This is one of those federal over-reaches that has the 10th Amendment folks all in a tizzy.
OK - we needed to commission a study to find out that distracted driving can cause accidents? Shouldn't this be a "no duh"?????
Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-New York; Robert Menendez, D-New Jersey; Mary Landrieu, D-Louisiana; and Kay Hagan, D-North Carolina, unveiled the ALERT Act, which would ban truck and car drivers and operators of mass transit from texting while driving.
The proposed legislation would prohibit any driver from sending text or e-mail messages while driving a vehicle, said an earlier news release from the senators. If the bill passes, the Department of Transportation would set the minimum standards for compliance.
The thing is guys, 14 states (including Minnesota and Utah) already have texting and driving bans in place. In addition, ALL FIFTY STATES have laws already in place that prohibit impaired driving (like driving while distracted by anything) so why do we need yet another law on the books to tell us something so very apparent?
I do find it ironic that the very same people who tell us that we can't legislate morality, have no problems trying to legislate stupidity. Ironic - but not surprising.
The Democratic Leadership in the House just can't seem to buy a break when it comes to trying to get the Health Care bill out of Rep. Henry Waxman's Committee.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi spent half of Wednesday finalizing a
Liberals, Hispanics and African-American members — Pelosi’s most loyal base of support — are feeling betrayed after House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) reached an agreement with four of seven Blue Dogs on his committee who had been bottling up the bill over concerns about cost.
“Waxman made a deal that is unacceptable,” said Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), one of about 10 progressives who met repeatedly with Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) on Wednesday.
“We signed a pledge to reject any plan that doesn’t include a robust public option, and this plan doesn’t have a robust public option,” he added.
And yet it's the Republicans that need to come on board Mr. President????
Seriously, there needs to be compromise in this bill and it is obvious that there are many in the Democratic Party that are adamant that it is their way or not at all. You can't blame Republicans for this one Mr. President. It's your team that is slowing progress down. Maybe you should get BACK TO DC and act like Commander In Chief instead of running about the country playing Saleman In Chief.
I have really tried to steer clear of the whole "birther" controversy in large part because I didn't want to give the conspiracy theorists behind it any "encouragement" or publicity by talking about it. However, very Logical Lady Mary Katherine Ham (HT AP at Hot Air) has a great post up at the AmSpec Blog addressing it that I think says all that needs to be said about it.
Indeed, it's almost as if birthers have allowed an intense and sometimes irrational dislike of a political figure to lead them to conspiracy theories while rationalizing the indulgence with concerns about the vetting process and rants about the failed responsibilities of a complicit media. It's almost like they continue to ignore evidence to the contrary of such theories in order to preserve their favored narrative long after the question (and election) is settled, even when induced to abandon it by friends, adversaries, and Occam's Razor alike.
They might even think to themselves, "Maybe I am crazy to even wonder. Or maybe we have witnessed one of the biggest frauds in American political history and the biggest failures among the American media in a very, very long time."
$12 trillion in debt and health care reform dying in committee and the US House spends another $25 MILLION on sea otters.
His next Tweet?????
It shows you exactly where their priorities are eh?
Logical Lady Kathleen Parker has a column up highlighting health care reform done right...and right in our own backyard...
The ambassador-designee promised a Senate panel Thursday that, if confirmed, he would press American values in China. If only the Obama administration would press Huntsman's health care reform values here in the U.S.
She lists out what she thinks are the best aspects of our refrom.
This is where the Congressman from Texas' 14th District has me in the palm of his hand.....
Healthcare continues to dominate the agenda on Capitol Hill as House leadership and the administration try to ram through their big government healthcare plan. Fortunately, they have been unsuccessful so far, as there are many horrifying provisions tucked into this massive piece of legislation. One major issue is the public funding of elective abortions. The administration has already removed many longstanding restrictions on abortion, and is unwilling to provide straight answers to questions regarding the public funding of abortion in their plan. This is deeply troubling for those of us who do not want taxpayer dollars funding abortions.
Forcing pro-life taxpayers to subsidize abortion is evil and tyrannical. I have introduced the Taxpayer’s Freedom of Conscience Act (HR 1233) which forbids the use of any taxpayer funds for abortion, both here and overseas.
I had to laugh at this headline from AP yesterday.
Dems alone can't deliver Obama health care win
With a filibuster proof Senate and an overwhelming majority in the House, the Democrats hardly need any help from Republicans in getting their agenda through. After all there is nothing the Republicans can do to stop them from getting legislation to the President for his signature.
