David Frum's Comments on Health Care Worth Contemplating by Both Right and Left

David Frum last week resigned from the right wing American Enterprise Institute after they cancelled his pay and office. Frum is a former President George W Bush speechwriter and decided to speak his own thoughts rather than follow the current Republican campaign strategy of saying no to anything and everything the Democrats and President Obama proposes. Frum's comments relate to the just passed health care reform legislation.

 The Republicans hope that Congress's not acting on many critical issues helps Republicans get elected.  The only thing they don't consider in this negative strategy is that the public may wake up and realize that it's the Republicans that are causing this inaction, not the Democrats.

David Frum, in his column entitled Waterloo on Frum Forum irritated the right wing by his comments that the Republican strategy on health care was and is wrong. It's not that he's supporting the Legislation that passed but he believes the Republicans are making a big mistake.

This bill will not be repealed. Even if Republicans scored a 1994 style landslide in November, how many votes could we muster to re-open the “doughnut hole” and charge seniors more for prescription drugs? How many votes to re-allow insurers to rescind policies when they discover a pre-existing condition? How many votes to banish 25 year olds from their parents’ insurance coverage? And even if the votes were there – would President Obama sign such a repeal?

We followed the most radical voices in the party and the movement, and they led us to abject and irreversible defeat.

His comments were not a one time fluke. He repeated his comments on CNN the next day in an atricle entitled How GOP can rebound from its "Waterloo"

"Some Republicans talk of repealing the whole bill. That's not very realistic. Even supposing that Republicans miraculously capture both houses of Congress in November, repeal will require a presidential signature.

More relevantly: Do Republicans write a one-sentence bill declaring that the whole thing is repealed? Will they vote to reopen the "doughnut" hole for prescription drugs for seniors? To allow health insurers to deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions? To kick millions of people off Medicaid?

It's unimaginable, impossible."

Such blunt talk didn't sit well with his right wing free enterprise think tank employer. Hence his resignation.

While Frum discusses the GOP's mistakes and problems he also see the issue from a larger perspective which it is important to keep in mind. Consider these comments he made later to the The Globe and Mail in an article entitled David Frum makes no apologies to Republicans

"The health-care status quo is for sure not sustainable. The United States is now spending 17 per cent of its GDP [on health care] and Canada spends about 10. The average in most developed countries is about 10 1/2 and the runner-up in Switzerland spends about 11. If the United States spent as much on health care as Switzerland does per person, relative to the economy, you would liberate six points of GDP. You would get your entire defence budget for free and have two points of GDP left over to pay down your debt."

Such straight talk is uncommon these days from Republicans.  While I don't agree with his proposed "solutions" to changing the health care reform legislation just passed, it is refreshing to see a Republican discuss some hard realities of the problems that our current health care system has produced.

Democrats in Congress Act to Reduce Student Loan Costs and Save Taxpayer Dollars

Contrary to Republican goals of doing nothing, Democrats in Congress are moving forward addressing the nation's problems without Republicans. As part of the recently passed Health Care Reform Legislation, Democrats added a rider to also reform the studen-loan program. This is a major reform that will lower the interest rate college students pay, extend their repayment time and save $67 billion  according to an column by Froma Harrop in the Seattle Times entitled "Student-loan companies don't need welfare"

As Harrop notes, "...when corporations get taxpayer handouts, that's not welfare in the GOP book of rhetoric. Take away a company's subsidy, and you have a "government takeover". Such is the Republican stance on Democratic plans to remove the corporate middleman from the federal student-loan program, included in the recently passed House  health care reform bill"

President Obama's weeekly address on March 27, 2010 addressed the student loan issue. The White House press release notes that "These reforms save the taxpayers $68 billion over the next decade by ending the subsidies given to banks and middlemen who handle student loans. The money saved will help expand and strengthen the federal Pell Grant program. The reforms will also cap college graduates’ annual student loan repayments at 10% of their income, revitalize community colleges, and increase support for Minority Serving Institutions.

You can read his full comments by clicking on the link above, hear audio or watch video.

The Democrats are acting to address our nation's future.  The Republican's are gungho to go back to our past. They are continuing to try to obstruct Congress and the President from passing needed legislation.

 If the public has any reason to be upset at Congress, it is because of the Republican Party of No has made a concerted coordinated effort to prevent  Congress from moving forward and addressing our nations critical concerns in a constructive and meaningful way. It's time to boot the obstructionist Republicans out of office.

