Category: Legislation

Wanker of the Day

No Comments

Charles Grassley, who took less than 24 hours to take credit for the good parts of the healthcare bill:

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has long been a vocal critic of the Democrat’s health reform efforts, but today he started taking credit for some provisions of the bill, and talking up his own role in crafting the legislation.

In a release sent out by his staff to reporters today, Grassley says the bill will “hold tax-exempt hospitals accountable for the federal tax benefits they receive” thanks to his work.

If you recall, Grassley bought into the whole death panel bullsh%$, and spread every lie possible in an attempt to kill the bill, and now he is trying to take credit for the good parts.

Full statement after the break:

M E M O R A N D U M

To: Reporters and Editors

Re: tax-exempt hospitals provisions in new health care law

Da: Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Sen. Chuck Grassley, ranking member of the Committee on Finance, with
jurisdiction over taxes, has worked to hold tax-exempt hospitals accountable for the federal tax benefits they receive. The health care legislation signed into law yesterday includes provisions Grassley co-authored to impose standards for the tax exemption of
charitable hospitals for the first time. The bill requires that a hospital complete a community needs assessment once every three years and adopt and publicize a financial assistance policy; prohibits billing those who qualify for financial assistance the top rates; and prohibits a hospital from taking extraordinary collection actions if the hospital has not made reasonable efforts to notify patients of its financial assistance policy.

The bill also requires the IRS to review the tax-exempt status of each hospital every three years; requires Treasury and Health and Human Services to submit an annual report to Congress on the level of charity care, bad debt expenses and the unreimbursed costs of means-tested and non-means-tested government programs; and requires Treasury and HHS to provide a report in five years on the trends on the items reported on an annual basis.

Grassley made the following comment on the advancement of these provisions.

“Tax-exempt hospitals don’t have many measures of accountability for their special status. The law hasn’t given them much direction, and so they’ve defined standards for themselves. Sometimes that’s resulted in providing very little charitable patient care or other community benefits, failing to publicize charitable care to patients, charging
indigent, uninsured patients more than insured patients, and using very aggressive collection practices. The Government Accountability Office and others, including the former IRS commissioner, have said for a long time that there is often no discernible difference between the operations of taxable and tax-exempt hospitals. These new provisions are modeled after principles and polices that the Catholic Health Association has had in place for years. I appreciate the association’s willingness to have honest, forthright conversations about charitable hospitals’ activities. The provisions take steps to differentiate tax-exempt hospitals from for-profit hospitals and provide further transparency about tax-exempt hospitals’ fulfilling their charitable mission. Congress, the IRS, and the public will now have additional tools and information to ensure that charitable hospitals act charitably.”

The provisions enacted in the new health care law are the result of
Grassley’s leadership on tax-exempt organizations’ accountability and
transparency, including hospitals. In 2005, he sent letters of inquiry to some of the nation’s largest tax-exempt hospitals. In 2006, he convened a hearing and released a summary of the hospitals’ responses. In 2007, he released a staff discussion draft of potential legislative reforms and convened a roundtable of experts to discuss the potential reforms. In 2008, he followed up with letters of inquiry to more hospitals and received a report he’d requested from the Government Accountability Office. In 2009, he drafted legislative reforms and succeeded in persuading the Democratic majority to include several of the reforms in the new health care law.

I Think that This is a Deliberate Incitement to Violence

No Comments

You tell me, if you post someone’s address on line, and suggest that people “drop by” and “express their thanks” in response to a Congressman’s vote on healthcare, the resultant threatening mail and a cut gas line are foreseeable.

In fact, it is predictable that threats and vandalism will result.

What isn’t predictable, I guess, is that the frothing at the mouth crowd would get the address wrong and so instead, this would go to the Congressman’s brother:

U.S. Rep. Tom Perriello’s brother received a threatening letter in the mail on the same day that someone apparently severed a gas line at the home in Ivy.

Two conservative Tea Party activists posted the address of the home on the Internet on Monday, mistakenly believing it was the home of the congressman. One of the activists urged others to “drop by” and “express their thanks” for Perriello’s vote in favor of health care reform.

