Archive for the ‘Health Care debate’ Category
Immigration Law Boycott – Will Arizona Cut Power To L.A.?
Across the nation, the Arizona immigration law is a personal insult to many people of Hispanic descent. The Los Angeles City Council, in order to make a political statement, voted to boycott the state of Arizona and Arizona-based business. In response to the Los Angeles boycott, the commissioner of Arizona’s electric and water utilities threatened to cut off the electricity supplied to the Los Angeles power grid by Arizona power plants.
Article Source: Will Arizona cut power to L.A. over immigration law boycott?
Boycott Arizona goes nationwide
The Arizona immigration law has encouraged other cities with large Hispanic populations to deprive the state of cash now, including San Francisco, San Diego and Oakland. In Seattle, not known as a center of Hispanic culture, the city council approved a similar boycott May 18. Across the nation, many organizations have also canceled conventions in Arizona. Just type in the words “boycott Arizona” in your Google search bar and you will get The National Council of La Raza homepage, inviting institutions across the nation to join the NCLR in their boycott of Arizona. But the Los Angeles boycott is the first so far to result in a game of tit for tat over a law many think encourages racial profiling and violates civil rights.
Depriving the Los Angeles power grid
The Arizona Corporation Commission, which administrates the state’s electric and water utilities, raised the idea of pulling the plug on Los Angeles, following the Los Angeles boycott. Arizona’s power plants supply electricity to 25 percent of the Los Angeles power grid, according to CNNMoney.com. In a letter to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio R. Villaraigosa, Arizona Corporation Commissioner Gary Pierce wrote that “If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives power from Arizona-based generation. I am confident that Arizona’s utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands.”
Los Angeles boycott could add up to millions
In a vote of 13-1, the Los Angeles City Council chose to bar the city from conducting business with Arizona unless the Arizona immigration law, which goes into effect in July, is revoked. The vote was followed an emotional council, as reported by MSNBC, during which numerous members stressed how their ancestors were U.S. immigrants. The stake isn’t exactly among small potatoes. Totaling up to as much as $ 58 million, Los Angeles has investments and contracts in Arizona. Most of the dollars involve airport, port and energy service that can’t lawfully be affected by the boycott. About $ 7.7 million is left in city contracts that could possibly be put into play. Some of those contracts include helicopter services, Taser guns, waste management, engineering and surveillance equipment.
Will Arizona really cut power to Los Angeles?
Will the state of Arizona really cut power to Los Angeles completely? Coming in to downplay the threatening nature of the letter is John LeSueur, a spokesman for Pierce. He said the commission itself does not have the authority for Arizona to cut power to Los Angeles. “It’s not a threat,” he told CNNMoney.com. “It’s just pointing out the ramification of what L.A.’s threat would be on the boycott. If they carry out their threat to boycott Arizona, that includes 25 percent of their power.” LeSueur pointed out that Los Angeles has partial ownership in two of the Arizona power plants, including a 5.7 percent stake in the Palo Verde nuclear power plant, and a 21 percent stake in the Navajo Generation Station on a Navajo reservation.
Hispanics could get the whip’s tip with the Arizona boycott
The economic impact of the Arizona immigration law could be substantial. According to Fox News, officials in Phoenix say their city could lose as much as $ 90 million in the next five years over the protests. This estimate represents not just lost convention and hotel feels, but it also includes the money tourists would otherwise spend in the city. In a twist of irony, Hispanics make up a major portion of Arizona’s hospitality and service workforce. With that in mind and the fact city governments and organization are pulling the plug on travel and conventions in Arizona, Hispanic workers have the most to lose, as pointed out by state officials.
Corporate Funding Of Politicians – Good Or Bad?
It’s a radical idea, but perhaps one whose time has finally come. Recently, the United States Supreme Court held that, as a legal entity with legal personhood, corporations also have the right to contribute campaign funds in amounts commensurate with those allowed for flesh-and-blood persons. As if Big Business doesn’t already have enough influence, it would seem that now the floodgates are opened and no restrictions apply any longer.
