare can get individual insurance by going through exchanges established by the Affordable Care Act (ACA), better known as Obamacare, or they can buy coverage directly from a private health insurer.

The advantage of going through the Obamacare exchanges, said the HHS, is that buyers are then qualified for federal subsidies depending on their income that can alleviate some of the cost of premiums.

"We estimate that about 2.5 million individuals currently purchasing individual market coverage off-Marketplace have incomes that could qualify them for tax credits," said the report from the HHS. "If these individuals instead purchased qualified health plans (QHPs) through the Marketplace, tax credits that could cover part of the cost of their premiums would be available."

In order to qualify, a household of four must make less than $100,000 in income according to the HHS. Currently, roughly 6.9 million people buy individual health insurance off-marketplace, meaning around one-third of those currently not on the marketplace could receive some relief.

Additionally, HHS estimated that almost all of the Americans currently without insurance would qualify for a discount from the federal government as well.

"In addition to those already covered in the individual market, we estimate that 10.7 million uninsured individuals are eligible for Marketplace coverage, and that 9.0 million of them (84 percent) may qualify for tax credits based on having incomes below 400 percent FPL," said the report.

The states with the most people off of the marketplace were California (313,000 people with off-marketplace plans that could receive subsidies), Texas (252,000), Florida (153,000), North Carolina (138,000), Illinois (130,000), and Pennsylvania (111,000).

The note from HHS comes just weeks before the open enrollment period for Obamacare, in which HHS hopes to ramp up coverage for all people, but especially young people. Getting young people onto the exchanges would help to recalibrate the pool of customers that is currently older and less healthy than originally hoped for, leading to losses for insurers.

By touting the subsidies, HHS is most likely aiming to attract reluctant people and decrease the risk in the pool of people buying Obamacare.

*SEE ALSO: The White House is kicking off a big push to fix Obamacare's largest problem*

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: STIGLITZ: It makes me crazy that everyone gets this wrong about the economy Reported by Business Insider 6 hours ago.

Are you 1 of the 44K N.J. residents paying too much for health insurance?

October 4, 2016, 8:44 am

≫ Next: Report: Millions may be skipping help with insurance bills

≪ Previous: There are 2.5 million Americans leaving money on the table while buying health insurance

$

0

0

An analysis shows that 44,000 New Jersey residents who bought private insurance policies could have gotten a subsidy through the federal exchange Reported by NJ.com 5 hours ago.

Report: Millions may be skipping help with insurance bills

October 4, 2016, 8:58 am

≫ Next: INSURANCE JUSTICE FOR KIDNEY FAILURE PATIENTS

≪ Previous: Are you 1 of the 44K N.J. residents paying too much for health insurance?

$

0

0

Millions of Americans who bought individual health insurance outside the Affordable Care Act's public exchanges may be leaving government help on the table if they skip those marketplaces again in picking 2017 coverage, a new report says. The Department of Health and Human Services estimates that 2.5 million people who bought so-called off-exchange coverage for this year might have income levels that qualify them for tax credits to help pay the premium. Reported by SeattlePI.com 5 hours ago.

INSURANCE JUSTICE FOR KIDNEY FAILURE PATIENTS

October 4, 2016, 9:37 am

≫ Next: Millions missing out on Obamacare tax credits

≪ Previous: Report: Millions may be skipping help with insurance bills

$

0

0

Imagine that you were lucky enough to get health care through the Affordable Care Act (ACA), that you were paying your $300, $400, or $500 a year monthly payment. While the cost might stretch your budget, you wouldn't mind. You had peace of mind knowing that you'd be covered if anything went wrong.

You might have been among the millions who breathed a sigh of relief because you knew than an insurer could not deny you health care because of a pre-existing medical condition. You felt secure that you could access health care without fear that your health status would be a barrier for you. You might rest easy unless you had kidney failure. Then, you might find that health insurers have a loophole to exclude those kidney failure patients whose health conditions make it difficult for them to pay their premiums, and whose fine print in their insurance policies preclude them from taking help to pay their premiums.