Democrats need to re-engage in the political process and work to turn our voters out in the coming elections.  It's not enough to just about bemoan and complain about the Republicans negative and obstructionist tactics and point fingers.

 Noone ever said change would be easy.  The big mistake many of  those wanting change made was assuming that electing Obama was the end of their need to stay engaged. It's time to re-energize and get back to work.  

Take the Money and Run - Oil Interests File Lawsuit to Exempt Themselves from Toxics Cleanup Initiative 97

The Automotive United Trades Organization in Washington State is just the latest example of greed and shortsightedness by businesses wanting to make money but not pay the environmental costs to society of their doing business.

This week they filed a lawsuit to try to exempt themselves from the provisions of Initiative 97 - a popular Washington State initiative overwhelmingly passed by voters to cleanup toxic waste.

Former State Senator and also former Supreme Court Justice Phil Talmadge is the attorney for the Automotive United Trade Association. It seems Talmadge is also willing to take the money as their attorney.
This is disappointing to say the least as Talmadge supported the original legislation, Initiative 97,  and had courted progressives and liberals in his campaigns.

Initiative 97 was passed by Washington voters in 1988. The vote was a 2 step process, Voters appoved the measure with an 84% yes vote, choosing the citizens alternative over a legislative alternative. The law has been in effect for 20 years.  Citizens collected signatures to place I-97 on the ballot. The Legislature came up with an alternative that the oil industry supported because they would have had to pay less.  Voters appoved the measure with an 84% yes vote, then choose the  citizens alternative over a legislative alternative by a 56% yes vote.

The current fight has come about because of efforts to increase the toxics tax to fund stormwater cleanup projects across the state.The bill is still under consideration in the special session. Oil industry officials are strongly opposing passing legislation to increase the toxics tax and threatened to take the issue to court if the Legislature increased it.

 Now that the legislature is in Special Session, the oil industry  has decided not to wait to see what the Legislature does but has gone ahead with the suit anyway. The suit has been filed by the independent gas stations association called AUTO. The action ends a 20 agreement by oil interests not to challenge the        bill,  which they agreed to when the legislature in 1988 put the industry alternative on the ballot  along with the citizen's version.

Currently before the legislature  this year are two bills:

HB 3181 -Concerning the clean water act of 2010 funding cleanup of water pollution and other programs necessary for the health and well-being of Washington citizens through an increase in the tax on hazardous substances has 35 sponsors. The substitute house bill 3181 has been watered  down such that  it  increases the 0.7 percent Hazardous Substance Tax (HST) rate by anadditional 0.1 percent annually until the additional tax rate is 0.4 percent."  The original bill proposed increasing the tax to 2%. The bill still has not been acted on.

SB 6851 has  24 sponsors and  has a substitute which  proposes that
"Beginning July 1, 2010, the Hazardous Substance Tax rate is increased by 0.5 percent (combined tax rate is 1.2 percent).
The additional taxes are deposited as follows:
Ÿ 85 percent into a new Storm Water Account; and
    15 percent into the Motor Vehicle Account.
A new Storm Water Account is created in the state treasury. DOE is responsible for distributing funds in the account to local governments as grants.
Revenues deposited into the Motor Vehicle Account must be used to fund activities or projects that address contamination of storm water through transportation infrastructure.
Revenues may not be used for construction of storm water facilities associated with new road construction"

The Senate also has taken no further action on this bill. Legislators should act to approve this legislation

The Environmental Priorites Coalition has listed passage of legislation to cleanup polluted storm water runoff as one of their three top priorities. They have labeled this legislation as the Clean Water Act of 2010.

The  toxics  tax has been used to clean up toxic substances caused by the use of toxic chemicals. Polluters should pay for the costs of toxic cleanup

Stormwater runoff is heavily polluted by petroleum products like oil and gasoline leaking from cars and trucks as well as pesticides and herbicides.

The oil industry is once again just trying to take the profits from the sale of gasoline and other oil products and take no responsibility for the environmental and health costs caused by the use of these chemicals. They would rather have taxpayers pay all the cleanup costs. The courts need to uphold the toxic cleanup tax and the Legislature is justified to use this tax to cleanup stormwater runoff. Legislators should act to approve this legislation now that would increase the tax.

