Well, another sleazebag Missouri legislator has resigned over inappropriate behavior with an intern. At least former Republican Speaker Diehl resigned and slithered away into obscurity but Democratic Senator Paul Levota was still trying to hang on until a second intern came forward with proof of sexual harassment.
Eli Yokely via JoplinGlobe.com:
The sad saga in Jefferson City brought yet another series of stories this week about a political culture run amok. They started this year as soon as lawmakers returned to Jefferson City, with accounts of exorbitant House “committee hearings” at a country club, featuring sea bass and red wine. They took a tragic turn in the cold of winter, when a man found himself overwhelmed with a relentless political environment that some say led to his suicide. And this spring, it turned gross when a series of sexually charged text messages were revealed between Speaker of the House John Diehl and a Missouri Southern State University intern, ultimately leading to Diehl’s resignation…
In case there is some confusion in Jefferson City or anywhere else, let’s talk about what sexual harassment is according to the Missouri Department of Labor. It is when “submission to such conduct is made a term or condition of an individual’s employment,” when “submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis of employment decisions affecting such individual,” or, in the case of the stories we’ve learned of from the Missouri Legislature, when “such conduct creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment…It is not a Democrat or a Republican problem, or a House or Senate problem. It is not a 2015 problem (ask U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill, who in her upcoming book details her own harassment as a young Jefferson City intern).Read more…
As leaders and marched last Saturday morning in Alderman Jeffrey Boyd’s 22nd ward to “stop the violence,” one “leader” was noticeably MIA; Mayor Francis Slay. The umpteenth elected mayor’s absence was notable since Alderman Boyd is one of the mayor’s few elected Black allies. Crime seems to be out of control in St. Louis and the Mayor Slay is taking the milquetoast approach of being “sensitive” while homicides are up 60% from last year.
22nd Ward Alderman Jeffrey Boyd (center)
STLToday:
The bodies are found on downtown streets and neighborhood alleys. Near O’Fallon Park in the north, and Gravois Park in the southTheir number is tallied nearly every morning. Two, three, four — sometimes more. With the homicide rate on target to reach its highest level in 20 years, St. Louis police are coming under increasing pressure. So is the man who two years ago won control of the department to hold it more accountable.
“I wouldn’t want to be in Mayor Slay’s shoes,” said Todd Swanstrom, a professor who specializes in urban politics at the University of Missouri-St. Louis. Mayor Francis Slay wrested oversight of city police from the state in 2013, the first time since the Civil War. With the change has come more power over police strategy, but also more political responsibility for it.Read more…
The AP reported, “Phony applicants that investigators signed up last year under President Barack Obama’s health care law got automatically re-enrolled for 2015. Some were rewarded with even bigger taxpayer subsidies for their insurance premiums, a congressional probe has found.
“The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office says 11 counterfeit characters that its investigators created last year were automatically re-enrolled by HealthCare.gov, even though most had unresolved documentation issues. In Obama’s terms, they got to keep the coverage they had.
“Six of those later were flagged and sent termination notices. But GAO said it was able to get five of them reinstated by calling HealthCare.gov’s consumer service center. That seemed to be a weak link in the system.
“The five bogus beneficiaries who were reinstated even got their monthly subsidies bumped up a bit, although GAO did not ask for it. The case of the sixth fake enrollee who appealed was under review.
“HealthCare.gov does not appear to be set up to detect fraud, GAO audits and investigations chief Seto Bagdoyan said in prepared testimony for a Senate Finance Committee hearing Thursday. A copy was provided to The Associated Press.
“HealthCare.gov’s document-processing contractor ‘is not required to seek to detect fraud,’ said Bagdoyan. ‘The contractor personnel involved in the document-verification process are not trained as fraud experts and do not perform antifraud duties.’”