Some of the people who can't afford to pay premiums need, and can find, a little help, are forbidden to get it by the fine print in their policies that say they must use their own funds, and accept no outside help. Meanwhile, the American Kidney Foundation helps more than 70,000 patients a year with their premiums because dialysis on Medicaid is more onerous than dialysis on private care. Further, if you've been paying private health premiums for decades, shouldn't you have the benefits of private health care?

Those who are affected by these policies are disproportionately black and brown. African Americans represent 13 percent of the US population, but 32 percent of those with kidney failure. The rate of kidney failure among Latinos has increased by an astounding 70 percent since 2000, and Latinos are 1.5 times as likely as whites to be diagnosed with kidney failure. While insurers may say they don't intentionally discriminate, the adverse outcomes are undeniable.

We've been down this road before. Aetna recently announced that it would become the latest insurer to pull of the ACA exchanges because they apparently weren't making enough of a profit on the plans they offered. Meanwhile, the company as a whole raked in nearly $7 billion in profits last year - far above what even the most optimistic Wall Street analysts projected. And its CEO took home almost $28 in take-home pay last year alone.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) should not limit the ability of charitable groups to provide financial assistance for low-income patients who wish to enroll in private coverage. Indeed, SMS should applaud it! After all, if someone has paid private insurance premiums for years and now needs help to keep paying them, CMS should appreciate organizations like the American Kidney Fund, who are willing to stand in the gap for patients who are having challenges paying their premiums. To oppose this help goes against the ACA promise all Americans - regardless of income or health status - can freely access the health exchanges to select a private insurance plan so long as they have not already enrolled in Medicare or Medicaid. This rejection of charitable assistance to patients seeking private health insurance is yet another tool insurers have been employing in their efforts to push away sick patients, and it's unfathomable that it might soon be supported by CMS policy.
If insurance companies are able to collect their premiums, they should not care where they come from. To prevent patients from accepting assistance from premium support programs limits their possibilities for health care, especially with kidney failure treatment, and also pushes already needy patients further into poverty. Instead of restricting premium assistance, insurers should be grateful for it. Certainly, patients are enhanced when they are assisted by those charitable organizations that would expand their options for quality care.

If insurers can arbitrarily reject charitable assistance payments for patients - lining their pockets while limiting patients' options for care - then what's next? Should cancer patients with costly but lifesaving therapies anticipate the same? Will insurers find new and novel ways to eliminate patients from their rosters who suffer from ALS, diabetes, cancer, or heart disease? In the long run, we may all be impacted when insurance companies have the option to cherry-pick those they cover.

Six short years removed from passage of the ACA, it's shameful that our nation's sickest patients continue to face obstacles in obtaining the care they so desperately need. It's even more outrageous that policies adopted by private insurers could soon be supported by federal regulations.

Before the care of a single patient is further disrupted, and before health insurers add another dollar in profit to their balance sheets because they are able to discriminate against the sick, our nation's policymakers to take a hard look at the direction we're headed and remember the patients for whom protective healthcare policies were created in the first place. If charitable organizations are willing to support kidney failure patients by helping them pay insurance premiums, insurance companies should applaud, not repel, this assistance.

-- 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 4 hours ago.

Millions missing out on Obamacare tax credits

October 4, 2016, 10:34 am

≫ Next: There are now 5 states with only one insurance company offering Obamacare (AET, UNH)

≪ Previous: INSURANCE JUSTICE FOR KIDNEY FAILURE PATIENTS

$

0

0

About 2.5 million people are missing out on tax credits to lower the cost of their insurance, because they aren't buying health insurance plans off the federal and state health care exchanges.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Reported by USATODAY.com 4 hours ago.

There are now 5 states with only one insurance company offering Obamacare (AET, UNH)

October 4, 2016, 11:18 am

≫ Next: Calm Down -- Bill Clinton Didn't Say Obamacare Is Terrible

≪ Previous: Millions missing out on Obamacare tax credits

$

0

0

South Carolina became the fifth state to only have one company offering health insurance through its Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare, exchange.

