The irony is that parts of AOC’s “Green New Deal” already seem A-OK with trends well underway in the nation’s capitalist markets.What the hell? I swear Still is messing with us...and it's working, especially after this:
Renewable energy sources; conservation strategies in manufacturing, construction and other sectors; “smart” power grids and transportation hubs; and the wise use of natural resources are all part of the U.S. economy’s general movement toward sustainability. It is happening, in large part, because it makes good business sense but also because government and academic research is generating new products and processes for market adoption.STOP ACTING LIKE THIS IS YOUR IDEA AND SOMETHING NEW!!! Suddenly, without Scott Walker at the controls guiding the state back into a 20th century ozone haze, the Democratic idea that the state could be more energy "self-reliant" is what, a flash of your genius?
That picture emerged in an April 23 Madison forum produced by the Wisconsin Technology Council, where 90 people heard from the director of one of the nation’s top bioenergy research laboratories and two advocates for strategies that can make Wisconsin more energy self-reliant, cleaner and able to capitalize on “green” jobs.Oh, and we can thank Trump? OMG...
The Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center, part of the UW-Madison Energy Institute ... was recently renewed – with an increase in federal dollars – by the Trump administration. That renewal was a vote of confidence for a lab that has filed nearly 200 U.S. patent applications, produced 109 technology licenses or option agreements, published 1,250 scholarly papers, led to five startup companies and trained hundreds of students, many of whom work in industry. The Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation holds those patents and licenses.
Tim Donohue, the GLBRC lab’s director, said the chance to create more clean products and energy jobs over time is significant (there were 2.7 million such U.S. jobs in 2016), and it’s poised to grow ... adding Wisconsin can compete in that race when it comes to bio-energy, wind, solar, conservation and energy storage.
Scott Coenen, executive director of the Wisconsin Conservative Energy Forum ... was created to give Republicans and conservatives a constructive voice in the debate, often dominated by unyielding opposition from some on the right – especially when it comes to global climate change.Without Scott Walker's iron fisted opposition to clean energy, "brave" special interest lackey's are just now speaking up, and it's no coincedence:
John Imes, executive director of the Wisconsin Environmental Initiative, said Wisconsin has “fallen a little behind” the rest of the Midwest in developing clean energy industries, but the state’s strong manufacturing base can lead in catching up ... be a part of producing wind turbines, for example. “We’ve got access to markets, we’ve got deep water ports,” Imes said. “So those jobs could be in Wisconsin.”And this will make your head explode, after all the trash talk we've heard from our out of touch Republican legislators at the Capitol:
Coenen said solar energy is an example of a renewable energy source that costs far less today than even a few years ago. Over the next four years, he said, around 1,700 megawatts of solar panel projects will come on line in Wisconsin. If that happens as scheduled, Wisconsin would move from getting about 1 percent of its energy from solar to about 20 percent.Is there a damn wall I can hit my head against....
“That has never happened like that in the history of our state, no matter how much government has pushed mandates or tax credits,” Coenen said. “It’s happening specifically, because the market has gotten behind these technologies.”
“Green New Deal” or no, the American economy is embracing changes to its energy portfolio. The question is whether government will be a catalyst or a top-down regulator. The former is more likely to produce results.
Former Gov. Scott Walker and the Republican-controlled legislature already expanded the Medicaid program. They just didn’t take the federal money available to states to offset much of the cost.Walker didn't think the federal government would be good on their word about paying 90 percent of the cost, odd since they've always paid their portion before that. Walker may be under the ridiculous and wrong impression the yearly federal changes to the percentage in the rules was the federal government going back on their payments. Walker is not a smart man.
Wisconsin is the only state in the country that expanded eligibility for its Medicaid program — the change made in 2014 covered 147,000 adults without dependent children as of January — while not accepting the federal money available to states through the Affordable Care Act.
That decision will have cost the state an estimated $1.1 billion in federal dollars through the current fiscal year, according to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau.