At a Senate Finance Committee hearing, Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-UT) said, “For this investigation, GAO created fictitious identities to apply for premium tax subsidies through the federal health insurance exchange. We learned last year that 11 out of 12 fake applications were approved. [The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)] accepted fabricated documentation with these applications without attempting to verify its authenticity and enrolled fake applicants while handing out thousands of dollars in premium tax subsidies.
“Now, a year later, GAO has reported that nothing has changed and that, if anything, there are more problems. Worst of all, the administration has known about these problems for over a year now and has apparently not taken the necessary steps to rectify them. While CMS says that it is balancing consumer access to the system with program integrity concerns, I think it’s pretty clear just what’s going on here.
“Since the federal exchange was first implemented, success has been measured by the number of applicants that have signed up for insurance. Indeed, last year, when the administration reached its initial enrollment goal, critics of the law were told that we had been wrong all along and that the law was, despite all the evidence to the contrary, working just fine.
“However, with these findings from GAO, it seems obvious, at least to me, that the administration has been preoccupied with signing up as many applicants as possible, ignoring potential fraud and integrity issues along the way.”
According to a follow-up AP report, Senate Democrats are upset–not at the lack of controls for fraud through Obamacare at CMS, nor at the failure of CMS to address this issue after knowing about it for at least a year. No, Senate Democrats are upset that the GAO launched the probe at all.
“Senior Democrats are pushing back against an undercover government probe of President Barack Obama’s health care law. Investigators signed up bogus beneficiaries, then got their coverage renewed – with bigger taxpayer subsidies. Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden said Thursday the probe did not uncover any real-world fraud . . . .
“But GAO’s audits chief said the investigation exposed real concerns. He said it was relatively easy for GAO’s fictitious characters to get and keep coverage. He added that HealthCare.gov seems to put a higher priority on getting people covered than on verifying they are entitled to benefits.”
President Obama has put forth a nominee to be the new administrator at CMS. This was necessitated by the departure of the previousadministrator, Marilyn Tavenner, earlier this year.
Meanwhile, The New York Times noted the news of Tavenner’s new job yesterday. “Marilyn B. Tavenner, the former Obama administration official in charge of the rollout of HealthCare.gov, was chosen on Wednesday to be the top lobbyist for the nation’s health insurance industry.
“Ms. Tavenner, who stepped down from her federal job in February, will become president and chief executive of America’s Health Insurance Plans, the trade group whose members include Aetna, Anthem, Humana, Kaiser Permanente and many Blue Cross and Blue Shield companies. . . .
“On Aug. 24, she will succeed Karen M. Ignagni, a former health policy specialist at the A.F.L.-C.I.O., who has led the industry’s lobbying arm for 22 years. . . .
“Most recently, Ms. Tavenner was the administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the federal agency that insures one in three Americans and has an annual budget of more than $800 billion. As administrator, she was in charge of HealthCare.gov. . . .
“Senator John Barrasso, Republican of Wyoming, described the selection in more negative terms. ‘While millions of Americans are still being hurt by Obamacare’s soaring costs and fewer choices,’ he said, ‘Ms. Tavenner’s appointment shows how the law has created a cozy and profitable relationship for some.’”
During a speech on the U.S. Senate floor, U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (Mo.) raised concerns over the lack of U.S. influence in the ongoing Iranian nuclear negotiations. Blunt also reiterated his calls for the Obama Administration to cease all negotiations until the American hostages detained in Iran are released, including Pastor Saeed Abedini, former U.S. Marine Amir Hekmati, and Washington Post journalist Jason Rezaian, and until Iran cooperates with the U.S. in locating former FBI official Robert Levinson.
Despite the triumphant rhetoric from President Obama and Democrats in Congress, yesterday’s ruling by the Supreme Court on federal exchange subsidies doesn’t change the long list of problems inherent to Obamacare, nor does it change the law’s longstanding unpopularity with voters.