Tuesday evening, Perriello’s brother’s family smelled gas and discovered the propane line of a gas-powered grill on their screened-in porch had been slashed.

In the mail, they found a letter addressed to the congressman that Perriello’s office described as “threatening.”

The FBI and local authorities are investigating.

This is shouting fire in a crowded theater, and it is clear that the vandal wanted a fire and possibly an explosion.

It’s a specific invocation to violence, and honestly it should be treated as such.

This was the equivalent of burning a cross on his lawn, and the intent is to terrorize.

Hopefully the authorities will use every legal avenue available to pursue both the people who are engaging in these actions, and those who are making specific invocations to pursue specific individuals.

As an aside, I think that whoever cut his brother’s gas line just took a dicey seat for the Democrats to hold, Periello won a squeaker only because of the Obama landslide, and made Congressman Tom Periello the favorite.

Basically, him a hero. Just campaigning normally will now be perceived by his constituents an act of bravery.

Barack Obama Signs Senate Healthcare Bill

1 Comment

Is it an end?


Or is it a beginning?†


Joe Biden says, “It’s a fucking big deal.”

I think that it is clear that there is a lot more that needs to be done, and I am reasonably sure that Barack Obama won’t do much.

I think that he has to create the appearance of support on the side-car, because otherwise, he will have the every Democrat in House of Representatives out for payback, but beyond that, I think that he has his paper to sign, and he won’t do much beyond this.

His strategy, as it has been in finance reform, has been to buy off the market malefactors, and so I think that attempts to further improve the system, whether it is Grayson’s Medicare buy in, or Kucinich’s elimination of ERISA preemption will likely be opposed.

Of course, it will be sold as the, “time not being right,” much as he has done with the repeal of DADT, the ENDA, the EFCA, etc.

I would note that my predictive record sucks, and perhaps he will surprise me.

If this is all that Obama will do with healthcare, than we have just seen him make his own flight suit speech, but if he supports further improvements, then, as the fucking* Vice President of the United States accidentally said into a live microphone, “This is a big fucking deal.”

BTW, one of my predictions is coming true: when I said that the preening narcisists in the Senate would find a way to make the bill worse, for the same reason that a dog marks his territory, I was right, case in point, Jim Baucus claiming that there would have to be minor changes to the bill to accommodate Senate rules:

Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus told reporters today that there may be “one or two” changes to the health care reconciliation bill, meaning it could be sent back to the House for another vote.

“Anything is possible. We’ve constructed this thing so well … maybe one or two but they’re so minor they’re almost not even worth mentioning,” Baucus said.

Any changes to the bill, even minor, will send it back to the House for another vote there before it can go to the president’s desk.

But it seems that either he got the face time on camera that he wanted, or someone threatened to disembowel him with a rusty spoon:

Late update: But Conrad now says he’s confident there won’t be changes.

“We’ve found additional precedent that supports our view that nothing is Byrd-able,” he said, referring to the Byrd rule on which legislation may be passed under reconciliation.

Kudos to whoever put a horse’s head in his bed.

*I consider myself to be a fairly profane writer, though mu rule is to %$# out my swear words, but fuck it, if the Vice President can drop the F-bomb today, than so can I.
†Yes, this T-shirt is for sale from Zazzle.com.

Party Line Vote

1 Comment

Dodd’s weak tea financial reform passes the Senate Banking Committee.

Here’s hoping that the Barny Frank – slightly less weak tea – bill prevails in conference committee, though if the Dems were smart, they would use finance reform as a way to get the Republicans to vote for the fat cat Wall Street bankers, and then use those votes as a cudgel in November.

But that would require that Democrats find their spines, which I think is unlikely.

They do not realize that having a backbone is something that voters place a huge value on, perhaps even more than philosophy and policy.

That’s why the leading candidate in the Republican primary in Alan Grayson’s district is Alan Grayson, because voters vote for politicians with guts.

An Unambiguous Good in the Healthcare Bill

No Comments

Assuming, of course, that it makes it past the preening narcissists in the US Senate, is the fact that it will finally stop paying banks to sell overpriced loans to students.