There’s also a question about the study’s time frame. The study ended with data from 2014 — before any purported cost shift to private health plans could have occurred in most states.
The expanded eligibility for Medicaid programs under the Affordable Care Act didn’t begin until Jan. 1, 2014.
Insurers typically negotiate three- to five-year contracts with health systems and other providers ... the price increases would not have been set until the following year, 2015.
Insurers and employers who self insure, in turn, set premiums for their health plans for the following year in September or October.
This means that any costs shifted to private insurers wouldn’t have appeared in the cost of health plans until 2016 at the earliest.
Darling: "And if we say, okay we're going to take you off that insurance and put you on government insurance, we're really going to change the private marketplace and shift a lot of the Medicaid expenses to the private insurers like you and me."
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) expanded eligibility to all individuals earning less than 138 percent of the federal poverty level.
States that don’t expand Medicaid are going to be in an increasingly tight spot, especially as the federal Disproportionate Share Hospital payments are reduced and phased out (because Medicaid expansion was intended to be universal, so there wasn’t supposed to be much uncompensated care to offset with DSH payments).Duffy-Dumbing-Down: I had to include the following mindless rant from Rep. Sean Duffy on Fox News the other day.
Duffy: "This Medicare-for-All is Medicare for none. What happens is if you have your health care plan through your union, you're a welder, your a teacher and you have your health care plan through your teacher plan, GONE...there is zero private insurance. So if you have Medicaid in your state, in Wisconsin we have BadgerCare, it would be a watered down BadgerCare. So instead of shooting for the stars and have a better plan for people, improving the plans in the coverage, they go to the lowest common denominator. And they're crappy plans, for everybody, but they're all the same.
The Trump administration has now increased the flexibility for states to add elements in their expansion programs that will help to better control costs going forward.
Contrary evidence from opponents suggesting official regret comes from expansions that occurred prior to the ACA, when the states bore a much greater share of expansion costs.
A September Wisconsin LFB report showed taking full Medicaid expansion beginning in 2020 would give the state an additional $280 million to work with over the next two-year budget cycle. Wisconsin has missed out on $1.1 billion in federal money since 2014, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau. The state would save about $513 million over the course of the next two-year budget, which runs from July through June 2021, if it accepted federal money for full Medicaid expansion, the Fiscal Bureau said.
This Brookings Issue Brief reviews (the) evidence, and evaluates continuing claims by Medicaid opponents that expansion is a “proven disaster” for state budgets. The strong balance of objective evidence indicates that actual costs to states so far ... are negligible or minor, and that states across the political spectrum do not regret their decisions to expand Medicaid.
1. Claims that the costs of Medicaid expansion have far exceeded expectations are overstated, misleading, and substantially inaccurate, based on a review of the credible evidence from either academic or government sources.
2. Expanded Medicaid pays for various costs that states previously were absorbing outside of Medicaid. Accordingly, several credible and expert evaluations (including one in the New England Journal of Medicine) show that states such as Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, New Mexico, Ohio, and West Virginia (among others) have actually reduced, not increased, state spending as a result of expansion.
3. Contradicting the ultra-conservative Foundation for Government Accountability claim that “each and every state that opted into ObamaCare expansion is facing a surge in Medicaid enrollment far higher than ever anticipated,” officials or agencies from Indiana, North Dakota, and Ohio (here and here) have flatly stated (and documented) that expansion enrollment, or overall enrollment, has either fallen short of, or not substantially exceeded, expectations.
4. the federal government now estimates that per person costs for newly eligible recipients will decrease almost 20 percent from their 2015 payment levels. Newly expanding states will be able to contract based on this more solid actuarial data, and can learn from the contracting techniques piloted by other states.
1. I'm a 24-year retired veteran of the United States Military.
2. I worked as a union locomotive electrician and train dispatcher for the BNSF Railroad ... worked as a Deputy Sheriff of Corrections at the St. Louis County Jail.