The South Carolina Department of Insurance announced on Tuesday that Blue Cross Blue Shield of South Carolina will be the sole provider South Carolinians looking to get covered through Obamacare, according to The Post and Courier.

Aetna and United Healthcare both announced that they were pulling out of the state earlier in 2016, and BCBC of SC said they would no longer offer coverage through their BlueChoice subsidiary, said the Post and Courier's Lauren Sasser.

Sasser also noted that premiums will increase by an average of 27% in the state.

South Carolina becomes the fifth state to officially be left with a single insurer after Alabama, Alaska, Oklahoma, and Wyoming. Based on current projections, North Carolina and Kansas could also be left in the same boat.

Insurance firms have struggled with a group of enrollees that have been sicker and older than expected, leading to large losses for the firms. This has been especially acute in states that did not expand their Medicaid offerings, such as South Carolina.

This has caused insurers like Aetna and UnitedHealth to ditch some of the more rural coverage areas, leaving residents of those areas high and dry. Even states with more competition are facing strains, such as Tennessee and Minnesota.

On the positive side, most of the premium increases, while intense, appear to be a normalization after insurers underpriced plans in the first few years of the law.

Jonathan Gold, a spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said that the changes are not representative of the experience of all of South Carolina. From Gold's statement:

"HHS projected that the majority of South Carolina Marketplace consumers would still be able to purchase coverage for less than $75 per month even if all Marketplace premium rates were to increase by double digits. Meanwhile, for the 50 percent of people in South Carolina with employer coverage, premiums have grown at some of the slowest rates on record since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. All South Carolina consumers, no matter where they get their coverage, are benefiting from ACA protections like no more exclusions for preexisting conditions, no annual limits on coverage, and no cost sharing for preventive services."

The 2016 open enrollment period for Obamacare begins November 1, when the Obama administration and health officials are expected to make a strong push to get young people to sign up for ACA plans to alleviate some of the stress on the system.

*SEE ALSO: 2.5 million Americans are leaving money on the table while buying health insurance*

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: STIGLITZ: It makes me crazy that everyone gets this wrong about the economy Reported by Business Insider 3 hours ago.

---

Calm Down -- Bill Clinton Didn't Say Obamacare Is Terrible

October 4, 2016, 11:56 am

≫ Next: Training the Mind. A practical approach to achieving happiness in life and at work

≪ Previous: There are now 5 states with only one insurance company offering Obamacare (AET, UNH)

$

0

0

WASHINGTON ― Former President Bill Clinton caused a bit of stir Monday when he was quoted describing Obamacare as “the craziest thing in the world” ― an opinion that would put him sharply at odds with Democratic presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton.

It would be quite a turn in this campaign if the last Democratic president slammed the signature policy achievement of the current Democratic president while campaigning for his wife, who hopes to be the next Democratic president. It also would be a remarkable turn for Bill Clinton, who championed health care reform from the White House and has been a vocal supporter of the Affordable Care Act.

But those ideas seem far-fetched, and they should. A spokesman for the ex-president denies that that’s what Bill Clinton actually said. And a review of Clinton’s full remarks appears to support this claim.

During a speech in Flint, Michigan, that ran nearly 40 minutes, Bill Clinton addressed the health care system and Hillary Clinton’s plans for further reforming it. He also discussed the progress made under President Barack Obama, and the calls from Republicans to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

A CNN report published Tuesday begins this way:

Bill Clinton criticized President Barack Obama’s signature policy reform while on the stump for his wife, Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, calling Obamacare “the craziest thing in the world.”