Elections are already heavily supported by corporate interests. With greatly increased levels of cash, they are practically guaranteed to drown out anyone else. Since it will all be corporate propaganda anyway, why not just sit it out?
It goes so contrary to the ideals and very ideology of our modern democratic system – but what if it works? What if by having zero or almost zero turnout, the media and their political favorites are forced awake instead of carrying on with business as usual?
The connection is often made between democracy and capitalism. One is told to vote with one’s feet when it comes to choosing schools or residences, and vote with one’s pocketbooks when it comes to goods and services. Well, how about voting with one’s silence, one’s absence, one’s disregard?
The worst thing for human psychology is to be ignored. In the Bible, God’s punishment for Cain’s act of murder was not the death penalty but exile, and for all to shun him wherever he went. What if the American electorate should just ignore the politicians for a change and sit out an election? That would send a truly unique message – that instead of holding one’s nose and voting for the perceived lesser of two evils, American voters insist on policies that reflect their wishes, instead of making do with those that go against them less.
Egyptian Employees Call For Rise In Minimum Wage
With elections scheduled later on this year in Egypt, workers have started to step-up their demands for a boost in the minimum wage. Â The thirty-five Egyptian Pounds per month minimum wage has stayed unchanged going back twenty six years and lots of ordinary Egyptians believe something needs to be done as inflation is just about 10%.
Â
Large groups of protestors in recent times clashed with police as they demanded a rise to 1,200 Egyptian Pounds each month. Presently, close to 40% of Egyptians live life below the poverty line and the rise in the minimum wage would make an immense impact to a substantial number of families. Nonetheless, it is being suggested that the Egyptian government are considering an increase to 450 Egyptian Pounds per month.
Â
There is little question that an increase in wages will assist a large number of men and women and in an election year, such a move would clearly help out the government at the polls. On the other hand, there is the tiny matter of how such an increase would be paid for. Governments do not have a bottomless pit of funding with which to pay public sector workers and at the same time businesses and organizations can only pay wages out of the money they produce.
Â
Egypt creates an awful lot of its wealth from natural resources such as oil, coal and gas together with tourism. Government may be able to pay extra for the rise in minimum wage for its personnel through a combination of tax increases, efficiency savings and redundancies. Even so, they may want to take into consideration that tax increases don’t always work as in 2005, the rate of corporation tax was cut from 40% to 20% year tax revenues the subsequent year doubled.
Â
A likely area to be hit with increases is the foreign visitor. The fees of visas could be increased to deliver increased government income while the private sector may likely have to raise room rates at resorts and prices at restaurants in order to pay their staff the bigger minimum wage. Â These expenses would almost certainly be passed on to the tourist. The real expense in Red Sea Holidays from the UK is the cost of flights. Hotels and services once in Egypt have always been superb value so there is scope for an increase there. However, pressure may be put on airlines to lower airfares so as not to price breaks to Egypt too far above their existing levels.
Ohio HB 486 Limits Payday Lending Fees
Ohio passed a comprehensive payday lending reform law, HB 545, in 2008. Interest rates lenders were charging on payday cash advances were capped with this law. Two years after this law went into effect, Representatives Jennifer Garrison, Gerald Stebelton and Matt Lundy are co-sponsoring HB 486, intended to further limit payday lenders.
The argument for more payday loan regulation through HB 486
Ohio’s HB 486 is being introduced under the auspice of more regulation for the payday lending industry. Payday lending stores are charging contentious fees for services such as check cashing, loan origination and credit checks, and many lawmakers are none too pleased. When HB 545 passed in 2008, the goal was to reduce the cost of payday loans and more heavily regulate the industry. Ohio’s HB 486 is designed to solidify regulations even more. Legislators are worried of the fact that many payday lenders are charging customers $ 15 – $ 25 on every $ 100 borrowed over a two or four week period. Some borrowers misuse this service and end up digging themselves deeper into debt.
Payday loans – arguments against more regulations
Though the payday lending industry is not often liked or well received, HB 486 attempts to penalize payday lenders for following the law. Once HB 545 was passed, interest rates on payday loans were capped at 28 percent annual interest, which is about the same for most credit cards. However, over the two-week period of most payday loans, that interest rate does not provide the income lenders need to cover their costs. More than 700 payday lending stores closed down, leaving 2,500 Ohio residents unemployed.
