Hometown: Northern California
Member since: Wed Aug 19, 2009, 11:37 PM
Number of posts: 1,127
Hometown: Northern California
Member since: Wed Aug 19, 2009, 11:37 PM
Number of posts: 1,127
Sanders’ Medicare for All, raising taxes, and the Establishment Pushback
Most everyone understands the concept that you will pay more in taxes for Sander’s Medicare for All. But this is greatly offset by not having to pay the health insurance middlemen their monthly premium. Less money flows out of your personal and household budget.
The Democratic third-way establishment folks like Clinton and Pelosi rail that it is ‘raising taxes’ on the middleclass. This is a typical republican ploy. Although nobody likes paying taxes, mature people know this is a requirement for a successful society.
The reason Clinton and the third-way democrats despise instituting a Medicare for All contribution tax is because people will see it coming out of their paycheck. When people see specific payroll deductions, like SS and Medicare for All, the people will demand an effective and fair health care system. And, people will proudly accept this payroll contribution for affordable and effective healthcare. Once implemented, the people will demand this healthcare system and fight against any negative changes...just like Social Security.
The Establishment is pushing back against Medicare for All because there is so much cash going into the pockets of insurance executives, stockholders, and of course politicians. Health Insurers literally make Billion$ in ‘profit’ every year. It is a cash cow for the 1%.
And this is why we the people must pushback against this disgusting insurance thievery and support Medicare for All.
Posted by TheProgressive | Thu Feb 11, 2016, 07:31 PM (6 replies)
The DNC Data Breach: An Analysis
First and foremost, the Sanders campaign did not hack the DNC database. The DNC vendor negligently altered (one way or another) the database access parameters. The ‘firewall’ in this case is just ‘parameter and security settings’. One setting says ‘given a user access code, here is what data you are allowed to access’.
The Sanders campaign informed the DNC in October that their usercodes permitted access to all campaign data. Was this just a DNC test to see what the Sanders campaign staff would do? Of course it was. The Sanders campaign staff did the right thing in October.
Let’s also note that Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the DNC are in bed with the Clinton campaign. There is so much obvious evidence to support this: the debates, DWS denying data access to the Sanders campaign, DWS rhetoric about this instance. They would do anything to help the Clinton campaign.
Is this just cover for the Clinton campaign? There is no doubt in my mind that the Clinton campaign stole Sanders and O’Malley’s data. Clinton has little to no integrity or trustworthiness and a plot like this is not beyond their tactics. “I’ll do the actual stealing of data and them blame Sanders”.
Remember that the DNC is tasked with securing the data. It is private data – not public data. The DNC and their vendor can selectively produce any evidence they want, including access logs. Note that the audit is a compiled document – a person had to read the actual audit log and interpret the data into an easy to read format.
The Sanders campaign and the public will never know what really happened because the data, audit log, and internal database workings is supplied by the DNC.
It is very suspect that the database was ‘opened up’ to all campaign access right before the debates. The DNC and the Clinton campaign had from October to plan the next data breach. It is my belief that the DNC/Clinton ‘persuaded’ the Sanders’ staffer to, this time, access the data and ‘store it’. This was the staffer who was immediately fired. Money does talk and the staffer obviously had no integrity.
What did it gain for the Clinton campaign? Clinton’s trustworthiness is in the toilet – Sanders is highly respected and trusted. What a clever way to ‘cast doubt’ on Sanders...
Every media outlet plastered the airways with the so-called ‘Sanders’ data breach. The news media purposefully reported this in such a way as to harm the Sanders campaign: the informative quotes from the Sanders campaign spokesman were not aired, but rather non-informational quotes. You also see the media run with the compiled audit as if it was 100% factual. Once again, the DNC and their vendor compiled the audit.
You see, the news media has a lot riding on who wins these campaigns. The networks make a ton of money on political advertising. And who has the most money to spend? – correct, the republicans and Clinton. It’s all about the money. And absolutely nothing gets in the way when it comes to money.
We will never know what really happened because the DNC&Clinton are the ones who own the data and the ones who provide the information about that really happened.
This was nothing more than a DNC/Clinton entrapment plot that Senator Sanders has to ‘apologize’ for. It was his staffers, with questionable integrity, that access the data and they were fired.
Just more dirty politics against the first statesperson in along time to be running for president. The real crime lies with the corrupt DNC who allowed this data access to occur.
Posted by TheProgressive | Sun Dec 20, 2015, 02:52 PM (48 replies)
It will take 5-10 minutes to write your comments about the XL Pipeline. It is our duty
to participate in such important matters.
The Public Notice and comment header is: "Presidential Permit Applications: TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, L.P, National Interest Determination". The ID number is: DOS-2014-0003-0001
1. Federal Register describing the Public Notice
2. The Public Notice directs you to regulations.gov:
3. The direct link to the Comment page is:
From TIPS FOR SUBMITTING EFFECTIVE COMMENTS* (regulations.gov):
A comment can express simple support or dissent for a regulatory action. However, a constructive, information-rich comment that clearly communicates and supports its claims is more likely to have an impact on regulatory decision making.
Please go forth and comment...!
Posted by TheProgressive | Fri Mar 7, 2014, 12:22 PM (15 replies)
I would say chained-cpi is on the table. Below is the report. Looks like
Social Security gets hit hard.
