Marta Kutas’ Blog

They call it Obamacare and they want to repeal it. They say that U.S. people don’t like it. They say that they were elected to the Congress to repeal it, and if they can’t do that then they will try to make sure that they do everything they can to stop it from going into effect by not providing the funds needed to actually have it work. So I ask if you are one of those that would like to see the Affordable Care Act repealed, then I ask just which parts of it would you like to see repealed?

• Young adults will be able to stay on their parents’ health plans until the age of 26. Would you like this part of the ACA repealed?
• Insurers will NOT be able to deny coverage to children based on pre-existing conditions – unlike in the past where people who were already sick could NOT get insurance, the AFFORDABLE CARE ACT says that insurance companies must accept such people. This is what insurance is supposed to be all about. Would you like this part of ACA repealed? Starting in 2014, this. provision will be extended to all age groups. In other words, no matter how old you are and how sick you are, you WILL be able to get insurance.
• Insurance companies can NO longer put limits on how much they will pay out on coverage for a consumer’s lifetime. In other words, in the past if you got really sick and your payments exceeded some amount, the insurance company stopped paying. The fact that you were in the hospital or needed medical attention was of no concern to them. When ACA was signed, it meant that they could NO longer set such lifetime caps on your coverage. Would you like this part of ACA repealed?
• Likewise, by 2014 insurance companies will NO longer be able to put limits on how much they will pay out for coverage in a year. In short, you will get the coverage you actually need. Would you like this part of ACA repealed?
• Insurance companies will NO longer be able to stop coverage for a sick person because they accidentally made some error on the application they filled out for insurance. Would you like to see this part of ACA repealed?
• Insurers will have to come up with and implement a better appeals process for consumers to appeal decisions. Would you like this part of ACA repealed?
• New health plans must cover a minimum set of preventive benefits, including basic immunizations and even certain types of screenings, in some cases without copayments. Would you like to see this part of ACA repealed?
• Small-business owners are now eligible for a tax credit of up to 35 percent of the cost of premiums. Would you like to see this part of ACA repealed?
• The maximum adoption credit will be raised to $13,170 per child, up from $12,150 in 2009, so you can recover adoption expenses such as adoption fees, court cots, attorney’s fees. Would you like to see this part of ACA repealed?
• Healthcare plans that spend less than 80 percent of premiums on healthcare services will be required to provide rebates to customers. In other words, insurance companies serving the large group market will have to devote 80-85 percent of every dollar to patient care and improving quality of care, and not to overhead costs, executive salaries or dividends for shareholders. If insurance companies fail to meet these standards, they will have to provide rebates to consumers. Would you like this part of ACA repealed?
• The “donut hole” will become smaller.  Pharmaceutical manufacturers will have to provide a 50 percent discount on brand-name prescription drugs to older Americans on Medicare who fall into the “doughnut hole”, which refers to the out-of-pocket expenses Medicate recipients have to pay once their prescription drug costs reach $2,830. Would you like to see this part of ACA repealed?
• A new program will go into effect that will provide matching federal funds for long-term care services under Medicaid which provides medical care to the poor, to children and to pregnant women living under the federal poverty level. The federal government will also provide funds for home health care and attending services for people with disabilities. The new law requires that Medicaid be expanded to cover Americans whose incomes are at or below 133 percent of the federal poverty level — which equates to about $14,000 in 2010 for a person living alone. Would you like to see this part of ACA repealed?

The U.S. Constitution was read. Why? To remind WHO of WHAT?  Well, actually the (now) odious parts of the Constitution were not read. So, I was reminded that we the people are not perfect and neither is the Constitution. The implication was that congressman try to pass laws without knowing whether or not they are constitutionally sound — really? And, I was yet again reminded of my how much it costs us taxpayers to listen to this reading — given that the minimum salary of a member of the House or Senate is $174,000 plus health benefits and pension, of course — at a time when the people of this country are in dire need of sincere and effective representation.

2009 Lie of the Year Redux: Palin’s so-called Death Panels http://neurocritic.blogspot.com/

May 2011 bring us all mega-doses of natural, organic, home-grown kindness
to counter social, political, and economic blindness
and ever-growing torrential currents mindless, malicious or shallow.
Maturity to counter callow.
Furious green ideas to counter fallow mind fields.
Resounding echoes of neighborly yabadabadoo yields we can wield with a smile.
At least a few moments we can while away every day.
Friendships without borders — next door and internationally.
Everyone not only thinking but thinking rationally.
A year in which all hallow fairness with open-eyed awareness.
A year in which all hallow equality, tranquility, and sanity
rediscovering a do-unto-others-with-compassion-and-empathy mentality.
A year in which we wallow we-deep in giving not taking
in forgiving not forsaking
in living not faking
in re-making our one of a kind world anew
doing well by all not just a select few.

When Annie Leonard videos, it’s worth a look and a listen.

see them all: http://storyofstuff.org/

My favorite: www.storyofstuff.com

Compromise is a joint promise
not to unilaterally diss the other side
to negotiate with respect rather than blindly deride
to come together
whether or not you fully succeed
giving a little as long as you get what you really need!

Compromise is a true use of wise
separating the wheat from the chaff
the curled lip snicker
from the heartfelt happy laugh
the musts from the wants (or would be nice)
the political flaunts and taunts
from sincerity, selflessness, and sacrifice.

Equality is a sieve
that allows all people to live and be
as if they were you
and you were me

Kerry explains one important point among many: on the Democratic proposal everyone would get a tax cut on the first $250K,. Everyone!  Just not on the rest. I beseech the powers that be to put this fact into all American’s drinking water.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/

Are we too short-sighted to see
that every me
could be you
not working
not eating or drinking
thinking of themselves less
because the economy is a mess
and because some politicians (too often nameless) don’t compare
lack compassion but dare nonetheless
to argue in a clearly nonsensical fashion
that we should spare
Bush tax cuts for millionaires!

http://www.opencongress.org/articles/view/2122-GOP-Blocks-Unemployment-Extension-Again-But-Do-They-Even-Know-What-They-re-Blocking-

At least forty millionaires have written an open letter to President Obama asking that he not extend the Bush tax cuts for people earning one million or more (http://www.fiscalstrength.com/) .  If only the decision were up to Obama!  Why have these millionaires made this request and others to join them? Because it’s fiscally irresponsible to extend the cuts. Because they don’t need the money. And, because these “patriotic millionaires” readily admit that extending the Bush tax cuts won’t actually lead to job creation; we have plenty of evidence that the money does NOT trickle down. I can’t sign the letter because I don’t make a million or more, but if I did, I would.

David Frum on NPR (tried) to make the case that repealing the tax cuts even for those who make a million or more does not make good economic sense. I was all ears on this one. His argument was that at around 27% the tax rate wouldn’t be worth fighting, but if raised to a higher rate it would be. In other words, the wealthy American citizens would do anything and everything in their power — even if it took spending the monies they would pay in taxes — to avoid paying the taxes. Imagine if everyone did that. Was I convinced? Yes and no. I wasn’t convinced by Frum’s argument that it would be bad for the economy as he didn’t really explain why. However, I was convinced that at least some of the richest Americans would in fact do almost anything to avoid whatever taxes they could. It saddens me for if it is true, it shows that even when people have the resources to help the country — the economy by lowering the country’s debt, they have no motivation to actually do so. Sad selfish. Sad selfish. An American blemish.  My father always told me having to pay more taxes each year (assuming a constant rate) was a good thing because it meant you were making more money!