From the Daily Beast:

From the department of “no one was supposed to see this” comes the Republican National Committee’s internal pitch to its fundraisers. A PowerPoint presentation, obtained by Politico, makes it clear that the committee’s strategy for raising money this election cycle will be fear-mongering. The committee says its campaign should focus on a promise to “save the country from trending toward socialism.” Helpful advice included is that wealthy “ego-driven” donors can be seduced by offers of access and, what they termed “tchochkes.” Another gem from the presentation is the page headed “The Evil Empire.” On it, President Obama is made to look like the Joker from Batman, Nancy Pelosi is depicted as Cruella DeVille, and Harry Reid as Scooby-Doo. RNC Chairman Michael Steele’s office has already distanced itself from the pitch. “Obviously, the chairman disagrees with the language and finds the use of such imagery to be unacceptable,” committee communications director Doug Heye told Politico. The Daily Beast’s Eric Alterman on the GOP’s breathtaking contempt for its own—and how the Dems should respond.

No wonder the Republican Party is in tatters.

John Avlon of the Daily Beast tells us that CPAC (Conservative Political Action Committee) is set to hold its annual meeting tomorrow. Republicans anxious to run for President in 2012 will be there in full force. Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, and more will be on hand.

The keynote speaker is Glenn Beck, the eminent conservative nutcase.

And guess what? The thing is being co-sponsored by the John Birch Society.

Avlon writes: [Read more →]

I’m not a fan of the Tea Party. CNN ran a poll to determine just who those folks are that populate the new Tea Party.

Activists in the Tea Party movement tend to be male, rural, upscale, and overwhelmingly conservative, according to a new national poll.

CNN found that Tea Party activists would vote overwhelmingly Republican in a two-party race for Congress.

“If the Tea Party runs its own candidates for U.S. House, virtually every vote the Tea Party candidate gets would be siphoned from the GOP candidate, potentially allowing the Democrats to win in districts that they might have otherwise lost.”

[Read more →]

The following is a letter to the editor that appeared in today’s Las Vegas Sun. It was written by a school teacher, Jeremy Christensen of Las Vegas. I’m running it here because I agree with what Mr. Christensen writes:

“It’s time to stop whining that education in Nevada doesn’t work because of a lack of funding,” Gov. Jim Gibbons said in his State of the State address last week. “We need to quit throwing money at programs that haven’t worked and don’t work for our children.”

What hasn’t worked and doesn’t work for our children is throwing clichés and ideology at problems.

This question is not as complicated as it seems. What is a reasonable cost to educate a child? Most of the other states in our nation believe that it costs more than what we spend in Nevada. How do these other states pay for the generous investments they make to educate their children?

Forty-five states in our country have an effective state-level corporate tax rate of at least 5 percent. How long have zealous ideologues proclaimed that businesses would flee if we even considered any taxes on corporations? These corporations pay taxes almost everywhere else in the United States. How long have our children suffered some of the largest class sizes in the nation and parades of long-term substitutes in vital courses such as mathematics because of this outrageous lie?

The state of Nevada is not making a good-faith effort to provide quality education for its children. Apparently our children have no voice or heroes to stand up for them and say enough is enough. The greatest sins in Sin City are committed against its children.

Governor “No New Taxes” Gibbons has a duty to those school children to see that their education proceeds with quality and unabated. It is his duty as elected governor whether he wants to raise taxes or not. I personally don’t care whether he gets re-elected or not. I didn’t vote for him to start with. I do care about the education of Nevada’s children.

All my kids are now grown with kids of their own. All still in California, which has its own financial problems. My grand daughter, Joan, will graduate from the University of California-Chico in June. She plans to then attend law school. She works and attends college now, has she has done since she started. One of my grand sons, Aaron, is attending college in California with the objective of obtaining a degree for his future as an accountant. He also works to pay for and attend school. But the financial burden of college tuition and expenses for law school are mammoth to a 22 year old.

Cutting the education budget, again, as proposed by Governor Gibbons, may be expedient to him, but not to those kids trying to get a college education.

Nevada maintains one of the lowest commitments in the nation for education. California is slipping fast, losing it’s once high education status.

