Racism Re-visited

 

DESPICABLE!  Need we say more?  YES.  It was not just the outfit, or that a clown was wearing it, it was the remarks over the loudspeaker that put this whole matter into the area of racism.

According to CNN, a voice was heard over the loudspeaker working up the crowd and saying, "We're going to stomp Obama now."
The remarks were carried over the loudspeaker system, but were made by a rodeo clown.
"As soon as this bull comes out, Obama, don't you move," the voice said. "He's going to getcha, getcha getcha, getcha."
"Hey, I know I'm a clown," the voice said. "He's just running around acting like one. Doesn't know he is one."

This is mockery.  This is wholly uncalled for.  This is blatant bigotry.  But it’s not the only time we have seen it, either covertly or discretely displayed.  Let us take stock of this pernicious movement to mock and demean our President.

Joe Conason wrote in a recent NY Times article the following:

“What made so many of us proud of our country on Jan. 20, 2009, has increasingly provoked expressions of hatred from the far right. That is troubling, but not nearly as troubling as the behavior of conservatives who excuse, embolden or simply pretend to ignore the bigots surrounding them.  But this summer has seen several loud and ugly outbursts of very real racism—including threats of violence against the president of the United States—that go well beyond the utterance of any single word. As if suffering from a facial tic, leading figures on the right cannot seem to suppress their inner Klansman these days.”

It is perhaps safe to say, as one commentator did, that “white antipathy toward the President has brought forth an outbreak of racism not experienced at such a level since the 1950s and '60s. Joe Conason has put his finger right on it. These people commit acts that demean the President as a black man. They are racist actions, pure and simple.”

Let us revisit some of the outright mockery and bigotry that has shown itself in the years of Mr. Obama’s Presidency.

1)  Obama is not a U.S. citizen. It is perhaps the “birthers,” and their tales of conspiracy, that have garnered the most attention.  Because of this fact, we do not need to delve into this topic very deeply to know that this is racist bigotry that tries to display a black man as a foreigner who is not one of “us,” and who is therefore not worthy of the Presidency.  Birthers have consistently refused to accept as valid the documentation released by Obama that shows that he was born in Hawaii. Why is this racist? New York Times columnist Timothy Egan explained that the birther movement “has little to do with reality and everything to do with the strangeness of Obama’s background — especially his race."

Here is a somewhat stranger version of this whole birther topic, told on a blog that claims to be an Obama Timeline.  Note the attempts to attack the birth of Barack Obama by demeaning his father and his mother, as well as indicating that he was not a natural born citizen of the U.S.A.  Wonder how the author would evaluate Senator Ted Cruz’s dual citizenship status?  Is he too, “arguably not a natural born citizen?”

Part I of The Obama Timeline
”Barack Obama Jr. is born on August 4, 1961 to Stanley Ann Dunham (1942–1995). Ann Dunham… had married Obama’s father, Barack Obama, Sr. (1936–1982), on February 2, 1961. Obama, Sr., a pro-Soviet Marxist, was a Kenyan studying at the University of Hawaii. Dunham met him in a Russian language class in the fall of 1960, as he was starting his second year at the university and she was beginning her first. Obama, Sr., an Arab-African Muslim by birth, but an atheist by admission, already had two children with a woman in Kenya named Kezia (b. 1938). The senior Obama may or may not have been legally married to Kezia. Some have speculated that their marriage was only a tribal marriage, and therefore not legally recognized. Depending on his marital status in Kenya, Obama’s marriage to Dunham may not therefore have been legal.
Obama states he was born in Honolulu, Hawaii. If that is the case, he was then both an American citizen and a British citizen at birth because his father was a citizen of the protectorate of British East Africa. Because the region had, in 1961, not yet declared its independence from Great Britain, Obama was, like his father, a British citizen under Section 32(1) of the British Nationality Act of 1948. Both Obama, Sr. and Obama, Jr. then automatically became citizens of Kenya when that independent nation was formed in 1963. Obama’s British/Kenyan citizenship automatically expired when he turned age 21, but he was born with dual citizenship and split loyalties, and thus was arguably not a natural born citizen of the United States.”  

2)  Obama is a Muslim.  This rumor became widespread around the time Obama first announced his run for president. The argument was that he attended a Muslim school in his youth and that his father was a radical Muslim. Various photos featuring Obama wearing Muslim-influenced clothing helped fuel this rumor.  A more specific charge was that, while living in Indonesia as a child, Barack Obama attended a Madrassa (Muslim school) for 4 years. 

Nadra Kareem Nittle, at About.com Guide, comments:
“Rumors about Obama being a Muslim persist, despite his declarations to the contrary and the very public scandal surrounding his former minister the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. NPR senior news analyst Cokie Roberts faults racism. She remarked on ABC’s ‘This Week’ that a fifth of Americans believe Obama’s a Muslim because it’s unacceptable to say, ‘I don’t like him ’cause he’s black.’ On the other hand, ‘it’s acceptable to dislike him because he’s a Muslim,’ she declared.
Like the birther movement, the Muslim conspiracy movement attempts to highlight the fact that this president is different. He has a ‘funny name,’ a so-called ‘exotic upbringing’ and Kenyan heritage. Rather than point out their distaste for these differences, some members of the public and of the opposition Party find it convenient to label Obama a Muslim, which serves to marginalize him and undermine his fitness to lead the nation.” 

3) Obama as subhuman or animalistic.  Nadra Kittle also points to this example of racial bigotry and states:
“Before and after his election to the presidency, Barack Obama has been painted time and time again as subhuman in graphics, email transmissions and posters used to undermine him. While it’s nothing new for politicians to be turned into caricatures, the ones used to criticize Obama frequently have racial overtones. The president has been portrayed as a shoeshine man, an Islamic terrorist and a chimp, to name a few. The image of his altered face has been shown on a product called Obama Waffles in the manner of Aunt

Jemima and Uncle Ben. The depictions of Obama as ape-like have arguably sparked the most controversy, considering that blacks have been portrayed as monkey-like for centuries to suggest that they’re inferior to other groups. Still, when Marilyn Davenport, an elected official in the Republican Party of Orange County, Calif.,

circulated an email depicting Obama and his parents as chimps, she initially defended the image as political satire.”  Underneath the picture was written: "Now you know why — No birth certificate!"

“What did the Fox News host, Glenn Beck, mean, exactly, when he shrieked: ‘It’s like the damned Planet of the Apes. Nothing makes sense!’ Is there any other way to explain the grotesque new best-seller by radio host Laura Ingraham, ‘The Obama Diaries,’ where, among other things, she depicts first lady Michelle Obama eating ribs at every meal?