(Note - In 1987 I was the Campaign Director for Initiative 97 and coordinated the signature drive by citizens to collect the signatures that qualified I-97. Steve Zemke)

Facebook Opposition to McKenna Now Exceeds Opposition to Eyman's 1033

The internet is bubbling with outrage at Republican Attorney General Rob McKenna's partisan decision to try to join Washington State to an effort by 12 other states to overturn the just passed national health reform bill. An indication of the pushback by the public is that the number of people joing the Facebook page Washington Taxpayers OPT OUT of Rob McKenna's lawsuit  is growing faster than I can type this post.

  Just started 2 days ago the number as of 11:54 AM today is at 12,608 and  now exceeds the number of people on another recent surge of FACEBOOK outrage, people opposing Eyman's I-1033 which went down to a decisive defeat in  November. The Anti-1033 site, No on 1033 has 12,212.

At 12:15 PM (I took a phone call) the anti McKenna lawsuit page now has 12,713.  The number is growing at a rate of 200 to 400 an hour right now.  Add your name to the facebook page by going to Washington Taxpayers OPT OUT of Rob McKenna's lawsuit.

It's 12:29 and the nmber is now 12,766.

Rob McKenna has two Facebook pages up.

Rob McKenna the Politician has 1797 fans.  The site Rob McKenna has 3097. Looks like a lot more people don't like what Rob McKenna is trying to do to right now than want to be his fan or friend.

 I think McKenna made a big miscalculation in joining with the Tea Party fanatics and those in the Republican Party of No in opposing health care reform. This can't be good news for his ambitions to be Governor. At least you now know where McKenna's real allegiances are after his many year front of trying to be positioned as a consumer advocate representing the public good.  I guess health care for Washington citizens doesn't rank up there with the potential for corporate dollars from special interests or wanting to befriend Tea Party fanatics or not being able to be independent of the Republican Party of No's strategy to say no to everything.

12:40 PM  12,821 - still growing
12:48 PM  12,846

posting now

Charlie Wiggins is Running for the Washington State Supreme Court

Charlie Wiggins is a candidate for the Washington State Supreme Court.  People running for the Washington State Supreme Court have the formidable task of running statewide. It is even harder when you are running against an incumbent. Wiggins is running against Justice Richard Sanders.  So when he showed up at the 46th District Democrats last night after having been in Spokane the day before I offered his campaign the opportunity to do a guest post on Majority Rules Blog.  Here is what they wanted to pass on to the voters about their campaign:

This year Charlie Wiggins, a thirty-year practicing attorney and former Appeals Court judge is running for the Washington State Supreme Court Position 6 against Justice Richard Sanders. Many people are unsure of how to vote for judges: what sets one candidate apart from another in a nonpartisan race? What qualities should we look for in a judicial candidate? According to a report issued by the American Bar Association, the three key qualifications for a judge are integrity, impartiality, and independence. Charlie exemplifies all three.

Integrity: Charlie was given the highest possible ethics rating by the widely respected legal directory Martindale-Hubbell, was chosen for the national publication “Best Lawyers in America,” and received the Washington State Bar Association Young Lawyers Professionalism Award in 2008. His excellent reputation and conduct earned him his position as Chair of the Disciplinary Board for the Washington State Bar Association, which disciplines lawyers who violate legal ethics. His commitment to service and sharing his legal expertise have been widely recognized; in 2010 he received the Kitsap Bar Association Humanitarian Award and was named Volunteer of the Year by the Legal Services Clinic of the Union Gospel Mission in the Pioneer Square district of Seattle in 2004.

Impartiality: Throughout his career Charlie has represented all types of clients, from individuals to corporations, from victims seeking damages to those accused of negligent conduct. His experience as a Court of Appeals judge and a pro tem judge in superior court have proven him to be fair. In superior court, lawyers and parties must agree on a pro tem judge, and they continue to choose Charlie because they know he is impartial. He has worked tirelessly to preserve impartiality in the judiciary, helping to establish the nonpartisan award-winning website votingforjudges.org, the best single source of information about judicial candidates in Washington.

Independence: Limits on campaign spending prevent special interest groups from attempting to “buy” judges. In 2006 Charlie testified in the legislature in favor of imposing campaign contribution limits in Washington judicial election, which was signed into law the same year. In 2007 he again went before the legislature in favor of public financing of judicial elections, which has not yet been adopted. In 2008 Charlie represented 27 former state Supreme Court Justices from across the country in an amicus brief, arguing that a judge should not be allowed to sit on a case involving a party that donated to his or her campaign. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed, and the case was retried. For the past two years Charlie has been working towards the adoption of a rule in Washington to require a judge to step down from a case if a party to the case provided substantial financial support for the judge’s election.