I read that Nevada’s mining industry has enjoyed a low rate of taxation for 150 years. The implication being that that industry does not pay its fair share of taxes—a tax status that is unfair to ordinary taxpayers in Nevada.

I, frankly, think it is time that Governor Gibbons begin to realize that his obligation to Nevada taxpayers is higher than his adherence to his “no new taxes” creed. It is time to fairly and evenly raise taxes in Nevada, even if it requires applying a fair tax on the mining industry.

At a Tea Party protest in Las Vegas, Joe Heck, a Republican running for Congress, blamed both the Democratic and Republican Parties for moving the country toward “socialistic tyranny.” [New York Times]

The foregoing paragraph is an excerpt from an article in today’s New York Times by David Barstow.

Barstow portrays a bewildering array of political groups around the nation forming and struggling to find a way to thwart what they perceive as a governmental threat to their independence, liberty and freedom.

All kinds of groups are mentioned. The Tea Party, John Birch Society, Oath Keepers, Friends for Liberty, Defenders of Liberty

Glenn Beck gets prominent mention throughout the article, along with Ayn Rand and George Orwell, and Sarah Palin.

There is talk of eliminating Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Debates about secession, tax boycotts, nullification of federal laws, forming citizen militias.

“It is a sprawling rebellion” writes Barstow, “a narrative of impending tyranny.”

Lots of talk about patriotism, the Constitution, and the Federal Reserve.

A popular T-shirt at Tea Party rallies reads, “Proud Right-Wing Extremist.”

There is fear among right wing extremists of a “cataclysmic economic collapse in the United States.”

Far too much to in the article to summarize here. You are best advised to go read the coverage in the New York Times.

So what does any of this have to do with Pahrump and Nye County? There is evidence of the existence of some of these groups right here in River City, that’s what.

Nevada may give rise to a third political party, joining ranks with the Democratic and Republican Parties. Jon Ralston reports that the “Tea Party has qualified as a third party in Nevada and will have a candidate in the Senate race to battle for the seat held by Majority Leader Harry Reid.” [Las Vegas Sun]

The new Tea Party will need to get 1 percent of Nevada’s electorate to vote for its candidate in November to remain alive. The Tea Party has filed their Certificate of Existence.

So who is the Tea Party’s candidate to run against Harry Reid? Someone named Jon Ashjian says the Sun. Ashjian hasn’t yet declared he is a candidate.

What is the Tea Party’s aim:

“promote this nation’s founding principles of freedom, liberty and a small representative government. We believe that our government under both Democrat and Republican control has led to massive national debt, crushing deficits, increased taxes; while establishing a large and powerful federal government in a direct refutation of the founding ideals of America.”

You can read the Tea Party’s constitution, bylaws and officers here.

So now we can all watch a multitude of political partys compete for election to public office to run the country.

I predict there will be a number of Nye County residents flocking to the new Tea Party. Or maybe the Tea Party isn’t all that new, remembering the Tea Party in the Boston Harbor.

We’ll see how it goes.

Alan Grayson (D-FL) who gave us “The Republican Health Care Plan—Don’t Get Sick” and if you do “Die Quickly” has prompted the Republicans to initiate a money-raising website called Alan Disgrayson.com which proclaims:

The time has come to send (dis)Grayson home. That is why, Leader Boehner and NRCC Chairman Sessions are pleased to announce the official “FL-08 Nominee Fund.” Any dollar donated to this fund will go directly to the Republican candidate who emerges from the primary to challenge (dis)Grayson in 2010.

Looks like Grayson is doing something right. (See The Republican Health Care Plan.

Wendell Potter, former CIGNA executive wrote yesterday,

There are so many problems with the health care reform bill proposed by Senator Max Baucus (D-MT), chair of the Senate Finance Committee, it is little wonder that members of his committee have proposed more than 500 amendments to fix it. Unfortunately, some of the worst amendments that would make the bill even more of a gift to the health insurance industry are being offered by Republicans. If there is a God in heaven, they will not be adopted. But many other amendments are vital, including those that will make this key bill more like the better bills that have been reported out of four other Congressional committees. All of those bills call for the creation of a public insurance option, which is an absolutely critical element of reform. Without it, all of us who are not eligible for an existing government-run program, like the Medicare and VA programs, will be forced to buy coverage from the private insurance industry, which is dominated by a cartel of huge for-profit companies.