The Small Loans Act providing some help for Ohio lenders
In an attempt to remain above waters, Ohio payday lenders began operating under the Small Loans Act. Under the Small Loans Act, lenders are able to charge fees for check cashing, credit checks and loan origination. However, increased reporting, cash-on-hand and more regulated advertising is required by the Small Loans Act. The payday lending stores in Ohio that began charging fees and operating under the Small Loans Act have followed the letter of the law, ensuring that they are providing a legal service. And HB 486 is looking to end this practice.
The math of payday loans in Ohio
Many legislators are pointing to figures such as 391 percent APR to explain why they believe payday lenders need more regulation. Both HB 545 and HB 486, however, do not take into account that payday loans are designed specifically for short-term financial solutions for between two and four weeks. Additionally, the only other option available for most payday loan customers is to head face-to-face with bank fees of $ 30 or more for bounced checks. Many payday loan customers have credit that does not qualify them for more traditional financial products.
So what do you think? Will HB 486 protect consumers? Or will payday lenders be put out of business because of HB 486?
With Little Chance Of Success, Climate Change Bill Hits Senate
Wednesday, after months of partisan bickering and the peevish defection of one of its main sponsors, the Senate climate change bill was unveiled. Senators John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, and independents of Connecticut, Joe Lieberman, presented a climate and energy package designed to limit climate change and promote clean energy jobs. Kerry said it was imperative the Senate climate change bill, which includes a little something for everyone, gets passed this year. But one of the vote-getting goodies in the climate bill is expanded off-shore drilling — a provision that could backfire in the wake of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
A bad climate for change
Negotiations with lawmakers by Kerry and Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, on the climate and energy bill appeared to be humming along until just last month. Graham abruptly withdrew his support of the energy legislation under pressure from GOP true believers. Right Wing enforcers were really upset with Graham for giving Democrats installment loans of Republican support. As an excuse, Graham gave an oblique reference to immigration politics. But potential Republican votes that the climate change bill needs to pass may have gone out the window along with Graham.
Stained by oil is clean energy
After the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico began last month, incentives to increase domestic offshore drilling was written in. The New York Times explains that instead of providing for an expansion of offshore drilling, the Kerry-Lieberman bill gives coastal states the right to veto any drilling plan that could cause environmental or economic harm. Graham had a hand in drafting the original oil drilling provision.
Energy legislation and a big crowd
A swarm of lobbyists have been attracted by the Senate Climate change bill. Oil companies have spent millions of dollars trying to stop the bill from passing. Clean energy producers in low-carbon nuclear power, natural gas or wind and solar power have been trying to enrich themselves with the Senate climate bill. Reuters reports that green energy utilities such as FPL Group and Exelon have lobbied alongside environmental groups for the climate change bill, along with General Electric, a manufacturer of clean coal for power plants and wind turbines.
Clean energy, green jobs
Kerry’s presentation of the Senate climate change bill had along with it a blog on the Huffington Post asking for public support. Kerry claims the climate and energy bill package will help create nearly 2 million new green energy jobs, develop new products, and support the research and development required to help the U.S. maintain leadership in the global economy. He also claims the climate bill as written will reduce the deficit by about $21 billion in nine years.
Senate and Climate Change?
Kerry thinks that it seems to be long overdue for American to finally lead on climate change. He vows to mount a “full court press” to pass the energy legislation in 2010. But Kerry wants to add more pressure to a Congress paralyzed from dealing with the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, financial reform, immigration reform, an upcoming Supreme Court nomination battle and a sputtering economic recovery.