Charlie’s record speaks for itself. However, a recent study noted that, "In any given election in Washington state, as many as 50 percent of those who cast votes for other candidates choose not to vote for judicial candidates on the same ballot.” It’s time to change that statistic. Learn more about Charlie, as well as his opponent, and spread the word. Effective democracy requires educated voters. Please visit www.votingforjudges.org and www.charliewigginsforjustice.com to learn more.

Could Senator Murray be in Trouble in Washington State?

 In more bad news for Democratic incumbents, a new Field poll in California shows that Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer is now in a dead heat in her re-election race. Senator Barbara Boxer's race is now a tossup Since January her polling numbers have dropped.  Matching her up with any one of her 3 potential Republican opponents shows the race dead even. Her Republican opponent will be picked in California's June Primary.

The matchups show Campbell leading Boxer 44 percent to 43 percent, Boxer edging Fiorina 45 percent to 44 percent and leading DeVore 45 percent to 41 percent. In January, Boxer led all three by double-digit margins.

“These are yes and no votes on Boxer,” DiCamillo said. “They’re not distinguishing among the Republicans because they don’t know much about the Republicans.”

Washington State supporters of Senator Patty Murray should be worried.  The public is in a foul mood, poisoned by the negative governing strategies of the Republicans in Congress, who have adopted a strategy of obstructing Congress from getting anything done and then blaming it on the Democrats.

A New York Times article yesterday discussed in depth the strategy that Senator Mitch McConnell proposed after Obama was elected and that he has implemented and carried out over the last year. The strategy was fairly simple. It was to:

"...use his extensive knowledge of Senate procedure to slow things down, take advantage of the difficulties Democrats would have in governing and deny Democrats any Republican support on big legislation.

 Republicans embraced it. Democrats denounced it as rank obstructionism. Either way, it has led the two parties, as much as any other factor, to where they are right now. Republicans are monolithically against the health care legislation, leaving the president and his party executing parliamentary back flips to get it passed, conservatives revived, liberals wondering what happened. "

The New York Times argues that in the short term this strategy has worked for the Republicans. Democrats like Senator Patty Murray, need to reach out to the public and explain why they are not able to get much of anything done.  She needs to point to the obstructionist policies of the Republicans and ask why anyone would think that putting the Republicans back in charge was going to solve any of our nation's problems. 

McConnell has used his skills to frustrate the will of the voters and put the Obama vision that voters supported at risk. Voters need to wake up and kick the Republicans out, not vote out the Democrats. Obama naively assumed the Republicans would work with him; he needs to play hardball now and act like a leader.

The Republicans know how to stop things.  They have no vision to solve health care or create jobs or deal with climate change.  They have shown they can stop government from working. That's hardly a reason to vote for them.

 Voters need to elect those that are going to deal with America's hopes and future.  Electing more Republicans will only return us to more of the same concentration of special interest power supporting a failed free enterprise system we saw under Bush and Reagan - more corporate power, more tax breaks for the wealthy, less environmnetal protection, more right wing conservatives on the US Supreme Court, less help for the unfortunate and more concentration of wealth in the hands of a few.

Wake up America.  It's time to get to work and solve our problems, not revert to the failed policies of the free enterprise Republicans that got us in our present financial mess. Only fools would reward Republican obstructionism by voting for more Republicans.

Press release on Saving Waldo Woods from Maple Leaf Community Council

March 17, 2010
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

** Waldo Woods Permanently Preserved **

(SEATTLE, WA) – The Maple Leaf Community Council Executive Board is pleased to announce the permanent preservation of Waldo Woods.

Ordinance 116794 was passed by the Seattle City Council Monday, March 8. Confirmation was received today that Seattle Mayor Michael McGinn has signed the legislation. This ordinance represents the last step in the process where the Seattle Parks Department takes possession of a conservation easement for Waldo Woods. The effect of the conservation easement is the permanent preservation of Waldo Woods, an urban grove of mature, native Douglas firs.

“When we started this process nearly four years ago,” stated Waldo Woods Working Group head David Miller, “we didn’t know whether we’d be successful or not. Through the support of hundreds of people from across Seattle, today we’ve managed to permanently save this unique grove of trees.”