These loans are guaranteed by the US government, and now, only the US Government will make them:

Legislation hailed by supporters as the most significant change to college student lending in a generation passed the House on Sunday night.

The student aid initiative, which House Democrats attached to their final amendments to the health-care bill, would overhaul the student loan industry, eliminating a $60 billion program that supports private student loans with federal subsidies and replacing it with government lending to students. The House amendments will now go to the Senate.

By ending the subsidies and effectively eliminating the middleman, the student loan bill would generate $61 billion in savings over 10 years, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

Most of those savings, $36 billion, would go to Pell grants, funding an era of steady and predictable increases in the massive but underfunded federal aid program for needy students. Smaller portions would go toward reducing the deficit and to various Democratic priorities, including community colleges, historically black colleges and universities, and caps on loan payments.

Of course, there is a more general problem with the student loan program, which is that student loans, and federal student aid programs, when juxtaposed with the collusion of the top schools on tuition and financial aid, have led to the costs of higher education significantly outpacing inflation.

But that’s another rant.

I Must Condemn Matthew Yglesias in the Strongest Possible Terms

No Comments

This is just evil

Simply put, while I understand and appreciate his desire tosay, “In your face,” to Republicans, who have now appeared to lose the vote, this over-steps the basic bounds of humanity.

Seriously man, you use the music of ABBA to chastise Republicans?

You do know that doing so is but one step away from napalming baby kittens!

Baby Kittens, do you hear me, Napalming Baby Kittens!!!!

You’ve done enough! Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you NO sense of DECENCY?

In Case You Were Wondering About the Tea Baggers…

No Comments

The fact that they were screaming “f****t” at Representative Barney Frank, and screamed, “n***er” at Representative, and civil rights icon, John Lewis:

Civil rights hero Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) and fellow Congressional Black Caucus member Andre Carson (D-IN) related a particularly jarring encounter with a large crowd of protesters screaming “kill the bill”… and punctuating their chants with the word “nigger.”

………

And that wasn’t an isolated incident. Early this afternoon, standing outside a Democratic whip meeting in the Longworth House office building, I watched Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) make his way out the door, en route to the neighboring Rayburn building. As he rounded the corner toward the exit, wading through a huge crowd of tea partiers and other health care protesters, an elderly white man screamed “Barney, you faggot”–a line that caused dozens of his confederates to erupt in laughter.

They are doing this because they can, and they have wanted to for years, but feel that the level of social disapprobation involved in such an act in different contexts will be too great.

Post racial society my ass.

Are There Republican Moles in the Lay-Staff of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops?

No Comments

I was listening to NPR this morning, and they were talking about the position of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops regarding healthcare reform and abortion.

Any time that anyone talks about their position, this morning, it was a law professor, the consensus is that the position of the Bishops is coming from somewhere in the Twilight Zone: There is simply no basis in realities of law, precedent, legislation, or the manner in which regulation is derived from statute to suggest the Senate language will allow for federal funding of abortion.

This raises an obvious question: Why does the professional staff of the Conference hold a position at such extreme odds with every lawyer, and almost every other Catholic organization out there, most recently the Catholic Health Association and 59,000 nuns?

The only answer that I can come up with is that the professional staff working in their offices have been captured by partisan Republican operatives.

Either there are Republican operatives working and generating legal and legislative opinions, or the staff has been browbeaten by the loud right wing lay activists, most notably Bill Donohue and his Catholic League, and so the staff is taking its talking points from Republican operatives.

In either case, it is clear that the staff is NOT providing competent or good faith advice.

Perhaps a look at the senior lay staff at the organization, and their backgrounds might be warranted by some news gathering organization. (I sent an earlier version of my theory to Josh Marshall, if you know of any other investigative organizations, please forward this to them.)

Note that I am not suggesting that the Bishops themselves are operating as partisan political operatives, simply that their staff may be operating as such.

The House Vote Can Occur Sunday

No Comments

Because, as per Pelosi’s promise, there is 72 hours from the CBO report, and the unveiling of the bill, and when the vote is taken.

Well, the report is out: $1.3 trillion over the next 20 years.