3. Earning my law degree ... practiced law focusing much of my time on Guardian ad Litem work. (Courts frequently appoint guardians ad litem to represent childrens' interests in cases involving Adoption, Child Custody, Child Support, Divorce)
4. In Polk County to help organize our local Democratic Party. I love my country and I am concerned for its future. The people of Northern and Western Wisconsin need to know that someone is standing up for them in Washington. That is work that I am eager to do.
WSAW: "It's been tiring, I've had a lot of windshield time." She said running a campaign in a district that covers 26 counties is a full time job ... she is living off her savings trying to win the votes of people in the seventh congressional district. "I'm not rich, I don't have big super donors giving to my campaign, you will not see television ads like other campaigns this season. The latest numbers show she has raised nearly $88,000 compared to Duffy's $3.3 million.
Engebretson said her experience in the military, along with working as a union locomotive electrician and opening her own law practice has provided her a well-rounded experience that is representative of the district.
1. "We over the decades have put a patchwork quilt-type health care system. So, we have thousands of different health care plans. We have employers that offer different plans, deductibles, all of this stuff. So, it's this really complex, confusing, multilayered health care system that we, unfortunately, built ourselves," Engebretson said. "And at what point do we just finally look around and say we can do better?" She said the switch would not happen overnight because of the complexity that health care is today. She explained one of the big benefits to Medicare for all is that costs would be lowered because those costs would be standardized.
2. Engebretson said there has not been enough investment in rural districts and small towns, which has caused people and businesses to leave to more developed areas. She explained if roads could be improved, people would have easier access to these areas and to the larger economy. If there was reliable and fast cell service coverage and broadband, businesses could grow, knowing they would have reliable access to customers in a world that is increasingly going digital.
3. "Wages are stagnant. Main streets have died," she urged. "I live in a town where my main street has struggled and you go around Wisconsin and it's just heartbreaking. And people are having to work more than one job, they don't have health care, they're losing hope."
4. She has claimed Duffy is an absentee representative, caring more about making cable television interviews than working with his district on issues important to him. Duffy responded by saying that claim is foolish. "People know I go to parades, and fairs, and dairy breakfasts all over this district. I do telephone town halls..." She said people in the district tell her the town halls he holds are scheduled last minute and people often do not get responses from him or his office when they reach out. She added he does not fight for the resources the people of the district need.
 |
| Real World antics... |
1. Nationally recognized professional lumberjack athlete - two-time world champion in the 90-foot speed climb, a three-time champion in the 60-foot and an accomplished log-roller.
2. Sean has been a color commentator for ESPN's Great Outdoor Games, as well as a Badger State Games Honorary Athlete.
3. Congressman Duffy practiced law in Hayward before becoming the District Attorney of Ashland County.
4. Congressman Duffy met his wife Rachel Campos-Duffy, an Arizona native, through the MTV show, “The Real World.”
Rep. Sean Duffy said he believes a free market system, with regulations handled by the state rather than the federal government, is better than what he calls one-size fits all model paid for by the government.
"In Wisconsin, we had a system... we were able to get those with preexisting conditions into a higher-risk pool, they paid a little bit more, totally affordable, and they were absolutely able to get health insurance. But also if I take them out of the healthy people's pool, I'm able to keep their rates lower, but also guarantee those with a preexisting condition insurance."
1. HIRSP offered seven plans with different premium and out-of-pocket cost structures.When you're just talking about cancer patients, excluding everyone else with a preexisting condition...
2. All HIRSP plans had high deductibles – 80% of enrollees were enrolled in plans with either a $2,500 or $5,000 deductible. There is no clear evidence showing the magnitude of the impact HIRSP had on premiums in the broader insurance market.
3. Premiums in HIRSP were an average of 15% higher than new policies sold in the regular market, and varied based on age and sex. Wisconsinites who could not afford the premiums or high out-of-pocket costs were priced out of HIRSP and were left without another coverage option.
4. Low-income enrollees – household below $34,000 for a family of two in 2012 – were eligible for income-based subsidies ... 25% of all HIRSP enrollees received a subsidy.