Similar symptoms of this spiritual sickness can be seen across the country now, even in amusement parks and church carnivals, where small children are being exposed.
“At the Big Time fair held by Our Lady of Mount Carmel in Roseto, Pa., a game called ‘Alien Attack’ featured ‘an image of a suited black man holding a health care bill and wearing a belt buckle with a presidential seal,‘ at which players were encouraged to aim their popguns. Anybody who hit the cardboard figure in the head or the heart could win a prize. Irvin L. Good Jr., owner of Goodtime Amusements denied that the figure represents Mr. Obama.”

“Meanwhile on the New Jersey shore, patrons of the Seaside Heights boardwalk could hurl baseballs at a black, jug-eared Obama figurine, winning a prize if they managed to smash it. As seen in a video posted on the Gawker website, this object closely resembles the grinning “lawn jockey” statuettes that used to festoon suburban lawns in a less decent era.”

The Arizona Republic reported that hundreds of dissenters chose to model their insulting and extremist behavior before some of Phoenix's youngest residents. Assembled outside Desert Vista High School, they mocked Obama's race, singing "Bye Bye Black Sheep" in spirited synchronization. One "patriot" went so far as to deprecate our commander in chief by pronouncing him "47 percent Negro," while another, held a sign that read, "Impeach the Half-White Muslim!"

4)  Obama as lazy or incompetent.
Former Clinton Advisor and current Fox political Advisor, Dick Morris, claimed as early as December 18, 2006 on FOX that Obama had never introduced a Bill in Congress.
Obama had been the primary sponsor on 152 Bills. Additionally, more than 14 bills that Obama had sponsored or co-sponsored have become law.
This accusation has raised it head many times, by many personages, saying that the President doesn’t work with Congress, that he takes too many vacations, that he leads from “behind,” that he frittered away chances to help rebels in Libya, Syria, now Egypt and who knows where else!  His latest vacation respite in Martha’s Vineyard produced many comments about his withdrawal from world events (especially in Egypt).

The attempt by Daryl Issa and his committee to pin certain scandals on the President basically went nowhere, but served to embolden already bigoted attitudes about incompetency.  The only “scandal” that has struck a viable chord surrounds the collection of phone and email records by the NSA, and that has more to do with laws passed by the Congress and a tendency of “spy” networks to keep things secret than it does with some sort of incompetency on the part of the President.  It raises the issue of individual liberties versus national security and is a conundrum we must all address. 

5) Barack Obama has ties with terrorists.
ALLEGATION: Obama is sympathetic to domestic terrorists, since his home in Chicago is in the same neighborhood as 60's radical William Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn, and the two have also worked together. Ayers and Dohrn, former members of the radical Weather Underground, a group that carried out a string of bombings of federal buildings, spent 10 years as fugitives before all charges were eventually dropped. Ayers and Dohrn both eventually became professors in Chicago.
FACTS: In 1985, Obama worked on the Developing Communities Project, a Chicago group which tried to empower the poor through grass roots organization and is based on the community organizing tradition of Marxist Saul Alinsky. Alinsky was friends for a time with Al Capone, and his followers included Cesar Chavez and several anti-Vietnam protesters. 
Starting in 1995, Ayers and Obama worked with the non-profit Chicago Annenberg Challenge on a vast school improvement project, which invited cities to compete for $50 million grants to improve public education. While Ayers was working to bring the grant to Chicago, Obama was recruited onto the board. Additionally, from 1999 through 2001, both Ayers and Obama were board members on the Woods Fund, a charitable foundation...” 

6)  Not only is he flawed, but he is power-hungry and violence-prone.
“In high school, playing basketball offered him some companionship, though he often felt he didn’t completely belong with his peers. To try to fit in, he also tried drinking, smoking pot, and experimenting with cocaine.”

“The Obama administration has already launched six times as many drone strikes as the Bush administration in Pakistan alone, killing hundreds of innocent people and devastating families
“By signing the ‘anti-terror’ bill the president could end up being worse than his Republican predecessor on civil liberties.” (Obama Fact Sheet PAKALERT Press.com)

In a Monday, July 15, 2013 Post by Spandan C, he writes that David J. Sirota (an American liberal political commentator and radio host based in Denver; a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist, Democratic political spokesperson, and blogger) is trying to say that Barack Obama is hunting down Arabs, just as Zimmerman hunted down Trayvon because of his skin color.  He is equating the black president's actions in war with an armed vigilante's pursuit and murder of an unarmed teenager because he presumed guilt by skin color. And in that equation not so subtly lies the thinly veiled caricature of black men as violent, vindictive, indiscriminate killers.”

7)  There are some who just say bad things about him and his race.

“You lie” was one.  “He hates white people” is another.  But, perhaps nothing tops it off like the November 10, 2012 private Facebook slur about President Obama that got a California woman fired and reported to the U.S. Secret Service.  The inflammatory and racist comments by Denise Helms, age 22, prompted management at Cold Stone Creamery to terminate her employment over her offensive comments and the public’s backlash.  The racial slur was posted on her Facebook page shortly after Obama won a second term over Mitt Romney: "And another 4 years of the (n-----). Maybe he will get assassinated this term..!!"

Some Conclusions:

Three of the Most Racist Anti-Obama Political Attacks
By Nadra Kareem Nittle, About.com Guide

“When the president’s opponents use racial stereotypes to undermine him or suggest that he’s lying about his origins because he’s different—biracial, bred outside of the continental U.S. and born to a Kenyan father with a ‘strange name‘—an undercurrent of racism is often at play. As former President Jimmy Carter said in 2009: ‘When a radical fringe element of demonstrators …begin to attack the president of the United States as an animal or as a reincarnation of Adolf Hitler…people who are guilty of that kind of personal attack against Obama have been influenced to a major degree by a belief that he should not be president because he happens to be African American‘.”

Monday, August 16, 2010
Racists Called Out by Joe Conason (writes for the New York Observer).
“The depths of the racism being expressed by today's right wing is consistent with its white nationalist history.  We are at the stage we were in the 1950s and '60s in terms of expressed white antipathy toward the nation having a black president. In the Reagan years a majority voted for Reagan because of his miserable record on racism. Out of power, many of these white nationalists are desperate. And today, they are buttressed by Fox News, talk radio and the Internet where even the most extreme white supremacists are able to organize and spread propaganda.  It is time for conservatives to step up and denounce the racism that is again disfiguring our country in their name.”