Recognizing this reality, Politico writes today, “Obamacare has cleared a second major hurdle at the Supreme Court — but its troubles are far from over. The law is still highly unpopular, and significant structural issues remain: Health insurance rates are rising, many people don’t have as much choice of doctors and hospitals as they’d like, some states continue to struggle with their exchanges, and 21 states still haven’t backed Medicaid expansion. . . .
“Some of the states that decided to set up an exchange are dealing with ongoing technological problems or financial difficulties, especially now that they can’t get federal grants.
“Hawaii decided earlier this year to move to HealthCare.gov for enrollment, and Colorado and Vermont are still working to fix problems with their systems. Some Republicans in blue states are already saying their states should switch to the federal exchange now that the subsidies will stay nationwide. . . .
“The law’s legal problems are not yet over, either. Another challenge to the ACA mandate that employers cover contraception in their insurance plans is moving through the courts — and very likely to return that issue to the Supreme Court in the next term. And a suit backed by the House of Representatives against the law’s cost-sharing provisions was filed earlier this year. . . .
“The law remains underwater in the polls. The most recent Kaiser Family Foundation Health Tracking poll found that 42 percent of people have unfavorable views of the law and 39 percent had favorable views. Those numbers have fluctuated since the law passed in 2010, but generally, the legislation has been viewed negatively.”
Politico then looks at the many reasons Americans remain unhappy with the effects of Obamacare: “For one, the public is frustrated with insurance premium increases that they view as directly related to Obamacare. A Kaiser Family Foundation analysis found that 2016 premiums are up by a greater percentage than in 2015. Benchmark silver-level plans are rising by an average of 4.4 percent in a select group of cities but could be much higher in parts of the country — with a Wellmark plan in South Dakota wanting to raise rates by 42.9 percent, CareFirst seeking a nearly 30 percent increase in Maryland and Health Care Service Corp. going after a 51.6 percent hike in New Mexico. While premiums were on their way up before the law passed, the public faults Obamacare — and that’s something the White House hasn’t been able to shake.
“Some people who have signed up have been shocked to discover the size of their deductibles or that they can’t go to the doctor they want because insurers have imposed narrow ‘in-network”’ care. . . .
“The law’s future is also threatened by the potential repeal of a few elements that are particularly vulnerable to Democratic opposition.
“Repeal of the medical device tax passed the House last week with nearly enough votes to override a presidential veto. A Medicare payment board that is tasked with controlling health care spending is unpopular with House Democrats, too, and likely to get a repeal vote soon. . . .
“The ‘Cadillac tax’ on high-cost employee health insurance plans, which goes into effect in 2018, is vehemently opposed by labor unions and some Democrats on Capitol Hill.
So while the president tried to declare the discussion of his unpopular health care law over yesterday, there are clearly many many problems with it that must be highlighted.
In an op-ed today for The Wall Street Journal, Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), a doctor, writes, “No one . . . can change that ObamaCare is an expensive failure—unpopular, unworkable and unaffordable.
“ObamaCare enrollees are facing double-digit premium increases, the opposite of what they were promised. The president’s health-care law was supposed to ‘bend the cost curve’—and it has, in the wrong direction. ObamaCare piled mandates on the insurance industry while drastically increasing uncertainty in the market. Early on, insurers were working with incomplete data when setting rates. They didn’t know how sick or expensive their millions of new enrollees would be. Now they have a better idea and are proposing enormous rate hikes—30% or more in states such as in Maryland, Tennessee and New Mexico.”
“It’s time,” Sen. Barrasso writes, “for the president to focus on addressing the real problems with this law, not on protecting his legacy. He has conceded before that the law isn’t perfect, and that there is more work to be done. Now he can show he means it.
“Republicans have good ideas about how to lower costs, improve access and help Americans lead healthier lives.
“First, some of the health-care law’s most unpopular and expensive mandates should be scrapped. These include the long list of coverage requirements that drive up costs and force many people to buy insurance that is more than they want or can afford. For example, one of my constituents in Wyoming asked me why the law forced her to pay for maternity coverage after she had a hysterectomy.
