Sunday, 3/28/10, Public Square

14 Comments

Filed under The Public Square

14 responses to “Sunday, 3/28/10, Public Square

  1. WSClark

    Yesterday, I pissed off the weather gods by stating it was a beautiful spring day in Kansas. They punished me with that pure-de-funk weather that rolled in in the afternoon.

    Today, I am going to keep my mouth shut.

  2. WSClark

    BTW: At least once a month, we should all take a moment to thank Iggy and Fnord for the work they do on this blog.

    Thank you, Iggy! Thank you, Fnord.

    Back to your regular programming.

    • Add my thanks as well. I have stuck with this blog longer than any other. The atmosphere here is the reason and that is the direct result of the efforts of iggy and fnord.

      Thank You Both!

    • How very kind!

      I feel like a ‘thank you back’ is well deserved. The company around here just can’t be beat. It’s a comfy and happy place where very smart, very kind people are found.

      “I think you learn more if you’re laughing at the same time.” — Mary Ann Shaffer

  3. David B

    Yesterday started off well. Today’s agenda: a little more garden clean up.

  4. tosmarttobegop

    Yesterday we ate at the Asian super buffet behind Town East and it was not bad at all.
    A telling sign was the number of actual Asians eating there!

    Thanks to WS it was a good day to be inside! Hee OMG we stopped into the Target and when we came out so cold and the wind was blowing the rain right into your face.

  5. Zippy

    It’s a nice day here, something you might think would be normal for Tucson in March, but not this year. I actually missed the Kansas rain, but having cold monsoons during the winter–while having an uncommonly dry June-July–wasn’t exactly what I was hoping for!

    It was nice today, high up to up to about 75 and sunny.

  6. Zippy

    By the way, if anyone really thought the insurance companies would play nice, heads up!

    The authors of the law say they meant to ban all forms of discrimination against children with pre-existing conditions like asthma, diabetes, birth defects, orthopedic problems, leukemia, cystic fibrosis and sickle cell disease. The goal, they say, was to provide those youngsters with access to insurance and to a full range of benefits once they are in a health plan.

    To insurance companies, the language of the law is not so clear.

    Insurers agree that if they provide insurance for a child, they must cover pre-existing conditions. But, they say, the law does not require them to write insurance for the child and it does not guarantee the “availability of coverage” for all until 2014.

    William G. Schiffbauer, a lawyer whose clients include employers and insurance companies, said: “The fine print differs from the larger political message. If a company sells insurance, it will have to cover pre-existing conditions for children covered by the policy. But it does not have to sell to somebody with a pre-existing condition. And the insurer could increase premiums to cover the additional cost.”

    Congressional Democrats were furious when they learned that some insurers disagreed with their interpretation of the law.

    “The concept that insurance companies would even seek to deny children coverage exemplifies why we fought for this reform,” said Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California and chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

    Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, Democrat of West Virginia and chairman of the Senate commerce committee, said: “The ink has not yet dried on the health care reform bill, and already some deplorable health insurance companies are trying to duck away from covering children with pre-existing conditions. This is outrageous.”

    And completely predictable.

    And so the fight continues.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/29/health/policy/29health.html

    • tosmarttobegop

      It is an aspect I have been trying to point out in the last few days.

      There is an element to this and past legislation, trusting that those who it effects will know naturally what they should be doing. That the intent was clear and that is what they had in mind when writing it.

      You do not trust a Pirate with your gold simply because you have told them they should not steal it!

      • And to think all of this could have been avoided with a carefully written, carefully phased-in UNIVERSAL health care plan.

        Oh well; who wants to actually solve problems anyway?

  7. Zippy

    Loopholes, my friend, loopholes. You give them any wiggle room and they’ll use it, and the 2014 delay gave them enough for a friggin’ Brinks truck.

    While this may, ironically, work to the Democrats’ political advantage, I don’t like who are the pawns in this chess game. One could only hope it finally makes people realizing that we can’t trust these industries to do the right thing, even when they have numerous incentives for doing so. And that taking control of big bad Gubmint is our only means of hitting back, apart from piecemeal direct action, which achieves nothing on a large scale, except publicity for changing the system.

    Anti-government rhetoric is something the powerful interests love. I don’t doubt Ron Paul, e.g., would end a lot of the explicit government support for them, but his lassez-faire approach would coddle a Corporate America that is already being left alone too much.

    I mention Dr. Paul precisely because he’s not the typical Republican yet is polling surprisingly high now, but Libertarians, too, in their opposition to all things government, would throw what’s left of democracy out with the bathwater.

    No wonder there’s so much ranting about “socialism.” Anything that would really correct the inequities we’re seeing in this society would look exactly that way to anyone vested in the status quo.

    Certainly FDR was called that, and worse.

  8. Zippy

    By the way, it’s only fair to report “the rest of the story”:

    From the NY Times again:
    In Health Bill, Obama Attacks Wealth Inequality
    By DAVID LEONHARDT
    Published: March 23, 2010

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/business/24leonhardt.html

    The article points out the shocking degree to which we’ve become a feudal society and, on paper (there’s the rub), the bill is a step–finally–in the correct direction.