Blogmeister Echo Syndrome

21 04 2015

Washington, D.C.

Me, on March 17:

The insurance industry will make sure all the Republican politicians they bought and paid for restores the Federal subsidies if SCOTUS does the “wrong” (i.e. right) thing.  Congress will do it so quickly that they’ll beat Planck Time.

Well well.





By Any Other Name

15 04 2015

Richmond, Virginia

Okaybut…

The way around this has already been perfected. Lobbyists just won’t call themselves “lobbyists.” They’ll call themselves “consultants” or some such. Remember, Eric Cantor became a lobbyist right away in spite of the one year cooling off rule for former House members because his job isn’t called lobbying.





Citizen United

14 04 2015

Monticello, Iowa

***

huffpohrc

***

2012spend

***

The question above of why HRC needs $2.5 billion or even $2.5 thousand is a very good one.  First off, she already has the media on her side, NBC most of all, because they hired Chelsea Clinton in order to buy access to Hillary Clinton, and even though the younger Miss Clinton didn’t last long at NBC, Comcast is going to have to protect their investment by making sure HRC wins.  And by eschewing all that money, HRC can lead by example, or at least put on a front like she is.





A Three Piece Puzzle

4 03 2015

Washington, D.C.

Two pieces of the puzzle in King v Burwell, whose SCOTUS BJs have just started.

Louisiana Gov. Piyush Jindal, writing in NR:

And here’s where some on the right want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Conventional wisdom in Washington has assumed that, should the Court strike down the subsidies in 37 states under King, states will immediately act to establish their own state-run exchanges — allowing the subsidies to flow once more. Alternatively, Congress might be tempted to pass language extending the subsidies to the federally-run exchange, allowing Obamacare to comply with the Court ruling. That’s a “solution” in search of a problem. If eliminating the subsidies represents a net tax cut, then restoring the subsidies — whether by states creating their own exchanges, Congress passing new legislation, or some combination of the two — would re-impose a sizable tax increase. Americans would pay billions more in higher taxes to fund the newly restored subsidies, making Obamacare that much more entrenched. What self-proclaimed conservative of sound mind would do such a thing? Alternatively, some have talked about enacting a “compromise” that would restore the Obamacare subsidies while reforming some of the law’s new insurance requirements and regulations. But restoring the flow of subsidies means restoring the employer mandate, thus raising taxes. And even if such a “compromise” weakens or eliminates the employer mandate, the Obama administration — to say nothing of the insurance companies themselves — will hardly countenance a repeal of the individual mandate, which restoring the subsidies will only strengthen. So those seeking to restore the flow of subsidies will likely end up having to raise taxes on millions of Americans, in some way, shape, or form.

The emphasis of one given word in this quote is my own addition.

Betsey McCaughey, in the NYP:

Insurance companies will be the biggest losers

Their stock prices have soared since the healthcare.gov rollout — Humana up 66 percent; Cigna, 53 percent; Aetna, 52 percent. No wonder: ObamaCare forces the public to buy their policies.

It’s like a law requiring all Americans to buy cars, subsidizing those who can’t pay. That would send automaker stocks skyrocketing, too.

Insurers are expected to haul in over a trillion dollars of taxpayer money over the next decade. No wonder they’re bombarding the Supremes with arguments defending their cozy deal.

The third piece of the puzzle?  Look at the campaign finance reports of a lot of Republicans, and you’re going to find a whole lot of insurance PACs, 527s, if not semi-directly, then funneled through one or two intermediaries.

It’s why the Republican Party in current form is never going to make a serious run at repeal.  At “best,” they’ll just nibble around some of the worst edges.





Ticket to Ride

11 02 2015

Manhattan

original

$100,000 income puts a household at the 77.5 percentile.

 





2015: A Border Odyssey

16 11 2014

Kentucky

Breitbart:

Exclusive: GOP Rep. Hal Rogers’ Campaign Donor Stands to Profit from Executive Amnesty

A defense contractor and top campaign contributor to House Appropriations Committee chairman Rep. Hal Rogers (R-KY) is in the running to get a contract to print millions of IDs and other government documents associated with the president’s planned executive amnesty, Breitbart News has learned exclusively.

That’s all you need to know.

And why is HAL crucially important here?

Easy.  He runs House Budget, and he’s trying to use his power to get the House to pass a budget that lasts through the end of FY 15, not just a short CR to last until early January when the next Congress starts.  Passing a longer budget now means that the new Congress wouldn’t be able to play appropriations hardball with Obama over EO amnesty, at least not until October 1, 2015, at which point the other side hopes that everyone will have forgotten all about the immigration issue.  That would be fine with HAL, for very practical reasons we now know.





NYT Lobs a Bomb on Chris Koster’s Campaign for Governor

30 10 2014

Jefferson City

Read all about it.

I would be cheering, except that, barring a miracle, the Republicans will be nominating Peter Kindercare.








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,110 other followers