Sources
The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/13/science/earth/13climate.html
Reuters reports
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1219978020100512?type=marketsNews
Huffington Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-kerry/transforming-our-power_b_573303.html
California Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act: The first Part
Last night the Californian Secretary of state confirmed to everyone that the voter initiative to legalize marijuana received about 523,531 signatures-more than 433,971 signatures were needed to get on the November ballot. The initiative has many supporters who believe that legalizing pot will not only save the cash-strapped Californian economy, but will also bring in instant cash of tax revenue. Many of the people who don't support the bill argue that legalizing the drug will end in more crime and great health impacts. Other people suggest that legalizing gray-market marijuana will make the marijuana quality go down and will significantly hurt the budding marijuana industry. {Part 1 of this article covers the Regulate, Control, and Tax Cannabis Act in California and the arguments for its passage. Part 2: Arguments against Marijuana Legalization in California covers the arguments against marijuana legalization in California}.
History of marijuana legalization in California.
The first law in the state criminalizing marijuana in the US was passed in California in 1913. Other states quickly followed suit. By 1937, federal law made possession or transfer of “Marihuana” illegal for everything except medical and industrial uses.
The US Federal government put marijuana in the Controlled Substances Act of 1970 although the act was declared unconstitutional in 1969. California made medical marijuana legal with Proposition 215 in 1996, reigniting the national debate. The federal government still considers marijuana an illegal Schedule I narcotic and considers it to have “no valid medical use.”
California legalization of marijuana measures.
The Regulate, Control, and Tax Cannabis Act, or the Californian initiative to legalize marijuana, has limitations on the way to legally use marijuana. Anyone 21 or older would be permitted to “possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use.” Marijuana would be taxed and regulated through commercial sales or production by local governments in California. Individuals would also be prohibited from smoking marijuana in public, smoking marijuana while minors are present, providing to any underage person, possessing the drug on school grounds or driving while under the influence of marijuana.
The cost-savings argument for marijuana legalization
Supporters of the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act argue that the legalization of marijuana would save the State of California a significant amount of money. California is currently in a huge budget deficit, and has been using payday cash advances on the state budget to cover costs.
Estimates for these savings range from $ 156 million to $ 1 billion. Many supporters claim that once the stretched-thin law-enforcement system stops prosecuting those people who grow, poses, or sell marijuana, they can focus on real crimes and criminals that are doing more dangerous and violent things. Those for the act also point out the fact that few deaths in California are due to marijuana while hundreds of death each year are due to alcohol.
The argument on taxation for cannabis legalization.
While saving California millions of dollars in law enforcement, the Regulate, Control and Tax Act also gives government the ability to tax marijuana. Those for the act estimate that $ 15 billion gray-market and black market marijuana is being sold every year in California.
An excise tax on the retail sales of marijuana would bring in an estimated $ 1.3 billion a year or more in revenue. Some counties and cities within California currently tax medical marijuana dispensaries. These county and city taxes make as much as $ 350,000 per dispensary.
Legalizing pot job argument
Many areas of California, like Humboldt County, have already a thriving marijuana tourism industry. With things such as schools focused on growing marijuana and medical marijuana dispensaries, the place brings in millions of dollars each year in tourism revenue. If the marijuana tourism industry in California grew to just one-third the size of the wine industry, it would help to create 50,000 jobs, as pointed out by supporters. Marijuana being legalized would also make it legal to produce hemp in state which might add to the agricultural base in California.
California's Regulate, Control, and Tax Cannabis Act is due to go on the November ballot. If you were interested in the arguments against the legalization of marijuana in California, I would suggest you see Part 2: Arguments against Marijuana Legalization in California.
Sources:
The Associated Press
Business Week
Seattle Times
Time Magazine
CNN
California NORML
Bernanke testimony | Helicopter Ben vs. Ron Paul
Was America the sole recipient of the bailout?
Ben Bernanke’s testimony before Congress continued today, punctuated by a very entertaining exchange between Bernanke and Rep. Ron Paul (R – TX), part of which was an allegation that the Fed was lending to Greece to ease the turmoil there. Decide for yourself whether Greece should be allowed to borrow money from the Federal Reserve.
Bernanke flatly denied Mr. Paul’s allegation, calling them “bizarre.”
Is it truly that bizarre?
Is the Federal Reserve about to bailout Greece? Has that been done for other countries in the past? Greece is still a question mark, irrespective of Bernanke’s testimony. The writing may already be on the wall.