The adoption of an amendment to create a strong public option, supported by Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and many others on the committee, is certainly job one. But there are many additional fixes that are necessary, including other amendments being offered by Senator Rockefeller. They are so important I have sent a letter to Senator Baucus and the other members of the committee urging them to adopt the Rockefeller amendments that will require private insurance companies to be more honest and transparent in their dealings with consumers and more accountable to federal and state governments that must regulate them. As I note in the letter, without those amendments, insurance companies will be able to continue their most discriminatory practices without either transparency or real accountability. Here is my letter:

September 23, 2009

The Honorable Max Baucus
Committee on Finance
United States Senate
219 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-6200

Dear Chairman Baucus:

As a former health insurance company executive, I am very concerned about the lack of transparency and accountability in the health insurance industry. That is why I urge you to incorporate Senator Rockefeller’s Amendments #C12 and #C13 into the America’s Healthy Future Act (AHFA), in particular with regard to the need for airtight regulations to protect consumer interests.

As proposed, AHFA will allow insurers to continue many of their most discriminatory practices without either transparency or real accountability: cost-shifting to their most vulnerable members through benefit designs that serve the needs of Wall Street; and rationing of care based on arbitrary opinions about what care is needed. In addition, there is no accountability for insurance companies to provide affordable and comprehensive health care coverage. A requirement that everyone buy health insurance accompanied by subsidies for people with low incomes does not ensure that Americans will have affordable care. The explosive cost growth in Massachusetts after health care reform is a case in point. And, AHFA has no mechanisms to enforce the insurance regulations that are included.

In addition, AHFA designates the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) to write key regulations. This is of great concern to me because this proposal delegates to the NAIC, a private organization, with rule-making authority that is generally reserved for an agency of the federal government. Any institution given the authority to define the rules that will determine health insurance coverage for millions of Americans must be completely independent of the insurance industry and have a demonstrated record of putting the concerns of consumers first. The institution must also have the will and the resources to carry out the rulemaking process in a transparent and unbiased manner, with opportunity for input from all interested parties at each stage of the process. Based on its traditional manner of conducting business, the NAIC fails to meet any of these standards. The NAIC does not operate independently of the insurance industry. In fact, the NAIC is a private corporation, funded, in large part, by the insurance industry itself. Without industry dollars, the NAIC would not operate as it does today. In addition, eight of the last 10 NAIC presidents, as well as numerous commissioners, have gone directly from their posts to industry positions, creating the distinct impression that leadership positions at NAIC are mere stepping stones to more lucrative careers in the insurance industry.

For all these reasons, as well as my inside knowledge of how easily insurance companies circumvent existing regulations, I support Senator Rockefeller’s Amendments #C12 and #C13 to AHFA, which will:

*Create a grant program for state insurance departments to help them better enforce market rules and protect consumers.

*Establish a federal role for private health insurance oversight and provide resources for the Department of Health and Human Services to hire expert staff to carry out these functions and coordinate with state regulators.

* Require health insurance plans to disclose clear, accurate, and timely information on their policies and practices to ensure that they do not circumvent new federal health insurance regulations.

* Add needed transparency requirements such as: establishing fair grievance and appeals procedures by health insurers; clarifying information for health professionals and freeing up time for patients by establishing transparency standards relating to reimbursement arrangements between health plans and providers; and requiring advance notice of plan changes so consumers get what they pay.

*Establish America’s Health Insurance Trust, a nonprofit, independent, consumer-driven organization that will evaluate and give ratings to all health insurance products offered through the National Health Insurance Exchange. Annual insurance product ratings will be based on factors such as affordability, adequacy, transparency, consumer satisfaction, provider satisfaction, and quality.

* Ensure that ombudsman offices in each state are open to consumers at all stages of the appeal process to allow for early intervention and increase the likelihood of successful appeals.

Health insurance reform requires that we not only create strong new consumer protections. It also requires that those rules be effectively enforced. American families and businesses must have health insurance that is accountable to them, not to Wall Street.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Wendell Potter, Senior Fellow on Health Care, Center for Media and Democracy

Cc: All Members of the Senate Finance Committee

[Source: Center for Media and Democracy]

Members of the Senate Finance Committee, yesterday, September 29, 2009  rejected Senator Rockefeller’s proposed amendment to the America’s Healthy Future Act even though each of them had Potter’s letter dated  September 23, 2009. Wonder if any of them even read his letter.