I offer my own conclusion by way of a personal experience.  On Thursday, August 22, 2013, I had the privilege of meeting, shaking hands with, and having a picture taken with,  President Barack Obama.  I searched for the ill-bred, animalistic, incompetent, power-hungry, white race-hater and lazy personage that right wing bigots keep spewing forth about this man.  Instead, I found a warm, engaging, sincere person of substance who appeared to have none of the flaws attributed to him.  Laziness was certainly not part of his grueling schedule for that day!  With some politicians, you can sense right away that they are not sincere or at least not interested in you or what you have to say.  Not so with President Obama.  He focused on me with laser sharpness, and made it clear that he appreciated the work that the organization I represented had done, and he thanked me for my leadership.  I am convinced from meeting him, and from all that I know about him from books, policies, videos, news reports and interviews, plus reports from people close to him, that this is a man of value, virtue and veracity, unlike so many of the politicians, pundits and nay-sayers who spew their venom at him whenever they get the chance. 

It is fair to ask, I think, how many of these haters and bigots have ever even met, or talked with, the President?  If they have not, then on what basis do they make personal judgments about him?  (Policy judgments and criticisms are one thing; personal attacks another thing entirely!).  Can anything they say about his personal nature have any validity, since their utterances seem to be based solely on stereotypes, epithets, and prejudices about the color of his skin? 

50 Years ago, Martin Luther King, Jr. said:

“I say to you today, my friends, even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

When segments of our society – especially the Right-Wing -- cannot bring themselves to respect the President of the United States because of his skin color, that dream has not been realized.

When the President of the United States, our Commander-in-Chief, is burdened and festooned with the hatred and disrespect of  a bigoted segment of our population because of his skin color, the day of fair judgment based on character has not arrived.

The work of obtaining equal freedom, equal justice and equal rights is not the burden of one race alone; it is the mission of all races working together for the betterment of humankind.

Affordable Care Act Update

On it’s website, the IRS reminds us:  “The Affordable Care Act was enacted on March 23, 2010. It contains some tax provisions that are in effect and more that will be implemented during the next several years.” Just what provisions have taken effect, and what is to come?  The following is a list of provisions for which the IRS or HHS has issued proposed and/or final guidance.  It is provided here simply as a guide and a summary which hopefully will bring some perspective to the debate about what it contains.

1)    Beginning in 2011, insurance companies were required to spend a specified percentage of premium dollars on medical care and quality improvement activities, meeting a medical loss ratio (MLR) standard. Insurance companies that are not meeting the MLR standard will be required to provide rebates to their consumers beginning in 2012.
2)    Reporting Employer Provided Health Coverage in Form W-2
The Affordable Care Act requires employers to report the cost of coverage under an employer-sponsored group health plan on an employee’s Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement, in Box 12, using Code DD. Many employers are eligible for transition relief for tax-year 2012 and beyond, until the IRS issues final guidance for this reporting requirement.  The amount reported does not affect tax liability
3)    Additional Medicare Tax
A new Additional Medicare Tax goes into effect starting in 2013. The 0.9 percent Additional Medicare Tax applies to an individual’s wages, Railroad Retirement Tax Act compensation, and self-employment income that exceeds a threshold amount based on the individual’s filing status. The threshold amounts are $250,000 for married taxpayers who file jointly, $125,000 for married taxpayers who file separately, and $200,000 for all other taxpayers. An employer is responsible for withholding the Additional Medicare Tax from wages or compensation it pays to an employee in excess of $200,000 in a calendar year.
4)    Small Business Health Care Tax Credit
This new credit helps small businesses and small tax-exempt organizations afford the cost of covering their employees and is specifically targeted for those with low- and moderate-income workers. The credit is designed to encourage small employers to offer health insurance coverage for the first time or maintain coverage they already have. In general, the credit is available to small employers that pay at least half the cost of single coverage for their employees.
5)    Health Flexible Spending Arrangements
Effective Jan. 1, 2011, the cost of an over-the-counter medicine or drug cannot be reimbursed from Flexible Spending Arrangements (FSAs) or health reimbursement arrangements unless a prescription is obtained. The change does not affect insulin, even if purchased without a prescription, or other health care expenses such as medical devices, eye glasses, contact lenses, co-pays and deductibles. This standard applies only to purchases made on or after Jan. 1, 2011. A similar rule went into effect on Jan. 1, 2011, for Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), and Archer Medical Savings Accounts (Archer MSAs).
6)    Changes to Itemized Deduction for Medical Expenses
Beginning Jan. 1, 2013, you can claim deductions for medical expenses not covered by your health insurance when they reach 10 percent of your adjusted gross income. This change affects your 2013 tax return that you will file in 2014. There is a temporary exemption from Jan. 1, 2013, to Dec. 31, 2016, for individuals age 65 and older and their spouses
7)    Health Coverage for Older Children
Health coverage for an employee's children under 27 years of age is now generally tax-free to the employee. This expanded health care tax benefit applies to various work place and retiree health plans.
8)    Excise Tax on Indoor Tanning Services
A 10-percent excise tax on indoor UV tanning services went into effect on July 1, 2010. Payments are made along with Form 720, Quarterly Federal Excise Tax Return. The tax doesn't apply to phototherapy services performed by a licensed medical professional on his or her premises. There's also an exception for certain physical fitness facilities that offer tanning as an incidental service to members without a separately identifiable fee.
9)    Adoption Credit
For tax years 2010 and 2011, the Affordable Care Act raised the maximum adoption credit per child and the credit was refundable
10)    Medicare Shared Savings Program
The Affordable Care Act establishes a Medicare shared savings program (MSSP) which encourages Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) to facilitate cooperation among providers to improve the quality of care provided to Medicare beneficiaries and reduce unnecessary costs.
11)    Qualified Therapeutic Discovery Project Program
This program was designed to provide tax credits and grants to small firms that show significant potential to produce new and cost-saving therapies, support U.S. jobs and increase U.S. competitiveness.  Submission of certification applications began June 21, 2010, and applications had to be postmarked no later than July 21, 2010, to be considered for the program.
12)    Medicare Part D Coverage Gap “donut hole” Rebate
The Affordable Care Act provides a one-time $250 rebate in 2010 to assist Medicare Part D recipients who have reached their Medicare drug plan’s coverage gap. This payment is not taxable. This payment is not made by the IRS
13)    Additional Requirements for Tax-Exempt Hospitals
The Affordable Care Act added new requirements for charitable hospitals. On June 22, 2012, the IRS issued proposed regulations which provide information on the requirements for charitable hospitals relating to financial assistance and emergency medical care policies, charges for emergency or medically necessary care provided to individuals eligible for financial assistance, and billing and collections.
On April 3, 2013, the IRS issued proposed regulations on the requirement that charitable hospitals conduct community health needs assessments (CHNAs) and adopt implementation strategies at least once every three years. The proposed regulations also discuss the related excise tax and reporting requirements for charitable hospitals and the consequences for failure to satisfy the requirements.
14)    Annual Fee on Branded Prescription Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Importers
The Affordable Care Act created an annual fee payable beginning in 2011 by certain manufacturers and importers of brand name pharmaceuticals.
15)    Limitation on Deduction for Compensation Paid by Certain Health Insurance Providers
The Affordable Care Act amended section 162(m) of the Code to limit the compensation deduction available to certain health insurance providers. The amendment goes into effect for taxable years beginning after Dec. 31, 2012.
16)    Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute Fee
The Affordable Care Act imposes the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) fee. Funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund, the institute will assist patients, clinicians, purchasers and policy-makers in making informed health decisions by advancing clinical effectiveness research. The trust fund will be funded in part by fees paid by issuers of certain health insurance policies and sponsors of certain self-insured health plans
17)    Retiree Drug Subsidies
Under § 139A of the Internal Revenue Code, certain special subsidy payments for retiree drug coverage made under the Social Security Act  are not included in the gross income of plan sponsors. Plan sponsors receive these retiree drug subsidy payments based on the allowable retiree costs for certain qualified retiree prescription drug plans. For taxable years beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2013, new statutory rules affect the ability of plan sponsors to deduct costs that are reimbursed through these subsidies.

