Tag: Mandates

Is There A Trump Mandate?

First, is anyone else sick of the term “Black Friday” yet?

I have read and heard so much about this past election that it is now getting damn right boring….his supporters keep telling me about the mandate he and the GOP have now that he is prez…….

Okay, what exactly is Trump’s mandate…not what you think it is but what is his stated mandate?  Or does that matter?

Mandate is a command or authorization to act in a particular way on a public issue given by the electorate to its representative…..

(I will pause here for a quick Google search for his supporters because they have NO idea other than his social media ramblings)

Within days of the U.S. general election, central elements of the result have already entered into American mythology: the revenge of the “white working class voter”; the unprecedented anti-establishment character of the President-elect; the populist revolution that led to Trump’s victory; and the years in the wilderness now facing Democrats and progressives in America.

But the endless repetition of these themes by the corporate media deserves a great deal more skepticism and scrutiny before they worm their way into all our heads to form the established and accepted narrative of this election. Let’s first review some basic facts about what happened on Nov. 8:

Source: The Non-Existent Trump Mandate – Consortiumnews

I listened closely to all his speeches and tried to follow his Tweets but I have a life and it was beyond tedious……there was so much contradictory stuff from his lips that I am not sure about anything he has on his mind…..

And then there is his search for the SecState…..there are so many factions jockeying for the inside position….I worry about who will be the winner…..

In recent history, a presidential election which puts the other major party in power has led to a pretty orderly transfer of power, with each party having its own collection of usual suspects that quickly and predictably fill in all the top spots. President-elect Donald Trump’s outsider status, and the number of Republican leadership figures openly opposed to his campaign, means he doesn’t have such a ready-made cabinet, nor likely the inclination to install one.

Instead, Trump’s cabinet is being assembled very publicly, amid a battle that includes neo-conservatives and establishment hawks arrayed against a group of outsiders including the libertarian right, Tea Party Republicans, and a bloc of realists who would normally not be in line for top positions.

Many of the neo-cons and the rest of the establishment had a substantial “Never Trump” bloc that opposed his election  appear to feel entitled to the top positions in the cabinet, and indeed, Trump seems to be entertaining candidate like ultrahawk John Bolton for some of his biggest positions.

Source: GOP Factions Battle Over Control of Trump’s Foreign Policy — News from Antiwar.com

This position and DoD will tell me all I need to know about the direction that our foreign policy will travel……

His choices point to a mandate to this writer….but I am not positive so I will withhold me impressions ….for now.

Maybe this is something we all should worry about and not what star is dancing to what song…..just a thought!

What Is In The Mandate?

Oh God!  The ballet has begun again…….the debate on the law called Obamacare.  Silliness and absurdity are the chorus…….we are hearing all the crap over and over….kinda like the House votes on repealing the Law, 39 times I believe and yet it is still the LAW!  GOP has its head firmly placed in their anus…….before we go on let me say something clever to the Right wing….Obamacare is LAW!  Get over it you twats!

The taxes and the fines and lastly that damn pesky MANDATE.  But wait what is the mandate?  Can you describe it without dashing to the Google machine?  (pause here for the clicking of keys in search of mandate on Google).

Ezra Klein has attempted to explain the mandate……..

The individual mandate is a requirement that all individuals who can afford health-care insurance purchase some minimally comprehensive policy. For the purposes of the law, “individuals who can afford health-care insurance” is defined as people for whom the minimum policy will not cost more than 8 percent of their monthly income, and who make more than the poverty line. So if coverage would cost more than 8 percent of your monthly income, or you’re making very little, you’re not on the hook to buy insurance (and, because of other provisions in the law, you’re getting subsidies that make insurance virtually costless anyway).

The theory behind the mandate is simple: It’s there to protect against an insurance death spiral. Now that insurers can’t discriminate based on preexisting conditions, it would be entirely possible for people to forgo insurance until, well, they develop a medical condition. In that world, the bulk of the people buying insurance on the exchanges are sick, and that makes the average premiums terrifically expensive. The mandate is there to bring healthy people into the pool, which keeps average costs down and also ensures that people aren’t riding free on the system by letting society pay when they get hit by a bus.

The irony of the mandate is that it’s been presented as a terribly onerous tax on decent, hardworking people who don’t want to purchase insurance. In reality, it’s the best deal in the bill: A cynical consumer would be smart to pay the modest penalty rather than pay thousands of dollars a year for insurance. In the current system, that’s a bad idea because insurers won’t let them buy insurance if they get sick later. In the reformed system, there’s no consequence for that behavior. You could pay the penalty for five years and then buy insurance the day you felt a lump.