The Nevada Senate Democratic Caucus announced it will back Tammy Peterson in the race for the state Senate seat held by Republican incumbent Barbara Cegavske.

She is, in the view of the Senate leadership, a “gold-plated candidate,” one state Senate insider said.

But she is not the only Democrat running for the state Senate seat. Another Democrat, Mark Brandon, a former college football star who has an insurance business in the district intends to run for the same seat.

I thought the rules precluded the Democratic Party from endorsing a candidate when two Democrats are competing in the primary election. (Note: The Democratic Party is a separate and distinct entity from the Democratic Party. I don’t know if the rules of the Nevada Senate Democratic Caucus prohibits endorsement of a candidate or not.)

For the official Democratic Party to announce it is backing a candidate in the primary phase of the election process makes it darned near impossible for another Democratic to run successfully.

If Democrat A is recruited to run by the NSDP then Democrat B, who wasn’t recruited by the NSDP, wants to run, then B is virtually out of luck, even if B is the more competent candidate. (Note: So far as I know the NSDP (Nevada State Democratic Party) does not endorse a candidate during the primary election.)

The NSDP, having recruited A, will put their resources behind A and ignore B, putting B at a huge disadvantage.

Of all things, the Democratic Party should be democratic, shouldn’t it?

A similar circumstance occurred here in Nye County last spring. The incumbent members of the county Central Committee decided not to run for re-election. Some “grassroots” Democrats, having toiled diligently in the Obama vs. Clinton primary election campaigns and awakened to political activity, wanted to run for seats on the Central Committee. It is a long story, but suffice it to say, the “old” Central Committee blocked the would-be candidates from eligibility to run for the offices, then endorsed for election the current members of the Central Committee who took office last April. Additionally the “old” Central Committee imposed such stringent voting restrictions that hardly any of the 9,000+ grassroots Democrats in Nye County were eligible to vote for new members of the “new” Central Committee.

The result of the actions of the “old” Central Committee has been a deep resentment and split in the Nye County Democratic Party which still persists.

Hardly the way to run an organized political party.

It is a sticky problem, however. Recruiting good, competent candidates for elective office is one of the most difficult goals of organized politics.

Witness the difficulty of the Republican Party trying to find a viable candidate to run against Senator Harry Reid. Or finding someone to run for Governor when Jim Gibbons says he’s going to run for re-election. The Republican Party is stuck with supporting Gibbons, an incompetent, when there are other Republicans intending to run against Gibbons.

The problem doesn’t help the voters, who, theoretically, are interested in electing the best possible and competent people to office. When either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party tie their hands with rules that closes the possibility for good candidates to even run it shrinks the field for voters to pick from.

There is a lot to be said for recruiting candidates but on the other hand there is a lot to be said for letting candidates bubble up on their own. At the same time allowing anyone and their dog to run allows any wingnut to run.

And, considering how poorly voters perform in making their voting picks, it leaves all of us in a precarious position.

[Source: Las Vegas Sun]

I want to express my thanks to James Wilson of Pahrump who inspired me to write this post. Jim had commented to a prior post that “According to my doctor in Pahrump, his malpractice premiums amount to less than 1% of his gross.  Charge cards assess slightly more than that per transaction.”

Merchants want to negotiate credit card fees they’re charged by banks.

When you go to your local convenience store to buy a jug of wine or six-pack of beer or even a loaf of bread and hand the clerk your Bank of America Visa Card or debit card to pay for it the bank charges the merchant an “interchange” fee of 1 – 2% of the purchase.

That cuts into the merchants profit margin of course and increases the bank’s profits. Merchants don’t like it. They’re fighting back. Banks increased their income by $48 billion in 2008. That isn’t chicken feed.

The Government Accountability Office is doing a study of the fees, as required by a law signed by President Obama in May that bans many unfair credit card industry practices. Can you imagine a Republican Congress or the Bush Administration enacting and enforcing such a law? I didn’t think so.

[Read more →]