Personally, I’m dubious, simply because either this is an end, which means that insurers find loopholes to screw us, or it’s a path to something more akin to European style healthcare, in which case, it gets a lot better.

In any case, it looks like a vote will occur after 2:00pm on Sunday.

Dodd’s Bill Is Out, and I Think It’s A Sellout, but ………

No Comments

You see, it places the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) in the Federal Reserve, which means that a small regulatory firm intended to defend the consumer is in a really big organization that is intended to defend banks.

Remember: Consumer protection was the Fed’s bailiwick in the run up to the, so this clearly appears to be a sell out, only, as an equally confused Paul Krugman notes:

…But here’s my puzzle: the bill, as I understand it, calls for an independent Consumer Protection Agency, with a director directly appointed by the president, but one that is “housed” at the Fed.

………

Does it mean that the staff will all be long-term Fed employees? Then that would, to at least some degree, compromise the agency’s independence. Or is it purely a cosmetic issue? If so, who exactly is being diverted?

I’m not prejudging this — there’s a lot to look at. But I’m puzzled.

What it does have is:

I think that the real question here is two fold, transparency and independence.

As to transparency, the question is whether Freedom of Information Act laws apply to this organization as they do to other regulatory institutions, or is it a paranoid secret black hole like the Federal Reserve.

As to independence, the question is whether it gets to, under the limitations of civil service regulations, hire its own staff, and draw up its own budget.

If it does not have this authority, it is a paper tiger.

Adding Brad Miller (NC-13) To My Act Blue Page

No Comments

Basically, he has an idea so good, that I don’t care that he wrote it in The New Republic.

He notes that obvious, that the various ways that the government has attempted to deal with home foreclosures are inadequate, and what’s more, the banks aren’t cooperating with the program in any significant way.

His solution is brilliant, use eminent domain to purchase the mortgage backed securities that have locked homeowners into their unsustainable home loans:

The Obama plan, by contrast, has misunderstood the calculus faced by homeowners facing foreclosure. An underwater homeowner has little incentive to save their home from foreclosure, even if the monthly payment is reduced. Mortgage modifications that reduce the principal are far more successful than modifications that reduce the interest rate. A homeowner with equity to protect will find a way to pay the mortgage. In contrast, for underwater homeowners a mortgage payment is just expensive rent.

…………

Also, roughly half of troubled mortgages now have “second liens,” a second mortgage or a home equity line of credit. Second liens are secured by the value of the home in excess of the first mortgage. Home values in many markets have declined by well more than the amount of most second liens. A reduction of principal on the first mortgage would often just be a gift to the second lien holder, still leaving the homeowner with negative equity in their home.

…………

That’s why there’s a need for a much stronger government role in this crisis. Some in the financial industry may be more willing to sell mortgages to the government at a discounted price than they are to modify mortgages themselves. Servicers fear that if they offer affordable mortgage modifications to struggling homeowners, many more homeowners will stop paying and wait for an offer. Selling a mortgage to the government may avoid that problem because the government would modify the mortgage, not the servicer.

But for many of the same reasons that the financial industry has not modified mortgages voluntarily, others in industry would not likely sell many mortgages voluntarily either, at least not at a realistic discount. So how can a new HOLC
[Home Owners’ Loan Corporation, an entity created by Roosevelt to help homeowners by buying and managing mortgages duringthe Great Depression] work if mortgage holders will not voluntarily sell mortgages?

The new HOLC could buy mortgages by eminent domain. Eminent domain powers are most commonly used to purchase land for highways or public buildings, but also to renew “blighted” neighborhoods or clean up contaminated land. And existing law allows the use of eminent domain to purchase property interests other than the outright ownership of land.

Some uses of eminent domain have resulted in public wariness and resentment. The Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in Kelo v. City of New London allowed the condemnation of family homes for an “economic development” project from which private developers profited. A mortgage in a securitized pool is no one’s castle.