One of the things we tend to forget about the ACA is that many provisions will not take effect until 2014 or later, right up to 2020.  So here are some of the important items that are yet to come, and presumably, Republican Radicals will want none of them to be realized!

Effective 2014 and beyond (thanks to Wikipedia, IRS, and other sources)
1)    Health Insurance Premium Tax Credit
Starting in 2014, individuals and families can take a new premium tax credit to help them afford health insurance coverage purchased through an Affordable Insurance Exchange. The premium tax credit is refundable so taxpayers who have little or no income tax liability can still benefit. The credit also can be paid in advance to a taxpayer’s insurance company to help cover the cost of premiums.
2)    Individual Shared Responsibility Provision
Starting in 2014, the Individual Shared Responsibility provision calls for each individual to either have minimum essential health coverage (minimum essential coverage) for each month, qualify for an exemption, or make a payment when filing his or her federal income tax return. Notice 2013-42, issued on June 26, 2013, provides transition relief from the shared responsibility provision for employees and their families who are eligible to enroll in certain employer-sponsored health plans with a plan year other than a calendar year if the plan year begins in 2013 and ends in 2014.

 

Effective January 1, 2014
·    Insurers are prohibited from discriminating against or charging higher rates for any individual based on pre-existing medical conditions or gender.
·    Insurers are prohibited from establishing annual spending caps of dollar amounts on essential health benefits.
·    Under the mandatory coverage provision, individuals who are not covered by an acceptable insurance policy will be charged an annual penalty of $95, or up to 1% of income over the filing minimum, whichever is greater; this will rise to a minimum of $695 ($2,085 for families), or 2.5% of income over the filing minimum, by 2016. The penalty is prorated.  Exemptions are permitted. Those who aren't covered will be assessed the penalty on their Federal tax return. In the wording of the law, a taxpayer who fails to pay the penalty "shall not be subject to any criminal prosecution or penalty" and cannot have liens or levies placed on their property, but the IRS will be able to withhold future tax refunds from them.
·    In participating states, Medicaid eligibility is expanded; all individuals with income up to 133% of the poverty line qualify for coverage, including adults without dependent children. The law also provides for a 5% "income disregard", making the effective income eligibility limit 138% of the poverty line. States may choose to increase the income eligibility limit beyond this minimum requirement.
·    Health insurance exchanges are established, and subsides for insurance premiums are given to individuals who buy a plan from an exchange and have a household income between 133% and 400% of the poverty line. Section 1401(36B) of PPACA explains that each subsidy will be provided as an advanceable, refundable tax credit and gives a formula for its calculation
·    Two federally regulated "multi-state plans" (MSP)—one of which must be offered by a non-profit insurer, and the other cannot cover abortion services—become available in some state health insurance exchanges. The MSPs must abide by the same federal regulations required of an individual state's qualified health plans on the exchanges, and must provide identical cover privileges and premiums in all states. MSPs will be phased in nationally, being available in 60% of all states in 2014, 70% in 2015, 85% in 2016, and 100% in 2017.
·    Section 2708 to the Public Health Service Act becomes effective, which prohibits patient eligibility waiting periods in excess of 90 days for group health plan coverage. The 90-day rule applies to all grandfathered and non-grandfathered group health plans and group health insurance issuers, including multiemployer health plans and single-employer group health plans pursuant to collective bargaining arrangements
·    Two years of tax credits will be offered to qualified small businesses. To receive the full benefit of a 50% premium subsidy, the small business must have an average payroll per full-time equivalent ("FTE") employee of no more than $50,000 and have no more than 25 FTEs.
·    A $2,000 per employee penalty will be imposed on employers with more than 50 full-time employees who do not offer health insurance to their full-time workers (as amended by the reconciliation bill). In July 2013, the Obama administration announced this penalty would not be enforced until January 1, 2015.
·    For employer-sponsored plans, a $2,000 maximum annual deductible is established for any plan covering a single individual or a $4,000 maximum annual deductible for any other plan (see 111HR3590ENR, section 1302). These limits can be increased under rules set in section 1302.
·    To finance part of the new spending, spending and coverage cuts are made to Medicare Advantage, the growth of Medicare provider payments are slowed (in part through the creation of a new Independent Payment Advisory Board), Medicare and Medicaid drug reimbursement rates are decreased, and other Medicare and Medicaid spending is cut.
·    Revenue is increased from a new $2,500 limit on tax-free contributions to flexible spending accounts (FSAs), which allow for payment of health costs.
·    Members of Congress and their staff are only offered health care plans through the exchanges or plans otherwise established by the bill (instead of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program that they currently use).
·    A new excise tax goes into effect that is applicable to pharmaceutical companies and is based on the market share of the company; it is expected to create $2.5 billion in annual revenue.
·    Health insurance companies become subject to a new excise tax based on their market share; the rate gradually rises between 2014 and 2018 and thereafter increases at the rate of inflation. The tax is expected to yield up to $14.3 billion in annual revenue.
·    Consumer Operated and Oriented Plans (CO-OP), which are member-governed non-profit insurers, entitled to a 5-year federal loan, are permitted to start providing health care coverage.
·    The Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act (CLASS Act) provision would have created a voluntary long-term care insurance program, but in October 2011 the Department of Health and Human Services announced that the provision was unworkable and would be dropped. The CLASS Act was repealed January 1, 2013.