That quotation, while accurate, doesn’t fully portray Bill Clinton’s argument for keeping the Affordable Care Act ― which has extended health coverage to 20 million people and cut the uninsured rate to a historic low ― and enhancing it with policies proposed by Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

Bill Clinton accurately described the status quo as one where people who get health coverage from government programs like Medicare and Medicaid, and people who are eligible for subsidies under the Affordable Care Act, are well-covered ― but where people who earn too much for financial assistance can face high premiums:

The current system works fine if you’re eligible for Medicaid, if you’re a lower-income working person, if you’re already on Medicare, or if you get enough subsidies on a modest income that you can afford your health care.

But the people that are getting killed in this deal are small businesspeople and individuals who make just a little too much to get any of these subsidies.

So you’ve got this crazy system where all of a sudden, 25 million more people have health care and then the people that are out there busting it ― sometimes 60 hours a week ― wind up with their premiums doubled and their coverage cut in half. It’s the craziest thing in the world.

Plus, prior to the Affordable Care Act, millions fewer people qualified for Medicaid, and no one received subsidies for private insurance.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign proposals would help close the remaining gap and make health insurance more affordable for people who don’t currently qualify for financial help, Bill said Monday.

“Hillary believes we should simply let people who are above the line for getting these subsidies have access to affordable entry into the Medicare and Medicaid programs. They’ll all be covered,” he said. (Hillary Clinton hasn’t actually called for people to be able to purchase Medicaid coverage, but she does support working with states that haven’t expanded the program under Obamacare to do so.)

During a speech later Monday in Pontiac, Michigan, the former president offered direct praise of Obamacare. 

“I think [Obama’s] health care bill has been a remarkable success for 25 million people, and for getting rid of pre-existing conditions, and the problems with it show why the president was right to recommend a public option in the first place,” Bill Clinton said, according to a transcript his spokesman, Angel Urena, supplied.

Hillary Clinton campaign’s platform calls for several enhancements to the Affordable Care Act, like creating a government-run “public option” that would compete with private insurers and allowing near-retirees to buy into Medicare instead of purchasing private coverage. Clinton would also provide tax credits to families who face extraordinarily high health care costs, among other things. 


I think [Obama's] health care bill has been a remarkable success.
Former President Bill Clinton, Oct. 3, 2016
Despite its characterization in the CNN report, Bill Clinton’s assessment of the health care system and the Affordable Care Act mirrors Hillary Clinton’s and Obama’s own.

Urena acknowledged that the former president’s remarks in Flint could lend themselves to misinterpretation. 

“President Clinton spoke about the importance of the Affordable Care Act and the good it has done to expand coverage for millions of Americans,” Urena wrote in an email. “And while he was slightly short-handed, it’s clear to everyone, including President Obama, that improvements are needed.”

The third year of annual open enrollment on the health law’s exchanges begins Nov. 1, one week before the election. Despite the expansion of coverage to millions of previously uninsured people, these marketplaces enter the new sign-up period facing real headwinds.

Health insurance companies are raising premiums, sometimes by a lot, to compensate for losses incurred because enrollees have proved sicker and costlier to cover than expected. Insurers included UnitedHealth Group and Aetna are scaling back their participation in these exchanges, contributing to diminished choices for consumers.

Congressional Republicans have steadfastly refused to consider amending the Affordable Care Act, and instead maintain that the six-year-old law should be repealed completely and replaced by a set of vague policies that would cover significantly fewer people.

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump also supports repeal, and although his statements about health policy are incoherent, he also would prefer to take away coverage from about 20 million people.

Urena, Bill Clinton’s spokesman, provided a transcript of the former president’s remarks in Flint on Monday:

Now the next thing is, we got to figure out now what to do on health care. Her opponent said, ‘Oh, just repeal it all. The market will take care of it.’ That didn’t work out very well for us, did it? We wound up with the most expensive system in the world and we insured the smallest percentage of people. On the other hand, the current system works fine if you’re eligible for Medicaid, if you’re a lower income working person, if you’re already on Medicare, or if you get enough subsidies on a modest income that you can afford your health care.