What is even more comical is how the President will (in one breath) blame Republicans for his health care reform bill from not being passed and then in the next trying to sweet talk them into putting their principles aside and coming on board with his plan. Never mind the fact that all he (and the Legislative leadership) has to do is to bring the recalcitrant "Blue Dog" Democrats which includes Utah's Jim Matheson who still apparently has reservations on the legislation that sits in front of the House) in line.....
Speaking of "Bliue Dogs" the Senate Finance Committee has been having truly bi-partisan meetings and they have come up with their own version of the plan - one that will provide some reforms but it does away with two very key parts of ObamaCare - the public option and mandated employer provided insurance.
Bipartisan negotiations on the Senate Finance Committee are moving closer to eliminating two health care provisions favored by many Democrats – a mandate on employers to provide insurance or pay a penalty, and a government insurance option, a senator and health care insiders said Monday.
That could bring even greater pressure on Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), who has been challenged by more liberal senators who say he is sacrificing key Democratic priorities on health care reform to win the votes of a few Republicans.
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) confirmed that the three Republicans and three Democrats negotiating the Senate Finance bill are moving away from a broad-based mandate that would force employers to offer insurance. The senators instead are leaning toward a “free rider” provision that requires employers to pay for employees who receive coverage through Medicaid or who receive new government subsidies to purchase insurance through an exchange.
Time will tell if this plan will a) go anywhere or b) provide meaningful reform but it is interesting to see the reaction of the ideologs to the thought of compromise.
This is kind of like stripping the amnesty provisions out of comprehensive immigration reform. Once the venom’s been drained from the fangs, how much damage can it do?
No wonder the Kossacks are ready to revolt: “If the Senate Finance Committee drops the public option, the bill is worthless.”
Former DNC Chair Howard Dean had some harsh words for the plan on the Rachel Maddow Show yesterday (according to the Politico story).
Democrats on the Finance Committee meet Tuesday morning, but already talk of a deal along these lines drew fire from one prominent Democrat – former Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean. If the co-op plan and free rider provision make it into the bipartisan compromise, "I fear for the future of health care reform because that is not health care reform," Dean said Monday on MSNBC's Rachel Maddow Show.
Instead, he called it “health insurance reform.”
As for the co-op plan, Dean said, "That is what I call the fake public option. And that is a shame."
"This compromise does nothing except reform insurance. It is not worthless because it makes it fair, but it is not health care reform," Dean said.
Emphasis mine. IF (and that is a big if) this is indeed real health insurance reform then it is a compromise worth supporting because that is what we really need. The health CARE system is not what needs to be "fixed" as much as it is the insurance delivery system that needs to be fixed. This compromise bears watching for sure.
It appears that there will NOT be a re-vote on Prop 8 in 2010.
This is a smart move if they can get the rhetoric toned down some. Doing that will do more for their cause with many independents if they can drive the tone and substance of the discussion into a direction that shows more understanding for the beliefs of people of faith.
Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free? Betsy McCaughey has the answer in her Wall Street Journal column and it is not pretty.
The Congressional majority wants to pay for its $1 trillion to $1.6 trillion health bills with new taxes and a $500 billion cut to Medicare. This cut will come just as baby boomers turn 65 and increase Medicare enrollment by 30%. Less money and more patients will necessitate rationing. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that only 1% of Medicare cuts will come from eliminating fraud, waste and abuse.
The assault against seniors began with the stimulus package in February. Slipped into the bill was substantial funding for comparative effectiveness research, which is generally code for limiting care based on the patient’s age. Economists are familiar with the formula, where the cost of a treatment is divided by the number of years (called QALYs, or quality-adjusted life years) that the patient is likely to benefit. In Britain, the formula leads to denying treatments for older patients who have fewer years to benefit from care than younger patients.
Emphasis mine. However, the President insists that his cost savings will not come from cuts in patient care....
Driving these cuts is the misconception that preventative care can eliminate sickness. As President Obama said in a speech to the American Medical Association: “We have to avoid illness and disease in the first place.”
During the campaign, many conservatives were concerned that the press appeared to be "in the tank" for then candidate Barack Obama - and to an extent they were. However, as anyone who has watched these things with a critical eye knows, the media loves to build up someone - to put them on a pedistal - only to tear it out from underneath them. Witness the saga of one Michael Jeffrey Jordan. He was the darling of the Chicago media - a god among men - until the gambling allegations came up (after his father's murder) and then the same media who for 9 years had worshiped the ground he walked on started tearing him down.