Written in “Texas Straight Talk”
In a recent weekly column at House.gov, Ron Paul wrote about the unveiling financial crisis in Greece. The government is close to defaulting on public debt, as the Treasury is almost dry. The debt level, claims Paul, is “about 120 percent of their gross domestic product,” so the public sector soaks up “what amounts to 40 percent of GDP.” This has European investors running scared, needless to say. However, the European Central Bank seems calm.
Why would that be? Outsiders are not sure. Is the Federal Reserve about to bail out Greece? We don’t know, says Paul, partly because the Federal Reserve’s distribution of bailout dollars hasn’t been as transparent as promised, but also because if they were aiding a foreign central bank, by law they don’t have to disclose that fact and it is exempt from audit. Considering that Greece isn’t the only European country in trouble – and that many of those countries in trouble have some sort of tie to Goldman Sachs – we wonder whether these countries will also be deemed “too big to fail” by the U.S. banking concerns. And who will be on the hook if such is the case? It would be American taxpayers, at a time when the real unemployment rate is still staggeringly high.
Creating fiat currency and shoveling it around with impunity
Our government buys into the idea of fiat currency. It’s creating money for whatever purpose they like; it’s a check the bank doesn’t have the actual capital to cash.The US Government and the Federal Reserve seem content to keep the status quo, with no concern to the burden it puts on future generations. Ron Paul suggests that Americans deserve to know if they are “going to be left holding the bag” as the Federal Reserve throws around money they don’t actually have – it’s imaginary!
Evidence log for your consideration
- Federal Reserve money supported Saddam Hussein and the Iraq military
- Federal Reserve money was involved in Watergate
- Here’s the Senate Watergate Report for more on Watergate.
Bernanke testimony does not inspire confidence
This is exactly why Ron Paul would like laws to be changed so that we can audit the Federal Reserve. Fast cash from our pockets to other nations cannot continue when our nation bears this burden of its own. We need to know what’s happening. Americans deserve transparency from their governmental institutions.
Bipartisan support means little as jobs bill is eviscerated
Reid does hack job on bill
By all accounts, the jobs bill was on the path to victory. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced that he was going to cut the bill from $ 85 billion to $ 15 billion, cutting it to about an eighth its former size.
How did he do it? Fox News also reports that he cut “key priorities of both Republicans and Democrats.” Why did Reid sabotage the bill? Well, there’s no official word from Reid on that, but there are plenty of others out there willing to offer up their theories. If Reid were to be asked why, it would likely be that it was a way to save money.
What will the jobs bill do?
The jobs bill, in its stripped down form, doesn’t make it easier for businesses to borrow money, but it does offer tax breaks to employers who make new hires. Fox News says:
The $ 15 billion bill includes a $ 13 billion payroll tax break for employers who hire new workers; $ 35 million for small business depreciation; $ 2 billion for “Build America Bonds” for infrastructure; and a one-year extension of the highway bill.
Reid removed several extenders, including funding for research and development, and a provision to decrease the estate tax. The estate tax extender had a lot of Republican support.
Why did Reid take a chainsaw to the bill?
Fox News reports that Reid gutted the bill due to “criticism that the Democratic-sponsored jobs bill would not primarily create new jobs.” Christian Science Monitor says:
Senator Reid appears to be making a political calculation that the GOP will have a difficult time voting against his own, stripped-down version of jobs legislation. That’s because Reid has left the bill’s central job creation provisions intact, while jettisoning tax breaks and other provisions intended to win Republican support.
As for what Reid himself had to say about it, the only quote out there from him is this: “We are going to move a smaller package than talked about in the press. Republicans are going to have to make a choice. We have a bipartisan bill that will create jobs, according to the CBO, immediately.” He added “I don’t know in logic what they could say to oppose this.” The results remain to be seen!
On budget deficits, Obama is agnostic
Will the tough budget deficit decisions be made?
It turns out “agnostic definition” is something Google searchers want to know. It probably doesn’t have anything to do with religion, as the word is usually applied in that context. It has a few others uses, however. Courtesy of the New York Times‘ “Word of the Day,” here’s a snapshot:
agnostic •ag-’näs-tik, əg-• noun and adjective
noun: someone who is doubtful or noncommittal about something
noun: a person who claims that they cannot have true knowledge about the existence of God (but does not deny that God might exist)
adjective: of or pertaining to an agnostic or agnosticism
adjective: uncertain of all claims to knowledge
Obama’s budget: endless cash loan or lesson in vocabulary?