The toxic assets backed by mortgages are impossible to value. The concern that taxpayers would get fleeced buying toxic assets from the financial industry was well justified. Whole mortgages are not hard to value at all. There are frequent, well-publicized auctions of mortgages with a sufficient number of informed, sophisticated buyers. The auctions are an almost perfect pricing mechanism. The problem for the financial industry is not the difficulty of valuing troubled mortgages; the problem is that many mortgages are not worth much. There are obviously many considerations in the price, but distressed mortgages generally sell for about 30 to 50 cents on the dollar at auction. And any honest valuation of many second liens would be pennies on the dollar.

Your mouth to Obama’s ear.

He is right on the law: In eminent domain, one is obligated only to pay market value, not par.

It won’t happen though, because Geithner and Summers would shoot it down, even it is legal, because, of course, it’s bad for the banks, and what’s bad for the banks is, to them, bad for America.

To be fair though, it should be noted that while Geithner and Summers may be financial Cossacks, it is also true, as Professor Delong is wont to say, “The Cossacks work for the Czar.”

He’s Just Not That Into You

No Comments

It looks like Democrat Chris Dodd has dumped Republican Bob Corker in his efforts to create financial reform, and has announced that he will be releasing a Corker-less proposal on Monday:

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd said he will release his version of legislation to overhaul financial rules, signaling that talks on a compromise with Republican Bob Corker have collapsed.

Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat who had been negotiating with Corker since last month, will release his proposal March 15 and hold a committee meeting to consider changes in two weeks, according to a statement released today.

“I have been fortunate to have a strong partner in Senator Corker and my new proposal will reflect his input and the good work done by many of our colleagues,” Dodd said. “Our talks will continue and it is still our hope to come to agreement on a strong bill all of the Senate can be proud to support.”

Note that he did not mention Richard Shelby, the ranking Republican on the committee, which I think was a deliberate snub; Shelby refused to do anything even approaching good faith.

I am not certain of the dynamics.

It could be that he realized that Corker was actually just trying to delay, that there were unbridgeable differences, or that the recent stories on how Bob Corker was doing the bidding of his campaign donor payday lenders skeeved him out.

My guess is that, at it’s core, Dodd did not want to spend any more time making the bill worse for just one Republican vote.

But Note: Strident Does not Mean Crazy

No Comments

Case in point, Alan Grayson, and his Public Option Act, which require the Secretary of HHS to set up a medicare buy-in at cost.

It’s only 4 pages long, and I’d love to see it hit the floor, because it would seriously jam-up the ‘Phants and the Blue Dogs.

H/t C&L.

Full press release after break.

GRAYSON INTRODUCES PUBLIC OPTION ACT
Bill Opens Up Medicare To Anyone Who Can Pay For It

March 9, 2010

Washington, DC

Congressman Alan Grayson, D-Fla., today introduced a bill (H.R. 4789) which would give the option to buy into Medicare to every citizen of the United States. The “Public Option Act,” also known as the “Medicare You Can Buy Into Act,” would open up the Medicare network to anyone who can pay for it.

Congressman Grayson said, “Obviously, America wants and needs more competition in health coverage, and a public option offers that. But it’s just as important that we offer people not just another choice, but another kind of choice. A lot of people don’t want to be at the mercy of greedy insurance companies that will make money by denying them the care that they need to stay healthy, or to stay alive. We deserve to have a real alternative.”

The bill would require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish enrollment periods, coverage guidelines, and premiums for the program. Because premiums would be equal to cost, the program would pay for itself.

“The government spent billions of dollars creating a Medicare network of providers that is only open to one-eighth of the population. That’s like saying, ‘Only people 65 and over can use federal highways.’ It is a waste of a very valuable resource and it is not fair. This idea is simple, it makes sense, and it deserves an up-or-down vote,” Congressman Grayson said.

In keeping with the “Grayson style,” the bill is clear and concise. It is only four pages. You can read the bill here.

OK, This is Freaky

No Comments

So, Eric Massa (D-NY-29) will resign Monday, following an ethics investigation regarding sexual harassment of a male staffer. He claims that it was simply, “Salty language,” and that the main reason was his diagnosis of Cancer, but this is decidedly odd.

One of the odd things here is that his resignation makes passing healthcare reform easier, because he is a conservative, though not officially a Blue Dog, Democrat, who voted against healthcare reform the first time around, so his exit removes a “no” vote.