Effective October 1, 2014
Federal payments to disproportionate share hospitals, which are hospitals that treat large numbers of indigent patients, are reduced. The payments will subsequently be allowed rise based on the percentage of the population that is uninsured in each state

Effective January 1, 2015
CMS begins using the Medicare fee schedule to give larger payments to physicians who provide high-quality care compared with cost.

Effective October 1, 2015
States are allowed to shift children eligible for care under the Children's Health Insurance Program to health care plans sold on their exchanges, as long as HHS approves.

Effective January 1, 2016
States are permitted to form health care choice compacts and allows insurers to sell policies in any state participating in the compact.
The threshold for itemizing medical expenses increases from 7.5% of income to 10% for seniors.

Effective January 1, 2017
A state may apply to the Secretary of Health and Human Services for a "waiver for state innovation" provided that the state passes legislation implementing an alternative health care plan meeting certain criteria. The decision of whether to grant the waiver is up to the Secretary (who must annually report to Congress on the waiver process) after a public comment period.  A state receiving the waiver would be exempt from some of the central requirements of the ACA, including the individual mandate, the creation by the state of an insurance exchange, and the penalty for certain employers not providing coverage. The state would also receive compensation equal to the aggregate amount of any federal subsidies and tax credits for which its residents and employers would have been eligible under the ACA plan. To qualify for the waiver, the state plan must provide insurance at least as comprehensive and as affordable as that required by the ACA, must cover at least as many residents as the ACA plan would, and cannot increase the federal deficit. The coverage must continue to meet the consumer protection requirements of the ACA, such as the prohibition on increasing premiums because of pre-existing conditions. A bipartisan bill sponsored by Senators Ron Wyden and Scott Brown, and supported by President Obama, proposes making waivers available in 2014 rather than 2017.

The two federally regulated "multi-state plans" (MSPs) that began being phased into state health insurance exchanges on January 1, 2014, become available in every state

Effective January 1, 2018
All existing health insurance plans must cover approved preventive care and checkups without co-payment.
A 40% excise tax on high cost ("Cadillac") insurance plans is introduced. The tax (as amended by the reconciliation bill) is on insurance premiums in excess of $27,500 (family plans) and $10,200 (individual plans), and it is increased to $30,950 (family) and $11,850 (individual) for retirees and employees in high risk professions.

Effective January 1, 2019
Medicaid extends coverage to former foster care youths who were in foster care for at least six months and are under 25 years old.

Effective January 1, 2020
The Medicare Part D coverage gap (commonly called the "donut hole") will be completely phased out and hence closed.

Wikipedia offers the following conclusion:
“The plan that ultimately became the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act consists of a combination of measures to control health care costs and an insurance expansion through public insurance (expanded Medicaid eligibility and Medicare coverage) and subsidized, regulated private insurance. The latter of these ideas forms the core of the law's insurance expansion, and it has been included in bipartisan reform proposals in the past. In particular, the idea of an individual mandate coupled with subsidies for private insurance, as an alternative to public insurance, was considered a way to get Universal Health Insurance that could win the support of the Senate. Many healthcare policy experts have pointed out that the individual mandate requirement to buy health insurance was contained in many previous proposals by Republicans for healthcare legislation, going back as far as 1989, when it was initially proposed by the politically conservative Heritage Foundation as an alternative to single-payer health care. The idea of an individual mandate was championed by Republican politicians as a market-based approach to health-care reform, on the basis of individual responsibility.”

The “combination of measures” that make up this ACT are less clear if one simply listens to commentators, or reads biased summaries, or hears cherry-picked portions of the ACT only.  Something does not add up.  According to the non-partisan IRS analysis, there is a combination of fees and fines and taxes, most of which are meant to pay for newly-minted subsidies, closing gaps like the “donut hole” and providing tax breaks and rebates for those most in need of health care insurance. Then there are measures to control health care costs, expansion of public insurance and subsidized and regulated private insurance.  But none of these appear as onerous as Republicans have claimed.  Indeed, we find that Republicans actually have supported universal health insurance and an individual mandate for coverage.  In other words, this ACT is a balanced approach to health care reform, not the socialistic, taxing debacle, threat to businesses, and attack on Medicare benefits that it has been made out to be (albeit, there is room for improvement as with any major legislation).  As usual, the prevaricating Republican radicals have led us astray and attempted to make baboons (bamboozled) of us all.
 
Republican radicals are now entirely focused on destroying all of these provisions in the ACA.  Why?  It is not simply because they oppose health care, although they do oppose the expansion of government programs (Medicare and Medicaid), and they oppose the individual mandate (which many Republicans previously proposed) as socialistic.  It is not simply because they hate the fact that President Obama achieved this landmark legislation in his first term, although they do want to destroy any legacy with which he might be credited.  All that is probably true, but too simple. 

The real reasons they have tried at least 40 times to repeal this Act is, one, because they do not want the richest 2%, and business interests, having to bear any additional tax burdens to help pay for a program that benefits the middle class and the poor.  A second real reason is because they do not want a national health care program on the books at all.  They are not in the business of enhancing the spread or influence of the national government.  They are all about diminishing, weakening, and actually destroying the power and reach of the national government in favor of a confederation of individual states that provide for each of their citizens only, unless there may be a reason for cooperation in a regional construct of some kind.  These radical conservatives do not want a strong central government, and they do not want broad-based central national programs for “undeserving” people who should take responsibility for taking care of themselves, and they do not want any interference with state laws or individual lives. 

The ACA is a fitting target because it encompasses all these elements and more.  It is fair game for their nihilistic platform.  And, above all, don’t forget, if they somehow pull off this one repeal, they will be emboldened to go after other major programs, including Social Security and Medicare, as well as Food Stamps (already on the chopping block), WIC (ditto), Head Start (ditto again), the ADA, NPR, and Planned Parenthood; and then add in: abortion choice, labor unions, separation of church and state, graduated (or progressive) income tax and gay marriages.  If you don’t see the connections here, you have missed the point of their vehement opposition!   These anarchists, these nihilists, these states’ rights Regressives are not after just one Act for repeal.  They are after the national government that provides for and protects all our nation’s citizens.  Be forewarned!