The Maple Leaf Community Council applied for a King County Conservation Futures grant three years ago in the hopes of saving Waldo Woods, an intact and healthy 80 tree grove on the eastern 1/3 of the Waldo Hospital property at 15th Avenue NE and NE 85th Street in the north Seattle Maple Leaf neighborhood. The council succeeded in its pitch, and secured a $300,000 grant from King County to preserve Waldo Woods.

In March 2009, the Maple Leaf Community Council won a court case proving the Seattle Department of Planning and Development (DPD) did not adequately assess the significant environmental impact and harm to surrounding residents from the planned demolition of historic Waldo Hospital. Shortly after the loss in court, the developer planning to remove the building and most of the trees and replace them with forty townhomes averaging $650,000 each terminated their plans.

That’s when the Menachem Mendal Seattle Cheder (MMSC) Day School stepped in and bought the property with the intention of remodeling the building into a new school. They agreed to preserve Waldo Woods, and worked closely with the Seattle Parks Department and the Maple Leaf Community Council to make that happen. MMSC will trade over $600,000 in development potential for the $300,000 in King County Conservation Futures money, using this money to help remodel Waldo Hospital into their new school.

"Our community generated enough visibility for this project to result in today's outcome," noted Maple Leaf Community Council President Marc Phillips. "We're very proud our effort, joined by other groups across the city, also resulted in better tree grove preservation rules for all of Seattle."

Conservation easements do not actually transfer ownership of the property, only the development rights on that property. MMSC retains ownership of the property and will make a portion of Waldo Woods accessible to the public. MMSC, Parks, and the Maple Leaf community will cooperate to manage and maintain Waldo Woods on an ongoing basis.

The Maple Leaf Community Council would like to thank Seattle City Councilmembers Richard Conlin, Nick Licata, Tim Burgess, Tom Rasmussen, Sally Clark, and Sally Bagshaw; King County Councilmember Bob Ferguson; Seattle Parks Superintendent Tim Gallagher; MMSC’s Mark Goldberg; Parks Department staffers Chip Nevin and Don Harris; David Mann from the law firm of Gendler & Mann; Kathy George formerly with Cassady Law; and the hundreds of people from across Seattle who wrote letters, attended dozens of meetings, and donated money. Without considerable support from these people, this would never have happened. A special acknowledgement to Mayor Michael McGinn and the entire Seattle City Council for rapidly moving this legislation through the process.

# # #
 Contact:

Maple Leaf Community Council Waldo Woods Working Group subcommittee
David Miller, Chair
206-517-5520
David.Miller@MapleLeafCommunity.org

Maple Leaf Community Council Executive Board
Marc Phillips, President
206-276-2567
Marc. Phillips@MapleLeafCommunity.org

Max Prinsen Wins King Conservation District Election

The results are in and Max Prinsen has won the March 16, 2010 King Conservation District Election.  Here are the unofficial results as reported in an e-mail sent out to the candidates earkier this morning.

Max Prinsen 1772

Mara Heiman 1488

Mary Embleton 519

Kirk Prindle 402

Teri Herrera 51

Total 4232

You can read the candidates statements on the King Conservation District website.

 Max Prinsen is a former commissioner and was supported by the Washington Conservation Voters and the Sierra Club. King County Executive Dow Constantine sent out an e-mail endorsing Prinsen yesterday.

 Mara Heiman received the support of Reagan Dunn and Kathy Lambert, two Republican members of the King County Council and wrote in her bio about respecting  "property rights." The right wing Citizens Alliance for Property Rights sent out over 10 different email urging their members to vote for Heiman.
.
The vote totals are the highest ever but are still ridiculously low considering the election encompasses most of King County.   King County had 1,109,128 registered voters in 2008. So this election was decided by less than 1/2 of 1% of the registered voters in King County.

Having only 7 polling places is ridiculous. The wait in Bellevue at the public library was over 45 minutes at one point. At the polling place in the Seattle Public Library, they ran out of ballots in the late afternoon, which delayed voting there.

The process is very anti-democratic in the lack of polling places and no absentee ballots.  If the election can not be held on either the prinary or general election dates in the future, maybe the Commission should be merged under King County Government, allowing commissioners to be appointed.

 Holding a special election and limiting polling to only 7 libraries in the whole county ill serves the public and amounts with the lack of public notification to holding a secret election. Regular elections notify the public by mailing them voters pamphlets.

  Names of candidates running were firrst posted on the King Conservation District website only 2 weeks before the election. This makes it difficult for any public evaluation or exposure of candidates and vetting of their positions on issues.