5. To reduce costs, HIRSP had a lifetime limit on benefits ($2 million). No HIRSP enrollees reached this limit.
6. Enrollees who were eligible because of a medical condition had a 6-month pre-existing condition exclusion period during which no medical services related to their condition were covered by HIRSP (prescription drug coverage was not excluded).
More than 285,000 cancer patients and survivors currently live in Wisconsin and need reliable access to health insurance that is affordable and comprehensive – free of pre-existing condition exclusions, high out-of-pocket costs, and other elements that increase the financial burden of a cancer diagnosis. Providing this type of coverage would require that a new version of HIRSP be sufficiently funded in order to remain affordable and sustainable.Check out the rates (don't forget high deductibles not listed here) way back in 2013, imagine what they might be today, and then tell me how "they're a little bit more, totally affordable."
DELAY OF AIR-QUALITY STANDARDS: The House passed a GOP-sponsored bill (HR 806) that would extend from 2017 to 2025 stricter standards under the Clean Air Act for reducing ground-level concentrations of ozone, or smog. The bill also changes from five years to 10 years the frequency of EPA reviews to ensure that National Ambient Air Quality Standards reflect the latest scientific and medical information.
The Republican House defeated a bid by Democrats to prevent HR 806 (above) from fully taking effect if an EPA scientific advisory committee concludes it would raise health risks to vulnerable populations such as outdoor workers, children, seniors, pregnant women and minority and low-income communities.
NATURAL GAS PIPELINE PERMITS: The House passed a GOP-sponsored bill (HR 2910) that would set tight deadlines for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and other federal and state agencies … the bill would streamline an overly bureaucratic process. Critics said it would trample on private and tribal property rights and undercut environmental laws. In part, the bill would allow conditional permits to be granted on the basis of aerial data collected by drones that critics said would fail to detect historical sites, endangered species and wetlands.
AMERICAN-MADE IRON AND STEEL: Voting 193 for and 232 against, the House defeated a Democratic motion requiring all iron and steel components of cross-border pipelines approved under HR 2883 (above) to be made in the United States.
GOP Rep. Sean Duffy exaggerates role of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton on federal debt: The total federal debt is at $19 trillion. But most of it was amassed before Obama took office. And many factors -- Congress, the economy and Obama himself, but to almost no extent Clinton -- played a role in the debt increases during Obama’s tenure.
CNN host Chris Cuomo made the interesting comment that if Duffy and his colleagues are so frustrated with Obama’s handling of ISIS, they (the Congress) can declare war on the terrorist organization themselves. Cuomo called Duffy on his bluff after the congressman said that he was confident that taking out ISIS would be a quick and dirty operation if only Obama would put it into place.Watch Duffy squirm. Cuomo's simple question should be asked of every smarty pants Republican. Remember, Paul Ryan's mission is to subvert and limit the power of the executive branch by ceding more power to congress. Wouldn't taking on ISIS be the best way to accomplish that? But Republicans don't want to get their fingerprints on something that they know won't succeed:
Cuomo: “I don’t know what you’re asking for that isn’t done right now. The generals do say they can take out ISIS, but we know what they’re asking for: They’re asking for boots on the ground. You’re part of a Congress that won’t even have a vote on the authorization for use of military force against ISIS.”
Duffy tried to stutter his way out ... Cuomo replied, “If it matters so much, why not take control of it with the power that’s yours?”
The only announced Democratic candidate running for U.S. Rep. Sean Duffy's 7th Congressional District seat has dropped out of the race. Kirk Bangstad, a Minocqua-area businessman, opera singer, and cancer activist, said he is dropping out after being told by Democratic party insiders that he would need at least $1.5 million in his race against Duffy, a three-term Republican. Thus far, Bangstad has raised about $145,000.Duffy's a blithering word salad tea party freeloader who has never had an original thought.