“V” Is Not Just for VICTORY

In my last post, after an essay on divisions and conflicts invented by radical Republicans,  I indicated in conclusion: “In my estimation, all of this Republican radical regression comes down to a Party without Virtue, Value or Veracity, all of which we shall review in my next posting: “V” is NOT JUST FOR VICTORY.”  Let us take stock.

Virtue = “Moral excellence and righteousness; goodness; efficacy; merit.”  Republican conservatives like to pretend that they are concerned with morality.  They tout the need for religion in the public square (like the 10 commandments on public buildings, prayer in schools, or creationism taught in schools), just as they substitute a pro-life stance for righteousness or law and order for justice, as well as a War on Drugs as a stand-in for ethics.  Yet they ignore the overwhelming message of the Old and New Testaments that the essence of religion and morality is care of vulnerable people like the poor, the widow and the orphan.  Republicans tend to ignore the essence of the Judeo-Christian message because it does not fit their “ideology.”  Take a look at the following:

Jesus made clear that God, and his own ministry, was on the side of the poor and downtrodden, by defining salvation as depending on how individuals and nations treat the poorest and most afflicted in the rather alarming parable or allegory of the Sheep and the Goats:
“When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne.  And all the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats; He will put the sheep on His right, and the goats on his left.  Then the King will say to those on His right, ‘Come, you who are blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.  For I was hungry, and you gave me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me drink; I was a stranger, and you invited me in; naked, and you clothed me; I was sick, and you visited me; I was in prison, and you came to me.’ Then the righteous will answer Him saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty, and give you drink?  And when did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or naked, and clothe you?’  “And the King will answer and say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.’”

In both the Old and New Testaments, helping the less fortunate is a message without caveats; it is simply something that must be done: a duty, an obligation, a way of life.  The overwhelming message in all these sources is that God wants it this way!  Those in positions of authority - Kings, Judges, representatives; and those who are rich -- are all responsible for the care and protection of the unfortunate, especially the poor:

[A Commandment to kings] “Open your mouth for the dumb, for the rights of all the unfortunate. Open your mouth, judge righteously, and defend the rights of the afflicted and needy.” “Woe to those who enact evil statutes, and to those who continually record unjust decisions, so as to deprive the needy of justice and rob the poor of My people of their rights…(Isa. 10:1-3)  [See my BLOG post of 4/10/2011 for much more on this topic.]

The Republican Party has lost its moral ground, and has substituted its own eviscerated version of what is of virtue. They have deserted their ethical foundation and no longer equate helping the afflicted with morality or moral excellence or with goodness.  They lack the most important virtue of all: justice for the vulnerable.  Instead they have raised to a new level the care of the rich, which turns the admonitions of scripture to be attentive to the poor and needy on its head.   Woe to them!

Value = “quality of a thing by which it is thought of as desirable, useful, important, worthy of esteem.”  The esteem with which the public holds this Congress is at an all-time low, as just 13% approved its performance at the beginning of this year.  Perhaps that is because these Republican radicals have done nothing useful or important, but have made a habit and career of being obstructionists.  They are, after all, the PARTY of NO!  Just what legislation of major importance have they passed?  Tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires?  Huge subsidies for major oil companies?  Department of Defense funding that provides more than even the Pentagon says they need?  How about 40 attempts to repeal Obamacare?  What of importance have they accomplished that is worthy of esteem?  Nothing that I can recall!  In terms of their major responsibility – to legislate – they have failed miserably! 

On the other hand, there is much evidence that their existing legislative record is undesirable, useless, unimportant and unworthy of a major political party.  On March 14th of this year, politicusUSA.com first published a list of thirty pieces of Republican legislation “that Republicans are using to destroy America” and called it “The Dirty Thirty.” (check with them for their latest update at www.politicusUSA.com).  Thanks to Senate Democrats and President Obama, very few of their legislative debacles have actually been signed into law! Here are just some of their listings:

·    A bill (HR 1179) called “Respect for Rights of Conscience Act of 2011.” The bill, introduced by Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb), allows health care providers and pharmacists to deny birth control to women if it conflicts with their religious or moral convictions.
·    Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) introduced a bill in the U.S. House of Representatives, the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” (HR 3) that would limit the rape exemption for abortion to “forcible rape” which would have defined many rapes, for example, statutory rape of a minor, as non-forcible and therefore not covered by federal assistance.
·    The U.S. House of Representatives passed (by a 234-182 vote) an amendment sponsored by Virginia Foxx (R-NC) prohibiting teaching hospitals from receiving federal funding if they teach doctors how to perform abortions. Unfortunately, as a result of this legislation new physicians will not receive the training needed to save women’s lives.
·    Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind, introduced a bill (HR 217) in the U.S. House of Representatives to strip Planned Parenthood of federal funding, despite the many other services Planned Parenthood provides to both men and women, including contraception and STD testing
·    Republicans have voted to drastically reduce the WIC program.  Yet WIC could be fully funded at the cost of just one week of Bush’s tax cuts for millionaires. According to the Center for American Progress, “one day’s worth of millionaire tax cuts would feed needy families for a year.”
·    The Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives voted to de-fund NPR
·     Republicans oppose net neutrality. They want corporations to control the internet to better their profits and to control the message getting out. A free press has always been fascism’s most potent enemy; it is no wonder they want to strangle it.  At a Communications and Technology Subcommittee Hearing “House Republicans pushed for a resolution to eliminate ‘net neutrality’ rules recently adopted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).”
·    Republicans voted to end a program “that helped low-income families weatherize their homes and permanently reduce their energy bills”
·    The U.S. House of Representatives wants to undermine state gun controls by forcing each state to honor the gun-carrying permits of other states. H.R. 822 the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011 “would require all states to allow out-of-state visitors to carry concealed firearms as long as the laws of the visitors’ home states allow them to do so” which would override protections that other states citizens want

Although not part of the “Dirty Thirty”, it is instructive to realize that before Congress adjourned for their August recess, they failed to pass a Transportation bill that contained drastic cuts that Republicans have proposed in the past, but which they could not stomach before returning home to meet with constituents!  Ruth Marcus writes in the Washington Post: “On Wednesday, House Republican leaders abruptly yanked a $44 billion transportation spending bill   from floor debate. The purported reason was scheduling — a pile of proposed amendments that supposedly made it difficult to finish up in time.
In fact, lawmakers had already disposed of most of that pile. The more plausible reason: The votes weren’t there. The bill cut too much, even for many Republicans to stomach — despite the fact that they had passed a budget requiring cuts of that size. When it came time to put their mouths (and votes) where the money wasn’t, lawmakers balked.”  And that is just one more example of the lack of quality (value) in this Republican Party.