But the people that are getting killed in this deal are small businesspeople and individuals who make just a little too much to get any of these subsidies. Why? Because they’re not organized, they don’t have any bargaining power with insurance companies, and they’re getting whacked. So you’ve got this crazy system where all of a sudden, 25 million more people have health care and then the people that are out there busting it ― sometimes 60 hours a week ― wind up with their premiums doubled and their coverage cut in half. It’s the craziest thing in the world so here’s the simplest thing ― you raise your hands, you think about it ― here’s the simplest thing: figure out an affordable rate and let people use that ― something that won’t undermine your quality of life, won’t interfere with your ability to make expenses, won’t interfere with your ability to save money for your kid’s college education. And let people buy in to Medicare or Medicaid.

Here’s why: you can let people buy in for just a little bit because unlike where you are now, if you were on the other side of this, if you were an insurer, you’d say, ‘Gosh, I only got 2,000 people in this little pool. Eighty percent of insurance costs every year come from 20 percent of the people. If I get unlucky in the pool, I’ll lose money.’ So they overcharge you just to make sure, and on good years, they just make a whopping profit from the people who are least able to pay it.

It doesn’t make any sense. The insurance model doesn’t work here; it’s not like life insurance, it’s not like casualties, it’s not like predicting flooding. It doesn’t work. So Hillary believes we should simply let people who are above the line for getting these subsidies have access to affordable entry into the Medicare and Medicaid programs. They’ll all be covered, it will not hurt the program, we will not lose a lot of money. And we ought to do it.

Urena also gave The Huffington Post a transcript of Bill Clinton’s comments in Pontiac on Monday:

I think his health care bill has been a remarkable success for 25 million people, and for getting rid of pre-existing conditions, and the problems with it show why the president was right to recommend a public option in the first place because the only real problems I can see with it are small businesspeople and individual working people just above the subsidy line are having. Why is that? Because they’re small, they’re independent, they do have any market power vis a vis the insurance companies, and that’s why Hillary said, “The change we need is not to wreck this thing and repeal it. It’s done too much good. The change we need is to create an affordable option for the small business people and the working people who are not covered ― that’s what the public opinion is about.

Keep in mind, when the other side complains about that, if they just pay these people something they can afford, it will cover well over 90 percent of the costs of the expansion of Medicare or Medicaid or both. Why? Because there’s a huge pool. This is one place where his adjective works. This is really important ― there’s a ‘huge’ pool, and the economics of health care are as follows: in any given year, more than 80 percent of the costs are claimed by 20 percent of the people. It’s just a shifting 20 percent. That means if you have a small pool, it’s impossible to price right. It doesn’t work, it’s not like life or casualty or property or other insurance, which is why there should be a public opinion, and it will either be available to people, or the private insurance companies will figure out how to reorganize themselves and put people into huge pools to compete.

Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.

-- 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 2 hours ago.

Training the Mind. A practical approach to achieving happiness in life and at work

October 4, 2016, 12:47 pm

≫ Next: STOCKS FALL, GOLD GETS CRUSHED: Here's what you need to know (SHLD, GLD, GLX, SPY, SPX, DJI, IXIC, GSPC, IWIM, TLT, TLO, DRI, GOOGL)

≪ Previous: Calm Down -- Bill Clinton Didn't Say Obamacare Is Terrible

$

0

0

Scattered thoughts, anger, hatred, envy, are all feelings that drive individuals to severe emotional distress.

These negative emotions are for the most part generated by a confused mind and cognitive processes that are based on a wrong perception of the reality around us.

We all come to this life pure and with a hearth filled with love and joy. Then overtime, trapped in our daily life, we lose our natural empathy, changing the way we look at things.

The core values such as love and compassion are still there, but the ongoing exposure to a society that judges the success of the individual mainly based upon the ability of achieving financial goals, distances us from what is most important.

Before I move forward, I want to make clear that I'm not trying to offer a spiritual view of the topic. The reason I'm making a connection to these core values is because whatever we may believe, or whatever context in which we live or work, we are still human beings. No matter how successful we are, how much money we make, or the power we have: if we lose the connection with who we really are and with reality, we can get in big trouble. It is just a matter of time.