“Americans deserve the freedom to buy coverage that is right for their needs and budgets, not the dictates of Washington. No two patients are exactly alike. Health-care reform should not attempt to be one-size-fits-all either. . . . Employers and workers should be freed from the parts of the law that reduce jobs, wages and economic growth. For instance, the mandate that businesses with more than 50 employees provide health insurance only covers workers who spend 30 hours or more a week on the job. That led many employers to cut or cap workers’ hours to below that threshold. In January, the House passed a bipartisan bill to repeal the 30-hour workweek by restoring “full-time” employment to the traditional definition of 40 hours a week. It has been introduced in the Senate with 40 co-sponsors, including two Democrats.”
Organizers say this is an opportunity to learn how important the Missouri Cannabis Restoration and Protection Act is. They will also have the Missouri Cannabis Restoration and Protection Act petition there to sign. The Nixa Meeting Center is at 160 and South Street and there is a sign directing you there.
USA Today reports, “Tehran will not sign a final nuclear deal unless world powers simultaneously lift economic sanctions imposed on Iran, the nation’s president said Thursday. . . .
“In a televised address Thursday at a ceremony marking Iran’s nuclear technology day, President Hassan Rouhani appeared to rule out a gradual removal of the sanctions, which have hit the nation’s energy and financial sectors hard — and devastated its economy.
“‘We will not sign any agreement, unless all economic sanctions are totally lifted on the first day of the implementation of the deal,’ he said. ‘We want a win-win deal for all parties involved in the nuclear talks.’ ‘The Iranian nation has been and will be the victor in the negotiations,’ he added.”
This is in contrast to what President Obama has been saying about the agreement, as USA Today notes. “‘It has never been our position that all of the sanctions against Iran should be removed from Day One,’ White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Monday.”
But it’s not just Rouhani saying this. According to Reuters, “Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Thursday demanded that all sanctions on Iran be lifted at the same time as any final agreement with world powers on curbing Tehran’s nuclear program is concluded.
“Khamenei, the Islamic Republic’s most powerful figure and who has the last say on all state matters, was making his first comments on the interim deal reached between Iran and the powers last week in the Swiss city of Lausanne. . . .
“His stand on the lifting of sanctions matched earlier comments by Rouhani, who said Iran would only sign a final nuclear accord if all measures imposed over its disputed atomic work are lifted on the same day. These include nuclear-related United Nations resolutions as well as U.S. and EU nuclear-related economic sanctions. ‘All sanctions should be removed when the deal is signed. If the sanctions removal depends on other processes, then why did we start the negotiations?’ Khamenei said.”
As The Washington Post editors said earlier this week, the gap between what the Obama administration about lifting sanctions and what the Iranian leaders are saying is a significant problem. “Worryingly, the fact sheets issued by the U.S. and Iranian governments differ sharply on this point: While the U.S. version says that “sanctions will be suspended after” the International Atomic Energy Agency ‘has verified that Iran has taken all of its key nuclear-related steps,’ Tehran’s account is that ‘at the same time as the start of Iran’s nuclear-related implementation work, all of the sanctions will be automatically annulled on a single specified day.’
“The gulf between those two scenarios is extremely important. Unless sanctions relief is conditioned on Iranian performance, the United States and its partners will lose their leverage.”
What a sad commentary from Mr. “Satan Sandwich” himself. Many of these folks’ ancestors were literally “beaten down” in order for them to have a chance to vote and participate in the Democratic process, so just because they’ve gotten traffic citations from their local police department, this will discourage them from voting?
“Cleaver said one of the biggest challenges in getting out the vote is convincing people that the political process can effect change. “If you live in a community (like Ferguson) where you’ve had taxation by citation or strobe-light lynching, then you’re going to be less likely to want to vote,” Cleaver said. “I mean, you’ve been beaten down.” Read more…