"It's an unsustainable system that candidates for office need to raise millions of dollars, basically on their own," Bangstad said. "I didn't believe in the system and I didn't believe in what I was doing."
Bangstad blamed the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. FEC in 2008, and the influence of super PACs and wealthy special interests. "Democracy is deeply in trouble, deeply in trouble, both in Wisconsin and in the U.S.," he said.
 |
| So none of this matters...? |
 |
| No outrage about the government cover-up? |
"This is not a debate about abortion or even non-abortion, pro life or pro abortion. Those who are even pro abortion agree that these tactics are unacceptable. They have no place in our society, and that federal tax dollars should actually go to fund an institution that harvests baby body parts for sale is absolutely asinine."
"Some states want to refuse this tainted money being used by an awful organization that profits from selling aborted children’s organs, but the Medicaid law and CMS is forcing them to fund abortion providers against the state legislature’s wishes. Health care doesn't mean Planned Parenthood, and Planned Parenthood doesn't mean women's health care. You talk about defunding women's health care? There is no less money. There is the same amount of money that goes to women's health care. That's a false argument."
Duffy says the bill makes abortion providers not fall under the “free choice of qualified provider” provision, so excluding abortion providers from Medicaid funding would not count as “limiting healthcare options”, which is not allowed under Medicaid.
"(It is) illegal under federal law to sell human fetal tissue for anything of "valuable consideration."But the video shows a Planned Parent representative discussing what isn't illegal:
"(It) does not include reasonable payments associated with the transportation, implantation, processing, preservation, quality control, or storage of human fetal tissue."
"It's just further documentation that Planned Parenthood is definitely in the business of selling baby body parts," said Sen. Stroebel. "We need to get into their books. That's what we really need to see. We need to see where they're revenues come from."
Nicole Safar, public policy director for PPWI said, "We are not donating fetal tissue, so it's unclear to me what exactly they would want to investigate." PPWI simply doesn't have the infrastructure to facilitate human fetal tissue donation. "It seems like a lot of political sort of rallying that they're doing, but, I have yet to see a credible argument they could make for investigating us."Stroebel won't let reality prevent him from agitating his conservative "low information" base for votes, while violating the privacy of peoples medical records, and PPW activities and contributions of a targeted GOP political enemy. Talk about witch hunts:
"If that's what they say, fine, but they're going to have to be able to verify that and that's what I'm looking for for the State of Wisconsin - their verification of their statements. We are going to make every effort possible to be able to get into those books, see where that taxpayer money is going and as a part of that organization, see where they are also generating all their revenues and if they are generating other revenues from the sale of body parts of babies,"Don't count out Rep. Sean Duffy getting in the phony outrage act too. Could anything be more transparent? Maybe this is what Republicans were talking about when they say they want transparency.
EBOLA DISINFECTANTS: The House defeated a Democratic bid to exempt from HR 4012 (above) any EPA actions to approve Ebola disinfectants or protect communities against nuclear, biological or terrorist attacks or chemical spills into drinking-water supplies. A yes vote was to exempt EPA actions against health threats such as the Ebola virus from the bill.Republicans weren't about to give Democrats a victory even on this. Voting no and against preventing an Ebola outbreak or chemical terrorist attack: Republicans Paul Ryan, James Sensenbrenner, Tom Petri, Sean Duffy, and Reid Ribble.
Labels:
EPA,
James Sensenbrenner,
Paul Ryan,
petr,
Reid Ribble,
Roll Call,
Sean Duffy,
Tom Petri
EPA SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD: The House passed a Republican bill (HR 1422) to reshape the EPA's Science Advisory Board to make it more industry-friendly. The board provides independent evaluations of the scientific analyses upon which the EPA bases its regulations. This bill would diminish academic representation on the board while expanding corporate membership; permit experts with financial ties to EPA-regulated industries to serve if they disclose their conflicts-of-interest; give state, local and tribal governments a guaranteed number of seats on the board and require the board to gather more public comments, among other provisions.Don't you love those unscientific public comments?