This is just a smattering of what the Republican right-wing nuts are fomenting.  State laws and other proposed laws by Republicans are even worse.  The only virtue one can find in all of this is that of persistence – the Republican Right does not stop in its quest to de-claw and de-fang the power of national government.  Unless, of course, that power can be used to their advantage in forcing people to comply with their very conservative view of the world.  2014 is the edge of a precipice – if more Republicans gain seats in the House or in the Senate or in state legislatures and governor’s mansions, the very fabric of democracy will be torn asunder, and YOU will find yourself in a situation where your life is under the control of politicians and industrialists who do not VALUE your citizenship or your rights.

Veracity = habitual truth; honesty; accuracy of statement.  Republicans in Congress and elsewhere have persistently used lying as a campaign or legislative strategy.  It is now an accepted practice to best another candidate by lying about his record and his person.  This is a rampant strategy that prevails throughout the country at all levels of electioneering and of office-seeking.  It is clearly a disgrace, and what’s more, it violates a very fundamental tenet of Judeo-Christian religion and communal life: that lying is harmful to individuals and to a community or nation.  That is why its prohibition shows up in the foundational tenets of many major religions, because lying fundamentally alters one’s relationship with one’s God and with one’s neighbors.  Its effects are devastating to a society if it becomes rampant because friendship and familial bonds and democratic institutions are all threatened by a lack of veracity and thus a lack of trust in anything being said or promulgated.
 
Republican right-wingers have consistently lied about President Obama’s person, his religion, his birth, his character and his legislative triumphs.  And their prevarications do not stop there; instead, this strategy has been applied at every level of office-seeking and legislating.  By so doing, Republicans have perpetrated upon the citizens of this nation, the following:

>A lack of faith in the functions and institutions of government
>Confusion about health care reform and other major pieces of legislation (such as Dodd-Frank) and what it does for the average citizen
>A lack of respect for our representatives and most politicians and a prevailing belief that all politicians are crooks
>A reluctance as citizens to become personally involved in political activism, or office-seeking
>An acceptance of “bamboozling” –  being misled, having everything distorted, being made a fool of – the general public accepts the idea that one must live with this prevalence of being “taken” and lied to in the public and private arenas of politics and commerce. 
>The result is a greater sense of apathy and despair of fighting against the tide.  Advocacy for oneself and others has been broadly affected.

“V” is not just for Victory, which is what Republican right-wingers seem to cherish most -- Win at all costs, and use the power granted by winning to the disadvantage of ordinary folk.  “V” must also stand for Virtue, Value and Veracity – none of which you will get if you continue to vote for candidates who cannot, and will not, deliver on any of these.  2014 will be a watershed year, and YOU have the power of the most important “V” – the Vote.  If you don’t use it to stop the devastating juggernaut of anti-democratic legislation and actions emanating from the Republican Party, YOU will reap consequences that will literally destroy our governing principles.  Say NO to the Party of NO!

2014–A “Watershed” Year

We cannot allow the Republican Radicals to block all that needs doing for this nation.  They must be rejected at the polls.  2014 is a watershed year.  And what does that mean?  A “watershed year” is “a critical year that marks a division or a change of course; a turning point.”  (A ‘watershed’ itself is “the ridge or crest line dividing two drainage areas; a divide.”) 

If the radical Republican Party is allowed to grab more seats in Congress, and in the state houses and legislatures in more states, the die will be cast.  It will mark the capture of enough power to continue to block and defeat anything that even looks like government activism at the national and state levels.  But worse, it will mark the questionable ascendancy of a Party bent on using states to destroy federal and national programs and policies.  Look carefully at what has happened already in states controlled by Republicans: some form of voter ID laws are now active in 27 states; eight of eleven states in old ‘Dixie’ have passed restrictive voting laws since the 2010 election.  North Carolina became the first state to pass a more restrictive voting law following the U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a core provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, and it looks like Texas, Mississippi and Alabama will not be far behind.  As of April of this year, restrictive legislation had been introduced in 30 states, with North Carolina making that 31.  This ability of states to thwart federal protection of voter rights is a danger, not only to our voting system, but to our entire federal system of governance.  It is the beast of “nullification” dressed-up in sheep’s clothing!

But, don’t forget, there are other equally pernicious movements afoot in the states.  Affirmative Action has been struck a major blow by the SCOTUS, and many state-run colleges will be free to ignore any reference to race as a factor in achieving ethnic balance within their student bodies; another attempt to nullify federal directives and protections.  As pointed out recently on this Blog, the ruling of the Supreme Court mandating the federal government to recognize and support gay marriage has not been applied to the states.  That delay will keep such implementation of gay marriage laws on hold for years in some states.  We must also mention the movement at the state level to pass laws that not only limit access to contraception and abortions, but actually deny funding to “abortion centers.”  Worse, states are beginning to pass laws that actually limit the point at which abortions can be implemented, by using questionable “science” related to a fetus feeling pain or when “life” begins.  Such state laws are nothing short of defiance of the Roe vs. Wade decision.   And, let us not fail to recall the movement abroad in this country to arm every man woman and child with guns; to support “stand-your-ground” laws, and to make sure, thereby, that the “others”, the “outsiders” (read minorities and immigrants) can be threatened with loss of life if they venture into the world of the elite.

In brief, here are some of the great divides ( or conflicts) that the Republican Party has devised or implemented that will negatively affect our lives after 2014 unless they are soundly defeated at all levels.