Perhaps its time for the Washington State Legislature to review the whole structure of the Conservation Districts statewide. They originally set up the current system. About 49 conservation districts exist statewide.

Kirk Prindle Running for King Conservation District Election Today

Kirk Prindle is a wildlife biologist. He's running hard for the sole seat open this year on the King Conservation District.  Kirk's not alone in running for the seat but he seems driven and passoniate in bringing his skills and background to represent the voters in King County.  He's currently serving on the Seattle Urban Forestry Commission.

The King Conservation District is one of these little known public agencies that collects property tax dollars and spends it, but most voters hear or know little about it, let alone know that 3 of the 5 commissioners are publicly elected.  The election this year is today, Tuesday March 16, 2010.  You can only vote in person at one of 7 library sites in King County from 10:30 AM to 8 PM. The Seattle Public Library location is only open until 7:30 PM.

Voting information is as follows from the King Conservation District website:

All registered voters who reside within the District boundaries are eligible to vote in the election. District boundaries include all of King County, except the cities of Federal Way, Enumclaw, Skykomish, Milton and Pacific. Voters must present proper identification, such as a driver’s license, passport or birth certificate.

Auburn
King County Library/Auburn Branch
1102 Auburn Way South, Auburn WA 98002
Poll hours 10:30 a.m. - 8:00 p.m.

Bellevue
King County Library/Bellevue Regional Branch
1111 110th Avenue NE, Bellevue WA 98004
Poll hours 10:30 a.m. - 8:00 p.m.

Carnation
King County Library/Carnation Branch
4804 Tolt Avenue, Carnation WA 98014
Poll hours 10:30 a.m. - 8:00 p.m.

Des Moines
King County Library/Des Moines Branch
21620 11th Avenue S., Des Moines WA 98198
Poll hours 10:30 a.m. - 8:00 p.m.

Seattle
Seattle Public Library (Downtown Main Branch)
1000 Fourth Ave., Seattle WA 98104
Poll hours 10:30 a.m. - 7:30 p.m.

ShorelineKing County Library/Shoreline Branch
345 NE 175th, Shoreline WA 98155
Poll hours 10:30 a.m. - 8:00 p.m.

Vashon
King County Library/Vashon Island Branch
17210 Vashon Highway S.W., Vashon Island, WA 98070
Poll Hours 10:30 a.m. - 8:00 p.m.


You can get more information about all 5 candidates running by going to the King Conservation District candidate page.

Republican Reconciliation Hypocrisy

The Republican myth making nonsense that there is something wrong with Obama and the Democrats in the US Senate using the reconciliation process to resolve the health care impasse is finally being challenged. And the Republican mirage is being shown as just that.

As EJ Dionne Jr points out in his column yesterday in the Seattle Times entitled "The GOP's astonishing hypocrisy on health care and 'reconciliation'"

"...The health-care bill passed the Senate last December with 60 votes under the normal process.  The only thing that would pass under a simple majority vote would be a series of amendments that fit comfortably under the 'reconcilation' rules established to deal with money issues."

Dionne is responding in his opinion piece to statements by Republican Senator Orrin Hatch trying to paint the Democrats in the US Senate as somehow acting  contrary to the views of the founders who wrote the US Constitution.  Funny thing is that, as Dionne notes, there is nothing in the US Constitution about 60 Senators needing to be in agreement to pass any piece of Legislation. 

But the mirage the Republicans are trying to paint that the Democrats are proposing to do something Republicans would never do is the big joke here.  As Dionne notes

"...the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts, which were passed under reconciliation and increased the deficit by $1.7 trillion during his presidency, were "substantive legislation." The 2003 dividends tax cut could muster only 50 votes. Vice President Dick Cheney had to break the tie. Talk about "ramming through."



The underlying "principle" here seems to be that it's fine to pass tax cuts for the wealthy on narrow votes but an outrage to use reconciliation to help middle-income and poor people get health insurance.'

As Media Matters remarks, the media has been slow to challenge the false assertions by the Republicans that there is something wrong with using reconcilation in resolving the differences between the House and Senate passed versions of the health care legislation.
 
