Well, I’m still waiting for the Obama administration to come in during the last weeks so he can castigate the potheads and dirty hippies and so forth. It would be nice if Boxer and Obama would remain neutral, at least, if they don’t have the courage to actually end the new prohibition and they clearly don’t…

But to stray off topic for a moment: Where is your comment on healthcare topics? First, where is your comment on the Sebelius letter to the health insurers and two, a recent republican attempt to strip health care funding from a recent bill?

Here’s the email I got today:

Dear Supporter:

Democrats in Congress are continuing to work to create jobs in America and support small businesses. As the Small Business Jobs Act (H.R. 5297) comes to a vote in Congress next week, Republicans are trying to use it as an opportunity to repeal and weaken the new health care law. Senator Johanns (R-NE) has offered an amendment to undercut two core provisions of the Affordable Care Act: preventative health care and shared responsibility.1

Click here and call your Senators and tell them to vote NO on the Johanns Amendment.

While we are all familiar with their anti-reform campaign rhetoric, this is the opposition’s first concrete legislative attempt to repeal the new health care law. Their tactic is to steal important funding away from some key provisions. This is why it is so important that we defeat this amendment now.

Fight back against subversive Republican tactics to repeal reform. Call your Senators today and tell them to vote NO on the Johanns Amendment and protect crucial funding of the new law.

The insurance companies and their Congressional allies will continue to take every opportunity available to prevent the new law from fulfilling its promise. We will fight them at every turn. We will not let Republicans use tactics like this amendment to raise the cost of health insurance premiums while leaving 2 million more people uninsured.2

Click here and call your Senators today. Show them that we will not stand by while enemies of reform side with the corporate interests against the people.

In Solidarity,

Melinda Gibson
Health Care for America Now

1. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d111:175:./temp/~bdAW4A::|/home/LegislativeData.php|

2. http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=32

I mean, I think I can predict what you’re going to say and there’s been some comment from the Consumer Watchdog but no one in the nation has better background than you on this issue. Please write something so that I know what to think. It won’t be popular. Booman won’t like it because it will be a downer. But you’ll be right. That’s all I care about.

Philip Shropshire
http://www.threeriversonline.com

PS: No I didn’t call anybody. That’s where I’m at right now. I’m rooting for the republicans to strip mandated buy ins for health care…

CNN says Whitman has spent more than $110 million of her own money on the campaign. (Brown’s campaign says more than $125 million.)

If I lived in California, I would go to the polls explicitly to vote in favor of Prop 19. I would also vote for some Greens. For Boxer, I might write in Public Option.

Brown and Boxer are each the lesser of two evils. I’m getting tired of that scenario.

Were it not for Prop 19, I might be inclined to stay home, I think.

There was lots of anecdotal evidence of folks showing up to the June primary in order to vote for 19, so hopefully they will come back, and bring a friend.

Looks like the alcohol industry in California is upset that they might face some competition from a safer alternative. The California Beer & Beverage Distributors just donated $10,000 to defeat Proposition 19.

Alcohol causes an estimated $38 billion in costs in California each year from emergency room visits, arrests, etc, according to the Marin Institute. There are roughly 3,500 deaths annually from alcohol-related illness and more than 109,000 alcohol-related injuries in California. Conversely, pot caused 181 emergency room visits in 2008, according to a study by the non-partisan RAND Corporation, despite being used by more than four million Californians monthly.

The California Narcotic Officers’ Association – which has 7,000 members who are “local, state, and federal peace officers, prosecutors, law enforcement personnel, and other national and international associates” – are even bigger donors to the No on Prop. 19 campaign. They donated $20,500 back in July.

The California Narcotic Officers’ Association – which has 7,000 members who are local, state, and federal peace officers, prosecutors, law enforcement personnel

Please. It’s been a long time since most cops and especially Narcs were “peace officers”.

Prop 19 is More Popular Than Any Politician in California

Given the current crops of both politicians and issues, can’t say I’m surprised.

The fact that Proposition 19 has more Facebook “likes” than Meg Whitman is remarkable when you consider that Whitman has so far spent over $80 million on her campaign while less than half a million has been spent supporting Prop 19.

and…

CNN says Whitman has spent more than $110 million of her own money on the campaign. (Brown’s campaign says more than $125 million.)

Bmull, guess that means the Beatles were right after all… Money can’t buy you love (in Meg’s case)

The California Attorney General’s race is the interesting one here. Both candidates (D-Harris, and R-Cooley) oppose Prop 19. Cooley even opposes medical marijuana. But Cooley is ironically much more sensible on civil liberties. Harris is a huge fan of three strikes, and also of the slew of Jessicas/Marcys/Megans/Cheleas/etc laws that have turned our criminal justice system into our own version of Sharia law.