1)    Ideology vs. solutions for real problems.  Republicans like to talk and bluster about their cherished principles; about their ideology. They like to manufacture problems that exist only in their narrow minds (think lack of prayer in schools or “voter fraud” or “stand-your-ground” laws).  They apparently have little regard for the actual problems that poor people and middle-class people generally face, like no jobs, no increase in wages, no child-care, inadequate transportation, lack of health care and proper nutrition, plus a need for home maintenance, adequate Social Security and pension benefits. In fact, it appears that Republicans in Congress would rather avoid all the real problems and issues of our day, and manufacture some of their own so that they do not have to reveal that they do not care about the real ones.
    Take our crumbling infrastructure, for example.  They point to deficit reduction as the major problem and fail to comprehend the major effects crumbling cities and towns will have on revenues and new industries and jobs.  They don’t care. They want to solve the deficit problem because it is an excuse for diminishing the power of the federal government (and not because it is affecting our GNP); never mind investment of government funds; it is wasteful.
    The 2014 elections could cement these attitudes into the forefront of our local, state and national governments.  Is that what you want?  Ask yourself first:  what have Republicans done to solve any of the problems you face, or that your community faces, or that the nation faces?  Maybe you like Sequestration…
2)    Elite vs. all other classes.  Republicans have demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that their destiny is tied into their support of the elite 1% or less of the richest people and corporations in this country, and nothing can dissuade them from that course (except, perhaps, a sound defeat at all levels in the 2014 elections).  It is the middle class that is being squeezed mercilessly by the Republicans as they cut back on every program, tax break, COLA, minimum wage increase, while also adding tax breaks and loopholes, increasing Defense and other federal contracts, and generally protecting the ability to gouge the public by diminishing all acts of consumer protection. 
    From PoliticusUSA we hear that examples of Republican hostility to average working- and middle-class Americans are many; here are just a few.  In Georgia a new bill (HB 385) would raise taxes on things like Girl Scout Cookies, groceries and gasoline but would lower tax rates on corporate income, from 6 percent this year to just 4 percent in 2014.  Also in Georgia, the new craze – drug testing welfare recipients – brings us the Social Responsibility and Accountability Act (SB 292), approved by their Senate on March 7, 2012. BetterGeorgia.com reports that “Republican State Senator John Albers, one of the sponsors of the bill says that the aim is to stop welfare recipients from using illegal drugs. Apparently, only Republican politicians should be allowed to do that. The state’s own estimates show that the drug test program may not save a dime and could cost $84,500 per person.  2014 is the point at which such foolishness will be curtailed or multiplied.  It’s up to YOU.
3)    Myths vs. science.  Republicans have a strong tendency to reject scientific studies and conclusions, unless they advance their pre-conceived ideas.  Climate change, early intervention benefits for children, importance of scientific research especially as regards childhood disease and obesity, plus the effects of war on the mental health of our armed forces are real problems with real consequences.  Instead, Republicans deny climate change is caused by humans and their industries, and don’t seem to care about the effects of other issues.  Their mantra is “drill, baby, drill” – keep on depending on fossil fuels until the planet dies!  2014 is the watershed moment in more ways than one since access to clean water is becoming a priority issue.  In 2014, YOU are voting on this life or death issue, because time is running out for our planet.  Again, ask yourself, what have radical Republicans done to protect our planet, to assure our unfettered access to clean air, water and environment?  They restricted the EPA, de-regulated certain industries, drilled for more oil.  How do you want your planet – crispy or grilled?
4)    Men vs. women.  Equal pay?  Equal access to health care?  Built-in glass ceilings for women? Right to an abortion for certain accepted reasons now denied?  Women subjected to sonograms as a prerequisite to an abortion?  Health care restrictions that men don’t have?  Child care opportunities cut?  This goes on and on under Republican control and governance, at state and national levels.  As PoliticusUSA.com reminds us: “Despite an electorate that is overwhelmingly pro-choice, there is no doubt that the GOP’s first goal is to deprive women of their reproductive rights and to frame that argument not as one of health but religion. It is in fact so important an issue to the GOP that out of some 40,000 laws of all types enacted in 2011, as RMuse wrote here recently, “there were nearly 1,000 bills in state legislatures to restrict a woman’s right to legal abortion services” (up from 950 in 2010). 2014 is the point at which YOU have an opportunity to stop this madness.  What will you do?
5)    State vs. central government.  Under Republicans, as we have seen, states’ rights and nullification of national laws and requirements are at the forefront. One of the most egregious examples of this is attempts by certain states to sneak religion into the public sector.  The South Dakota legislature is promoting “biblical instruction” in public schools, passing a nonbinding resolution that “encourages school districts to voluntarily provide instruction that makes students familiar with the content, character, and narratives of the Bible.”   In Georgia, “A copy of the Ten Commandments could be posted in all Georgia government buildings and schools under a bill passed unanimously by House lawmakers.” (from PoliticusUSA.com). 
    Let us mention one more frightening possibility: the devolvement of national programs to the states, among them Medicaid and food stamps.  Any program of this sort, taken over by already staff- and resource-strapped states spells diminution or outright annihilation of the benefits of such programs.  Eligibility will be greatly restricted; funding will decrease; administration will be abysmal; access will be curtailed.  If you are elderly, disabled, poor or a veteran, think very seriously about what the outcome of the 2014 election will mean to you if your state administers such programs (and many others).  Your goose is cooked if you vote Republican! 
6)    Private vs. public.  If you are not aware of this, then you are being sucker-punched!  The privatization of government functions is already happening but will become rampant under Republicans.  They believe fervently that the private sector can do a better job at running schools, prisons, wars (at least some aspects of them), health care facilities, and even our Social Security!  That’s right, and all these things (and more) are presently under private lucrative contracts with private entities. 
    Don’t forget, private groups are in this for profit; government is not.  The profit motive dictates a whole new set of circumstances, many of which are not beneficial to the client.  You want Wall Street investing your Social Security?  You want teachers and school administrators making a profit from teaching your children?  Then you need to remember that 2014 is a watershed year and if you vote Republican, you get more privatization.  Got a child going to college in a few years and you hoped to send him or her to a good state school because the fees are more reasonable?  Oh-Oh – Republicans don’t care about you; they will inevitably shut down state-supported schools because private education is a lucrative business for their cronies.
7)    Austerity vs. investment.  The greatest gift ever given to Republicans, besides their election victories in 2010, is “sequestration.”  Since it was originally meant as an evil place where no one would want to venture, it was thought that reasoned spending cuts and added revenues would be achieved before sequestration kicked into place.  Nada.  The Republicans played their hand and didn’t have to take any blame for it.  But it was their rejection of a grand bargain that led to it, and they are very much to blame for the draconian cuts that are now occurring in school districts as teachers are laid off, in Head Start programs, in research, in food stamps, housing, veterans’ programs, etc. One example from PoliticusUSA: “Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee approved the appropriations bill which reduced WIC funding from $6.73 billion this year to $5.90 billion in 2012. The bill will also cut $38 million from the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSIP), as well as $63 million from the Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAB). If the Republicans had been truly interested in slashing the federal budget they could have saved more money by ending tax cuts for the rich or slashing subsidies to the oil companies. Instead they starve the infants and elderly.” For Republican radicals, sequestration is the gift that keeps on giving because austerity is their goal for all but the rich who will gain even more in this climate.  If you like austerity measures to balance the national budget, then vote for Republicans in 2014.  You will get what you want.  The point of no return will have been achieved.

In my estimation, all of this Republican radical regression comes down to a Party without Virtue, Value or Veracity, all of which we shall review in my next posting: “V” is NOT JUST FOR VICTORY!