President Obama didn't get that much time...the media has started to turn and it's not pretty. It started last Wednesday where rumblings of the print media's dissatisfaction with how they were treated in previous pressers.....
Erick Erickson at RedState has a couple of posts up about some of the more chilling provisions of government run health care. The first comes from Oregon and is the story of 53 year old Randy Stroop.... Since the spread of his prostate cancer, 53-year-old Randy Stroup of Dexter, Ore., has been in a fight for his life. Uninsured and unable to pay for expensive chemotherapy, he applied to Oregon's state-run health plan for help. Lane Individual Practice Association (LIPA), which administers the Oregon Health Plan in Lane County, responded to Stroup's request with a letter saying the state would not cover Stroup's pricey treatment, but would pay for the cost of physician-assisted suicide.
Emphasis mine. Sorry Randy - even though prostate cancer IS treatable, we aren't going to treat you. Erick's post was followed by a post from Jeff Emanuel which details the "thought process" that goes into making these decisions in Oregon. Some of the points he makes are downright cruel and THEN there is their process on end of life issues.....
Since the spread of his prostate cancer, 53-year-old Randy Stroup of Dexter, Ore., has been in a fight for his life. Uninsured and unable to pay for expensive chemotherapy, he applied to Oregon's state-run health plan for help.
Lane Individual Practice Association (LIPA), which administers the Oregon Health Plan in Lane County, responded to Stroup's request with a letter saying the state would not cover Stroup's pricey treatment, but would pay for the cost of physician-assisted suicide.
So much for a post televised presser bounce. Today's Rasumussen Reports have the bad news for President Obama.
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 30% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-eight percent (38%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -8 (see trends)...Overall, 49% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the President's performance. Today marks the first time his overall approval rating has ever fallen below 50% among Likely Voters nationwide. Fifty-one percent (51%) disapprove.
Worse news (for the President) is the fact that the majority of Americans disapprove of the health care plan that he has been pushing so hard.
Fifty-three percent (53%) now oppose the Congressional health care reform package. That’s up eight points over the past month. Just 20% now see health care as the most important of the President’s priorities. Nearly twice as many, 37%, say deficit reduction is most important.
That 8 point swing can be tied directly to the President's approval rating. As more and more news has gotten out about this health care plan, the Presidents approval has gone down with support of the plan.
This is what happens when you misread your mandate.
My radio partner Jazz Shaw has a post up regarding a little heralded push nationwide to mandate ethanol use.
As the Rochester, Minnesota Post Bulletin reports, a major manufacturer of ethanol, is hoping for a government waiver which will allow more ethanol to be blended into the gasoline you purchase at the pump.
Ten governors representing the Midwest Governors Association (MGA) recently issued a letter to U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson voicing their support for the E15 waiver currently being considered by the agency...The letter was signed by Rounds, Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, Iowa Gov. Chester J. Culver, Kansas Gov. Mark Parkinson, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, North Dakota Gov. John Hoeven, Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland, Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle, and Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm.
"If individuals be not influenced by moral principles; it is in vain to look for public virtue; it is, therefore, the duty of legislators to enforce, both by precept and example, the utility, as well as the necessity of a strict adherence to the rules of distributive justice." --James Madison, response to Washington's first Inaugural address, 1789
Join Jazz and I today at 10 eastern (8 Mtn) for Mid Stream Radio. Sure to be on the plate will be last nights Presidential presser. Did President Obama hit a home run or do you agree with Howard Feinman (of Newsweek) that it was nothing more than the "same old talking points"? Join us on MSR and let us know what you think!
Lousiana's Bobby Jindal has an opinion piece in today's Wall Street Journal that offers yet another set of options....
•Aligned consumer interests. Consumers should be financially invested in better health decisions through health-savings accounts, lower premiums and reduced cost sharing. If they seek care in cost-effective settings, comply with medical regimens, preventative care, and lifestyles that reduce the likelihood of chronic disease, they should share in the savings.
- Please Help Me Mum - I Don't Want To Die
- Setting Priorities
- Turning Out The Vote
- Curiouser and Curiouser
- Cooking the Books
- The Sham Debate
- Read It And Weep
- History Speaks
- Good For DC - Bad For Farmers
- Which Is More Important?
- Obama vs.Obama
- The Age Of Obama
- Reset On Reality
- NYTimes "Hearts" Single Payer
- Medicare versus the Private System