That came from their their site. I edited my comment to put their description of their organization in quotes.

I know what you’re talking about, though. I’ve been to many protests and have seen police destroy personal property, recklessly charge into crowds on horseback, spray people in the face with pepper spray while they were calmly standing and listening to a speaker, and threaten people with arrest for simply asking, “Why are you arresting this person?” It’s scary how police have free rein to attack people.

And whenever the police instigate trouble, it ends up on the news as, “Protesters out of control!” – with accompanying video of DFHs and someone being dragged away who decided to either resist arrest or give the “peace officer” a piece of their mind.

I had family tell me, “You guys must have had it coming” when I once tried to explain how police had – without warning – randomly started pepper spraying and arresting protesters while we were all standing around, waiting for the speeches to end so we could go home. I guess they wanted to create a spectacle for the media before we got away. When I called a local news station to give our side, I was told, “We already talked to the police. They told us what happened. If we have any more questions about what happened, we’ll ask them.”

The day after Election Day should be very interesting if Prop 19 wins.

And I think it will.

Who ya gonna call?

Until Jon can get to it here’s my thoughts on the Johanns amendment:

1) The amendment is only one paragraph, which repeals a 1099 reporting requirement for business purchases which was part of the ACA. Just about everybody agrees this provision will create a significant paperwork burden for businesses.

2) The problem is that the 1099 provision is projected to generate over $17 billion in tax revenue over 10 years. If you take out the provision you have to find $17 billion to keep the small business bill deficit neutral.

3) The payfors that have been selected include reducing the affordabiliy exemption in the ACA from 8% to 5% of income. This would essentially nullify the individual mandate since it’s not possible for most middle class people to buy health insurance for less than 5% of income. This actually saves just a few billion but it’s in there as a political sweetener. The main place they want to get money is by eliminating a $15 billion preventive care trust fund, which critics say is unnecessary.

4) The Obama administration is strongly against this amendment, so if it passed it would be a huge rebuke. I don’t see 19 Senate Dems crossing party lines to weaken the mandate that they voted for earlier this year. They might however take some money from the preventive care fund.

5) I don’t care if the mandate is weakened, but I’d be opposed if money was taken from preventive care and given to businesses.

Steelydan, Thanks for the heads up on the Sebalius letter. Wow, Sebalius’s letter is such a blatantly political letter, some of her words will come back and kick the Administration’s ass. For example:

“The Affordable Care Act includes a number of provisions to provide Americans with access to health coverage that will be there when they need it. These provisions were fully supported by AHIP and its member companies”.
I’m SHOCKED, I thought the President and Congress were fighting the insurers?

“the trends in health costs, independent of the legislation, have slowed. Employers’ premiums for family coverage increased by only 3 percent in 2010 – a significant drop from previous years”.
So why was it so urgent to pass the bill this year (and then wait 4 years to provide universal coverage)?

“Any premium increases will be moderated by out-of-pocket savings resulting from the law. These savings include a reduction in the “hidden tax” on insured Americans that subsidizes care for the uninsured.”
Errr, wasn’t Sebelius supposed to be arguing that the premium increases are unjustified? Why would insurers discount their 2011 premiums because of new coverage of the uninsured beginning in 2014?

Finally, and this irked me to no end, the President made a fetish of limiting the 10 year cost of the HCRto $1 trillion (that’s why the bill waits 4 years to start up the exchanges and insurer subsidies, to keep it up under that arbitrary $1 trill. cap). Sebelius writes… “today, increased sickness and lack of coverage security reduce economic output by $260 billion per year.”
Over 10 years, this means a $3 trillion “uninsurance” tax on our economy. That was your talking point idiots, any HCR reform plan costing less than that is a tax cut.

You hominids love your drugs more than your pols, it seems. If “I would go to the polls explicitly to vote in favor of Prop 19. I would also vote for some Greens,” is a typical voter reaction, the increased turnout will make–how much difference?

“Looks like the alcohol industry in California is upset that they might face some competition from a safer alternative. The California Beer & Beverage Distributors just donated $10,000 to defeat Proposition 19.”

Is now a good time to mention that the alcohol lobbies (beer and liquor, working in unison) were leading opponents of women’s sufferage? I know they won’t give a reason for their donation, but I’d love to see them try and moralize it.

There are actually dozens of pro-Prop 19 sites on Facebook, & very few against. The Gold Rush made California great, so now get ready for the GREEN RUSH! Join the movement here: http://facebook.com/YesOnCAProp19/