Media Matters notes that the Republicans frequently used the reconcilation process to pass major legislation:

"GOP used reconciliation to pass Bush's tax cuts. Republicans used the reconciliation process to pass Bush's 2001 tax cut, the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001; Bush's 2003 tax cuts, the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003; and Bush's 2005 tax cuts, the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the 2001 tax cuts would "reduce projected total surpluses by approximately $1.35 trillion over the 2001-2011 period"; that the 2003 tax cuts would "reduce projected total surpluses by approximately $1.35 trillion over the 2001-2011 period"; and that the 2005 tax cuts would "reduce federal revenues ... by $69.1 billion over the 2006-2015 period." 

The Media Matters article has many more instances where reconcilation has been used by the US Senate, noting that some 21 bills were passed by reconcilation between 1980 and 2005.

The Democrats need to move forward and act on passing health care legislation.  The Republican's goal here is not to help more Americans get health care coverage or lower costs.  Their goal is to make the Democrats look incompetent in not getting anything done. The Republican goal is to try to get back in power. 

What a mistake that would be for our country. It's under their watch that the economy tanked and deregulation and lack of financial oversight brought us almost to financial disaster comparable to the Great Depression. Let's move forward to resolve our problems, not backward.

"Will you still need me, Will you still feed me?"

Ah yes, folks,the Beatles song has now struck home.  So long ago it was so far away. And now it is today.

So if you're looking for an answer, its not mine to give but yours.

But for my reflections, let me say.

Today is where I'm at and it is as mysterious as ever.  Whatever answers I have are no more permanent than the moment I am in.  I am alive fully aware that the eternal present is ever changing and transitory.  As I grow older I reflect on the probability that  this eternal present I experience has a greater and greater chance of flashing away at any time. I have no idea why what I experience exists but intellectually and emotionally do not adhere to any random dogma that assigns it some absolute value.

Yet I am a part of something larger and have strived to understand it and feel it and sustain the good things in it and reject those that are negative and life destroying.

I continue to live as if I will not die, because it seems to do otherwise is to start dying. That does not mean I do not reflect on my coming mortality, but I see no reason to hasten the day.

So many others have passed through this plane of being that we experience that to assign my life some special significance would be a form of self delusion.  Yet that does not mean my living or your living is not significant.  We seem to exist as part of some strarnge life force or energy field that has not found itself at an endpoint and is still evolving.  That is why science fiction which explores the dimensions of reality has always been intriguing to me. It opens the mind to visions of possible futures and realities not yet realized.

Living in a city for so many years blinds one to the starry heavens around us. The flickering lights in the sky are as mysterious and incomprehensible as ever.  So much of human history has been oblivious to the dimensions and fragileness of  life, including human life, that exists in a thin film around one planet that is a mere speck in the cosmos.

Infinity and our finiteness reamain as incomprehensible as ever in astronomical and metaphysical terms. Exploring the mosaic and multitude of  the dimensions of physical space getting smaller and smaller also is perplexing as the complexity of subatomic structure stll eludes our comprehension.

Life and existence remains a reality and an illusion. What I see and hear and feel is filtered through my past and the constructs imprinted on my brain and the constructs that are my mind and the web of being that connects with it through communication and books and the internet and the social and personal and physical links to my perception. I am a part of something and yet I am separate.

Then there's brain plasticity and the unconsciousness that I don't seemingly perceive and the inconsistencies and brain wiring networks that I don't control and those that I do that are variable with circumstances like age or smells or emotions or my physical surroundings or state of rest or stress.

We try to shape a construct on who we are to define ourselves and establish routines to function in the world we find ourselves in. Some of it is beyond our ability to control and some of it we daily repeat in patterns imposed upon us by society or our past.  Some of it we understand and some of it we are blind to. Some of it we can change and some of it is remains beyond us.

Truly living means to be open to constant re-evaluation to try to determine whether we are acting freely and wisely and with compassion or whether we are responding to factors or forces that are not in our best interests or those of others sharing the field of life we exist in.

Accidents of birth, being in one social setting or society versus another, must be viewed as just that. Those accidents of birth location and religious or social or political upbringing commit many people to a life that is unexamined and unquestioned. True freedom reuires one to step outside these contructs and  examine the alternatives before choosing. This is the role that real education should assist in but that is so often lacking.

Just a few thoughts percolating around as this day moves on.  Society as a whole would be wise to reflect on it's answers to providing care and compassion to those sharing life on earth, particularly those less fortunate and in need.  As populations grow and competition increases for resources and strains increase on the earth's life support systems; if we can't answer yes to "Will you still need me, Will you still feed me ...?" whether someone is 4 or 64 or 104, then we as a world civilization are in trouble.  We're not there yet.