In several articles I focused on what I believe to be the biggest problems in today's society and business, which is the fact that we almost all act based upon an individualistic, self-centered approach, and that this generates a culture where people purely act based on an "I win - You lose" mentality, where bosses squeeze people lives to their limit, and employees are constantly competing with each other. The outcome of this behavior in a business ecosystem is an unbearable amount of stress that is the main cause of illnesses such as anxiety, depression, and burnout.

This from a business perspective translates into an organization that is left without energy, where people don't perform, fight, and eventually leave. Of course all this has an impact on the company bottom line as well. "Corporate health insurance premiums in the United States shot up by 11.2% in 2004--quadruple the rate of inflation--according to survey figures from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Today, the American Institute of Stress reports, roughly 60% of doctor visits stem from stress-related complaints and illnesses: In total, American businesses lose $300 billion annually to lowered productivity, absenteeism, health-care, and related costs stemming from stress"https://hbr.org/2005/11/are-you-working-too-hard.

In my article "Building a Sustainable World Ecosystem", I tried to answer the following questions: "How can we create true awareness and mindfulness about this and what is the solution to it?"http://www.huffingtonpost.com/federico-foli/building-a-sustainable-wo_b_9195048.html.

The overall idea behind the article was that the answer to a more sustainable and a balanced business ecosystem, comes from our ability to give up an individualistic approach and make efforts to achieve the results through a healthy cooperation with all the people who are part of the same environment. So, cooperation is the organizing principle of a sustainable ecological, political, economical, cultural ecosystem.

The methodology that I proposed was an integration of the sacred and the secular. A combination of Tibetan Mahayana Buddhism , ecology and mindfulness. The first explains that we are all part of the same ecosystem (the abandonment of the concept of self). The second clarifies the meaning and foundation of sustainability. Mindfulness is the daily process to achieving all three.

Where do we go from here? What is the foundation of the change we need to undertake to reconnect with our human core values, that allows us to go back to a mindful, stable and happier life?

From my Tibetan Mahayana Buddhism practice, for me the answer has to be found in what we call Training the Mind. This is a key part of the practice that requires a lot of dedication and studies. This practice refers to the Eight Verses of Training the Mind by Geshe Lang-ri Tang pa.

I never enter into the religious or technical aspects of it when I bring it into my interactions with other people in business, because what I personally developed is mainly a practical way of being, based on the core concepts and steps of the practice, adapted to the needs of a secular environment.

What I invite people to do is to wake up early in the morning, or find a quiet place during or late in the day, follow a few simple steps and contemplate on the meaning of each of these steps.

Once we become familiar with the process and the meaning of its key concepts, the next step is to start to apply it during our daily activities. Whenever for instance we are part of a business discussion and we perceive a lot of tension and / or when we are put in a difficult position by a peer or a manager above us.

Let's go through the steps:

• *Always act and think caring about the welfare of all sentient beings. *Think and pray for the happiness and wellbeing of all. Your family members, your colleagues, the people reporting to you, your clients. I personally extend it also to Mother Nature, the planet, plants and animals.

• *Act and think with humility.* Whenever you interact with others think of yourself as the lowest among them. No matter how knowledgeable you are, listen first. Always think as if you can learn at any time from anyone, no matter their social and business status and their level of education.

• *In every moment be mindful and recognize when negative emotions arise*. Have the courage to face them and make the efforts to avoid overreacting.

• *Develop care for other less fortunate people as if you have found a precious treasure.
*
• *When treated badly by other people, make the effort to consider the situations as a learning opportunity. *Allow these people to become your spiritual guide, helping you to grow and become a more compassionate person.

• *Help everybody and share in others' suffering, understanding all phenomena as illusion, and releasing yourself from attachment.*

Sticking to this practice, processing and absorbing the key concepts of it, makes you feel more at ease with the environment around you. You will start to slowly understand that we are all part of the same ecosystem, that is not me against you, and that no matter the situation, there is nothing to be taken personally.