Consider this: The 'savings' from the C-CPI is about $12.72 Billion per year for 10 years.
So, our government decides that American Retirees are just getting too much of their own
money and they think that is wrong.
Then compare this $12 billion/year to the military budget. Why can't they reduce their budget by
$12 billion/year. It isn't like we are in global world war?
One can deduce that our government Hates American retirees and so they use that money and
'give' it to rich military contractors...
We get non-stop bombardments from Obama and Pelosi and every republican that cuts to 'entitlement'
programs are mandatory to reduce spending. Funny thing, Social Security is *Self-funding* and contributes
*Zero* to the budget. Not one dime from the General Fund goes to funding earned benefits.
Fellow DUer, Jackpine Radical, posted this last night: "The time to scream is BEFORE it's a done deal".
We have to stop our government from taking/reducing our earned benefits.
CBO Link: http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43965?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzEmail&utm_content=812526&utm_campaign=0
Posted by TheProgressive | Mon Mar 4, 2013, 02:12 PM (65 replies)
This thread shows how devious and un-American this Postal Act was passed.
Part 1: HR 22 January 4, 2005 – February 9, 2006 *failed*
It seems this bill has been in the works for years. Where we can catch-up to it is in the 109th Congress (2005-2006). On January 4, 2005, HR 22, the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act was introduced by Rep John McHugh (R-NY23). It came out of committee on April 13, 2005.
There were 163 cosponsors of the bill: 104 Democrats, 58 Republicans, and 1 independent. Well-known Democrats and Independents (just one) were part of the cosponsor list. It passed the House on Jul 26, 2005. The vote was 410 to 20 – quite the bipartisan vote.
Then on February 9, 2006, the Senate passed the bill. I am not sure how they passed the bill, as there was not a recorded vote.
Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act:
Senate passed H.R. 22, to reform the postal laws of the United States, after striking all after the enacting clause and inserting in lieu thereof, the text of S. 662, Senate companion measure, after agreeing to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, and the following amendments proposed thereto:
It is also important to note that the ‘pre-funding of the Postal Service Retiree Health Benefit Fund (Title VIII, Section 8909a) in the above bill (HR 22) did not have the precise dollar amount payment schedule (e.g. ‘$5.4B not later than Sept 30, 2007’ that the enacted bill has). Instead, there were formulas.
HR 22 died after the Senate passed the bill with changes.
Link to the above info: HR 22
Link to HR 22 (search ‘8909’ to find funding formula in Title VIII)
Part 2: HR 6407 December 7, 2006 – December 20, 2006 *passed*
On December 7, 2006, HR 6407, the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act was introduced to the House by Congressman Tom Davis (R-VA). There were three sponsors, two Democrats and one Republican.
This version of the bill contained the precise dollar amounts:
``(3)(A) The United States Postal Service shall pay into
``(i) $5,400,000,000, not later than September 30, 2007;
``(ii) $5,600,000,000, not later than September 30, 2008;
``(iii)$5,400,000,000, not later than September 30, 2009;
``(iv) $5,500,000,000, not later than September 30, 2010;
``(v) $5,500,000,000, not later than September 30, 2011;
``(vi) $5,600,000,000, not later than September 30, 2012;
``(vii)$5,600,000,000, not later than September 30, 2013;
`(viii) $5,700,000,000, not later than September 30, 2014;
``(ix) $5,700,000,000, not later than September 30, 2015;
``(x) $5,800,000,000, not later than September 30, 2016.
A computed amount was used after that date.
The next day, December 8, 2006, at 10:10pm, HR 6407 was considered under suspension of the rules. Debate lasted till 10:33pm. One Democratic representative, Mr. Davis of Illinois participated in the debate. The debate was nothing but praise for HR 6407.
After the debate, the ‘vote’ was taken:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Tom Davis) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 6407, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). In the opinion of the Chair,
two-thirds of those voting have responded in the affirmative.
Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were refused.
So (two-thirds of those voting having responded in the affirmative)
the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
The vote was only a voice vote. Representative Pence (R-IN) asked for a recorded vote and was denied.
The very next day, December 9, 2012 (actually after midnight, December 8, 2012), the Senate proceeded on HR 6407. Senator Murray (D-WA) was the only Democrat speaking on the bill. From the Congressional Record the bill was passed by unanimous consent:
Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and any statements be printed in the RECORD.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill (H.R. 6407) was ordered to a third reading, was read the third time, and passed.
Congressional Record Link
The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act was passed in less than 48 hours. There were no recorded votes. Republican Congressman Pence asked for the yeas and nays but was denied. Appears Democrats had no objections. The Congressional Record seems to indicate that Minority Leader Reid was on the floor when the Senate passed the bill by unanimous consent.
I do know that the ‘prizes’ of this bill were
1) Awesome and valuable Post Office buildings were sold off because of financial losses. They could not just sell off these buildings for no reason – right?
2) The first reduction of services just occurred – no Saturday delivery. This will snowball into increase postal workload and increase delivery times.
3) A cry will go out to ‘privatize’ the Post Office
4) Postal Unions will disappear
5) And, finally, any delivery will eventually cost a small fortune.
Posted by TheProgressive | Fri Feb 8, 2013, 12:58 PM (29 replies)
Go to Page: 1