The Swamp ran an article bearing the “Obama Agnostic” headline about the deficits.” Reigning the federal deficit in can lead to higher taxes on the middle class, but Obama is promising it won’t happen. Instead of committing to one particular idea or strategy, he’s staying “agnostic” and waiting for an idea.
No taxes, no cuts?
Obama told the press we can’t simply “cut our way out of this problem.” Tax increases and cuts in Social Security and Medicare might be where Obama goes, but he didn’t give Bloomberg any definitive answers. He is staying “agnostic,” which is the sort of typical non-committal language native to politicians.
Do anything but commit
I understand political gamesmanship. I also understand that repairing something as large as our national debt is a tremendously complex task. The budget Obama proposed cuts it to $ 1.267 trillion, improving on the $ 1.56 projection – but he’s eyeing $ 727 billion by 2013! Remaining agnostic won’t get you very far, as tough decisions will have to be made right away to meet a 2013 deadline. The recession has made things harder, and people are harder up for cash loans than in a while. Make a decision and stick with it.
Political Bumper Stickers: The Funny Side of Politics
Politics brings out the best and the worst in people, whether it is the candidates grasping for votes or the electorate themselves, but there is a great deal of fun to be had from watching the great democratic process in action.
One of the funniest aspects of the political arena is the number of political bumper stickers which make their appearance, not just at election time but whenever a “popular” politician is in office.
We should all be grateful for free speech!
So here is a selection of vehicular commentary on the political scene for your enjoyment:
George “W” Bush
Love him or hate him, George gave us more fun than any president since the last one. Bushism’s litter the modern lexicon and here are just a few to cause a smirk or two:
· Bush – End of an Error
· Bush – Like a Rock, Only Dumber
· If You Can Read This You Ain’t Our President
· Impeachment: It’s Not Just For Blowjobs Anymore – oh, Bill! You're up next - at least your wife is!
· We Need a President Who Is Fluent In At Least One Language
There are so many more, but it’s just not fair to concentrate on Ole’ George, so let’s take a look at someone else.
Hilary Clinton
We could have take a look at her husband, Bill Clinton and “W’s” predecessor, but Hilary provokes the kind of right-wing ire that liberals feel with Bush;
· Hilary – Just Like Your Ex-Wife, Only Bitchier!
· “Run Hilary Run!” – this was the best-selling political bumper sticker in New York because Republicans adopted it too – the difference was, they put the sticker on the front fender;
· GOPee on Hilary; and
· Monica’s X-Boyfriend’s Wife for President
Now we could go on for quite some time yet, but in the interests of political balance, it is only fair we make sure every political figure get’s the same exposure.
President Obama
President Obama is suffering from what many president’s before him have experienced – a turn in public acceptance and approval after they get elected. President Obama is in the midst of major legislative efforts with the financial crisis and getting a healthcare system established, and both these areas are fertile ground for bumper sticker aficionados:
· Obamacare – 9 out of 10 Illegal Immigrants Prefer It;
· Nobama (the ubiquitous play on words);
· HONK! If I’m Paying Your Mortgage
· One Big Ass Mistake America
· So, How’s That Hope and Change Working Out for You?
Thankfully, President Obama still has another three years of office to run, so there is plenty of time to iron out the kinks in any humor argument. At the next election who do you think will be running against him – Sarah Palin perhaps?
Ex-Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin
Going rogue seems to be what Sarah is all about these days, after quitting as the Governor of Alaska, ostensibly to spend more time with her family (or plotting on the takeover of the free world by becoming the first female US President).
No stranger to controversy, Sarah provokes the best and worst in people:
· I Can See Russia from My House (no she couldn’t);
· Coldest State, Hottest Governor;
· I Wanna be Sarah’s Intern!;
· McMilf 2008; and
· Pregnant Unwed High School Dropouts for Palin!