This practice teaches us to be more compassionate with the people around us, allowing us to see that we are all the same, and that whenever other individuals act aggressively against us they do it because of their own suffering. We should be grateful for their behavior because they help us understand the real issue behind it, and that engaging on negative actions brings in only more suffering.

This exercise is a beautiful opportunity to transform our mind in a positive way, develop acceptance, and become more compassionate. With practice and patience we can help create a positive change for us and the people around us.

One thing that I do and that I recommend is to explain it, and engage in a different way, based on the type of person or audience you have in front of you.

This is for me the ultimate meaning of happiness. Live in harmony and be content with what we have no matter where we are and what the problem we are facing, in every moment of our life.

Federico Foli©

-- 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 1 hour ago.

STOCKS FALL, GOLD GETS CRUSHED: Here's what you need to know (SHLD, GLD, GLX, SPY, SPX, DJI, IXIC, GSPC, IWIM, TLT, TLO, DRI, GOOGL)

October 4, 2016, 1:22 pm

≫ Next: What Will $4 Billion In Taxes Pay For?

≪ Previous: Training the Mind. A practical approach to achieving happiness in life and at work

$

0

0

Stocks closed lower, gold tanked below $1,300 an ounce as the dollar rose, and Treasuries fell on Tuesday.

The British pound dropped to a 31-year low against the US dollar after UK Prime Minister Theresa May said the legal proceedings to leave the European Union will kick in no later than the end of March 2017. The pound fell to a three-year low against the euro.

First, the scoreboard:

· Dow: 18,129.96, -123.89, (-0.68%)
· S&P 500: 2,145.76, -15.44, (-0.71%)
· Nasdaq: 5,277.28, -23.59, (-0.45%)
· Gold: $1,270.05, -42.65, (-3.25%)
· 10-year yield: 1.685%, +0.061

1. Sears Holdings has received bids for its Craftsman tool business, Bloomberg reported. Stanley Black & Decker and Hong Kong-based Techtronic Industries have made bids for the business, according to sources close to the matter. The company has been in turmoil, shutting down stores and bleeding profit. It shares jumped by as much as 17% on the news. 
2. Darden Restaurants, the owner of chains including Olive Garden, reported higher-than-expected earnings and guidance for its first fiscal quarter of 2017. But amid falling traffic and other ongoing challenges the restaurant industry faces, CEO Gene Lee said "we're not assuming the industry is going to get a whole lot better" during the company's earnings call. 
3. South Carolina became the fifth state to have only one company offering health insurance through its Affordable Care Act exchange. The South Carolina Department of Insurance announced that Blue Cross Blue Shield of South Carolina will be the sole provider for residents looking to get covered through the ACA, better known as Obamacare, according to The Post and Courier. Aetna and United Healthcare announced earlier this year that they would withdraw from the state's exchanges. 
4. The IMF cut its US growth forecast. In its latest World Economic Outlook, the IMF said that a drop in U.S. growth for 2016 due to a weak first-half performance would be offset by strengthening in Japan, Germany, Russia, India and some other emerging markets.
5. Google is going all in on the hardware business. The company unveiled the Pixel smartphone to rival the iPhone, the smart Google Home speaker to tackle Amazon's Echo, the Google Wifi router, and the Daydream View, a virtual reality headset. 

*Additionally:*

2.5 million Americans are leaving money on the table while buying health insurance

There's more evidence Vancouver's housing bubble is bursting

These 9 charts could define the future of America's workforce

Here's JPMorgan's comprehensive guide to markets for the rest of 2016

Manhattan's housing market is slowing down

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: KRUGMAN: The richest Americans should have a tax rate over 70% Reported by Business Insider 42 minutes ago.

What Will $4 Billion In Taxes Pay For?