The Right is fighting the law and in particular the mandate as a TAX….and we know how Americans have been brainwashed into a “no taxation” mode……now we can debate the legitimacy of the argument that it is a tax but it will always depend on your political ideology……..I want to believe that the consumer is smarter than the GOP gives them credit………(I say that and I live in a state where I question the mental capacity of 75% of the voters….so I could be mistaken)……..

Actually the law is too weak….more so than too punitive to the taxpayer……personally, it does not go far enough…..but I can live with it….for now….

Now you have an idea what the mandate is……there is so much more to the law but the mandate seems to be what most are focusing on….at least for this week……

Is “Opt Out” Proposal Good Or Bad?

It is about enough of who won what prize and who wants to own a NFL team…there is far more important issues that need analysis……

Since single payer was a NO SHOW in the deliberations and the public option will most likely be in name only….what options are being considered now?  Glad you asked….and this one is a doosey (sp?)…….

As reported in the Huffington Post:

Senate Democrats have begun discussions on a compromise approach to health care reform that would establish a robust, national public option for insurance coverage but give individual states the right to opt out of the program.

How such a system would work is still being debated, according to those with knowledge of the proposal. But theoretically, the “opt-out” approach would start with everyone having access to a public plan. What kind of public plan isn’t yet clear. States would then have the right to vote — either by referendum, legislature, or simply a gubernatorial decree — to make the option unavailable in their health care exchanges.

A simple thought experiment might clarify the issues at hand: What if Medicare had been passed with this ‘opt-out’ provision? To make the thought experiment more appropriate to the situation at hand, we must imagine that the 1965 law creating Medicare had already been subject to the same compromises that the public option has been: that its ability to negotiate with certain suppliers and providers has been negotiated away, and that instead of being available to all older Americans, access has been restricted so that only an estimated 5% of them are expected to join.

A plausible answer is that a number of states, especially in the South, would have chosen not to participate.

This appears to be a weak lame attempt to pacify as many Dems as possible with the chance that a 60 vote super majority can to reached……in other words, it is all about the vote not what is best for the people, who those voting have taken an oath to serve….did I miss something?  Is that not grounds to throw the ilk out of office?

Healthcare: The Truth Not Spoken

One of the most important issues in the primaries was that of healthcare, but during the beginning of this general cycle it has sort of slid down the important list behind war and gas prices. It will most like still be a very important issue when the general begins in earnest. Each candidate has their approach and the voter will use which they feel is the best as a benchmark for their support.

Obama’s most likely will be a mandate sort of approach, similar to that of Clinton’s; McCain’s answer will be some sort of tax break with incentives to buy insurance. Both approaches are crap! Neither plan will do anything to ease the financial burden of a major illness. Just delay it.

The prevention method is for the immediate benefit of the insurance companies, not the people it is suppose to help. This approach is supposed to save the people money by making them healthy and in turn less likely to need medical attention. All the programs on smoking and eating and the emphasis on screening and testing are to help the people manage their health. But the people will still be paying the high insurance premiums whether they are healthy or not. So who really benefits there?

The problem with this thinking is that the healthier a person is the longer they live and in doing so will become frail and sickly in their declining years. In those later years the chances of more expensive procedures like hip or knee replacement, extended hospital stays are extremely expensive. The chances of the person getting cancer or Alaheimer’s are pretty high and that is a very expensive medical treatment also.

A prevention program is a lofty and well intended goal, but in the long run there will be NO savings on high priced medical care. Healthier long lives may not be the answer to keeping medical costs down in the long run, just a postponement

Still the only true way to insure that a person, regardless of age, gets the proper medical attention, is a single payer system. It is simple and equal..

Biofuels Are The Answer

A group of the world’s biggest agribusiness companies announced it will use lobbyists on Capitol Hill and national ads to build the case for fuels such as ethanol and biodiesel, even as grain prices climb worldwide.

The biofuels industry has blossomed under federal mandates requiring the United States to increase alternative fuel usage by 2009. The mandates are under attack from groups who blame the new industry for rising food prices that have sparked riots and hoarding in several countries.

The newly formed Alliance for Abundant Food and Energy, formed by Monsanto, Archer Daniels Midland, Deere and DuPont, said producing more fuel without hurting food supply can be done by increasing agricultural productivity, an increase that would benefit the companies.

Although biofuels are help driving the coming economic bad times, I say let them do what they want–make lots of money–while the people stew in the approaching poverty. (sarcasm intended).