SCIENCE AND THE ENVIRONMENT: The House passed a Republican bill (HR 4012) that would negate specific rule making by the Environmental Protection Agency unless all data from underlying scientific studies -- including any confidential health information about participants -- has been made publicly available so that the studies can be independently replicated. Republicans said the bill would promote much-needed transparency at the EPA, while Democrats said it would thwart enforcement actions because many environmental studies depend on protecting the privacy rights of participants. Democrats said the bill's main targets are studies by the American Cancer Society and Harvard University that link air pollution with ill health and underpin the EPA's administration of the Clean Air Act.
LIABILITY FOR OIL SPILLS: The House on Friday refused to require the Keystone XL Pipeline to pay into the Treasury Department’s Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund. Sponsored by Democrats, this motion to HR 5682 (above) sought to blunt an Internal Revenue Service ruling under which crude extracted from tar sands is exempted from mandatory support of the oil-spill fund. The ruling spares TransCanada Corp., the Keystone owner, from having to pay 8 cents per barrel into the fund to help cover the cost of cleaning up any spills. Congress established the fund in response to the 1989 Exxon Valdez grounding, which spilled hundreds of thousands of barrels of crude into Alaska’s Prince William Sound. A yes vote was to require the Keystone XL Pipeline to contribute to the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund.
REPUBLICAN JOBS PACKAGE: The House approved a package (HR 4) of 15 jobs bills that previously passed the House as individual measures, and then died in the Democratic-led Senate. In part, the bills would expedite logging in national forests, scale back the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial-regulation law, make bonus depreciation and certain charitable contributions by businesses a permanent part of the U.S. tax code, ease certain environmental rules to promote job creation and give Congress veto power over federal regulations having at least a $100 million annual impact on the economy.
DEMOCRATS’ TAX CHANGES: The House on Thursday defeated a motion by Democrats to amend HR 4 (above) in a way that would deny federal tax breaks to companies that shift U.S. jobs overseas or which reincorporate abroad to avoid U.S. taxation, a process known as “inversion.” The motion also sought to require the Republican leadership to put Democratic issues such as a minimum-wage increase, pay equity for women and student-loan refinancing to House votes.
REPUBLICAN ENERGY PACKAGE: The House approved a package (HR 2) of 19 GOP-drafted energy bills that previously cleared the House as strand-alone measures before faltering in the Democratic-controlled Senate in the face of environmental concerns and other objections. In part, the bills would expand offshore drilling for oil and natural gas, require speedy administration approval of the Keystone XL pipeline, expedite Department of Energy approvals of applications for exporting liquefied natural gas and prohibit federal regulation on federal and tribal lands of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.
OIL EXPORTS TO TERRORISM-ENABLERS: The House on Thursday defeated a Democratic motion that sought to amend HR 2 (above) so that it would “prohibit U.S. oil exports to any country, company or individual that supports or harbors terrorist organizations, including ISIS or al Qaeda.”
DEMOCRATIC POLICY GOALS: The House on Wednesday turned back a bid by Democrats to add five of their policy goals to HJ Res 124 (government funding bill). The motion called for raising the minimum wage, requiring that women receive equal pay for equal work, allowing most student loans to be refinanced, denying government contracts to companies that move headquarters overseas and reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank for the long term.
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT HURDLES: The House passed a Republican-drafted bill (HR 4315) requiring the Department of the Interior to publish online the scientific basis of all new “endangered species” and “threatened species” designations under the 1973 Endangered Species Act (ESA). The bill also requires the department to treat data from state, local and tribal governments as “best available science and commercial data” in making decisions on species protection.
In addition, the bill puts a $125-per-hour cap on government payments of “prevailing attorney fees” in litigation challenging endangered-species designations.
Republicans refused to strip HR 4315 (above) the “best available scientific and commercial data,” even if it has not been subjected to peer review. In the scientific community, peer review is a discipline in which new research is not accepted as valid until it is evaluated by other experts in the same field.