October 4, 2016, 2:16 pm

≫ Next: Uninsured rates in Silicon Valley cities near bottom in nation

≪ Previous: STOCKS FALL, GOLD GETS CRUSHED: Here's what you need to know (SHLD, GLD, GLX, SPY, SPX, DJI, IXIC, GSPC, IWIM, TLT, TLO, DRI, GOOGL)

$

0

0

Thanks to The New York Times, we learned what we have long suspected: Donald Trump has not been paying income tax.

He claims to have made $10 billion. Let's take him at his word. Someone earning that much money should owe the American people a lot of taxes.

What would $4 billion pay for?

1. That money would cover the salaries of 7,407 teachers at $54,000 a year for 10 years.

2. Because Trump did not pay his fair share, every family of four in New York City had to fork out an extra $1904. So if Trump "settles up," it could mean a substantial tax refund for everyone else.

3. Trump's unpaid taxes are enough to purchase 20 million new laptop computers, one for every single student in the United States in both middle school and high school.

4. Donald Trump "says" he likes police officers. New York City employs 34,000 of them. His missing taxes could have either given them each a $11,764 raise every year for 10 years, or paid the salaries for 9,520 new officers at $42,000/year for the same period.

5. Donald Trump "claims" he loves veterans and wants to spend more on their health care. The $4 billion would have allowed the government to employ 3,636 additional VA doctors for 10 years (at a tier 2 salary of $110,000/year). Alternatively, it means $1,600 (in today's dollars) less in the the pensions of all 2.5 million soldiers that served in Iraq and Afghanistan. This equates to a pension loss of about $10,000 per veteran at retirement age.

6. Trump's missing taxes would have paid for 4 years of in-state college tuition for 109,421 Americans, or 2 years at a community college for 597,550 students.

7. If spent on infrastructure, it would pay for 1,000 new miles of 4-lane rural highways, or 350 miles of urban highways. Or, it could build a brand new state-of-the-art bridge across the Hudson River, something to consider the next time you're stuck in traffic.

8. It would be enough for health insurance at $250/month ($3,000/year) for 133,333 people for 10 years. Nearly 45,000 people die every year from preventable causes due to lack of health insurance according to a Harvard study. That $4 billion, if spent on health insurance, would have saved the lives of 1,250 Americans. To put it differently, 1,250 Americans are dead because one petty man has thus far, avoided paying his taxes.

Of course, the number of teachers, doctors and police officers that could have been hired is much larger, because they indeed will be paying 25-30 percent of their salaries back in taxes.

Instead, we are all on the hook because Donald Trump has stiffed America with the bill. Trump has been able to use that money to buy things like golden baby strollers and bathrooms, and he wants to repeal the "estate tax" so he can pass on his million dollar toilets to his children (currently the estate tax only applies to the very wealthy with estates over $5.4 million).

Donald Trump has a long history of conning his clients. We have now learned that he may have essentially done the same thing to every single American. Is this the man we really want to hand the reigns of power to?

Dan Rosenberg has travelled to over 40 countries across the globe, reporting on news and culture for various publications and media outlets, including The Times (London), The Huffington Post, Islands, The Rough Guides, Afropop Worldwide, NPR, the CBC, and PRI's "The World."

-- 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 1 day ago.

Uninsured rates in Silicon Valley cities near bottom in nation

October 4, 2016, 2:31 pm

≫ Next: HUFFPOST HILL - 'Square Off' Imbued With New Meaning Tonight

≪ Previous: What Will $4 Billion In Taxes Pay For?

$

0

0

When it comes to health insurance, Silicon Valley's biggest city has it covered. San Jose has the seventh-lowest uninsured rate in the country among cities with at least 300,000 residents, according to a new report from personal finance site WalletHub. Just 2.2 percent of children and 7.2 percent of adults lacked health insurance in 2015, collectively an 8.6 percent decline since 2010 in the uninsured population. Currently, the national uninsured rate is 8.6 percent, a record low according to… Reported by bizjournals 1 day ago.