The GOP Hopes That You Keep Sleeping

America has become like the proverbial frog in a pot of water, which has slowly, but steadily, increased in temperature to the point that it is boiled alive without realizing it.

As the story goes, if the frog were dumped into boiling water, it would immediately jump out.

But, since the water’s temperature was initially comfortable, even pleasant, and only slowly increased, the frog gradually became acclimated to it, and therefore was, in effect, desensitized to the inevitable, impending danger, and died slowly.

For the past nearly 50 years or so, and more specifically, within the last 38, America has swooned under the siren song led by the GOP, which in part started off with the not-so-oblique condemnation that, “In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” (As Brian Gurney, a private citizen from California, noted: “You can’t govern if you don’t believe in government.” But set up a straw man, and beat it to a pulp – demonize the Constitutional effigy.) And to sweeten the deal, and help matters along, a little bit of “They’re individuals and families whose taxes support the government and whose voluntary gifts support church, charity, culture, art, and education. Their patriotism is quiet, but deep. Their values sustain our national life,” was thrown in for good measure (“a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down,” you know).

In order to facilitate that destruction, first was an appetizer of dessert – across-the-board personal income tax rates were cut 23%, which made the majority of working-class Americans and families very happy.

But then, calling them “job creators,” (veritable sacred cows which should be left alone to wander about in traffic and poop anywhere they desire) another round of personal income tax cuts came around, this time for the elites, and personal income tax rates upon the very wealthiest Americans was dramatically slashed to less than half the former rate – from 70% to 28%.

And then, there came cries and demands for liberty, and freedom from the tyranny of genuine governmental slavery in the form of, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” And truly, who could disagree? But that was quickly transformed into efforts to squelch personal liberty as healthcare decision-making in the most intimate of, and deeply personal matters involving reproduction, by providing opportunity for nosy neighbors (government) to tell others how they ought to run their lives according to the dictates of others’ religious convictions, all under the auspices of government.

Dissatisfied with that aspect of control, they sought to again meddle into the private lives of others – despite the fact that their private liberties were not encroached upon – and the sanction of committed legal relationships in the civil sector were forbidden to select individuals… just like it once was with ethnic minorities. And when in indignation they invited the SCOTUS to step in and rule (hopefully to their advantage, though contrary to their own religious writings), which ruled against their religiously-motivated (no religious test), publicly-sanctioned governmental discrimination (equal protection under law), they loudly cried ‘FOUL!’

And then, when more of their hand-picked, fair-haired children ruled against them, that rights were not absolute (D.C. v Heller), that not just anyone had a right to own, possess, or brandish any firearm, anywhere, at any time, they couldn’t stand it any more, and falsely accused the SCOTUS of partiality and of siding with their opponents whom they continuously maligned, despite the fact that they were ruled against by one of their own most staunch hard-liners.

Feeling emboldened, their most powerful, yet little-known instigator went public and said in part that,

In Praise of Regulation

It’s said that “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

Though Lord Acton (John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton (1834–1902), the first Baron Acton) is often attributed with originating that phrase in an 1887 letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton, the idea itself was not new to him, and was known to have been expressed in 1770 by in a speech to the UK House of Lords by William Pitt the Elder, Earl of Chatham, who was British Prime Minister 1766–1778.

Our nation’s Founders understood that principle quite well, as evidenced by the systems of oversight, and the establishment of three separate, co-equal branches of government which they established via the Constitution – which was ratified June 21, 1788.

Absolute power, in a market sense, is about money and corrupting influence that almost always accompanies unchecked concentrated power. In this era, we see it commonly as a desire to abolish rules, regulations, and laws designed to protect the people.

That’s but one underlying reason why the GOP wants to abolish “ObamaCare” – so that power (and money) may be concentrated in the hands of the already-powerful.

We the people have the final say-so, because

#ALpolitics could STILL $ave money if they were to #ExpandMedicaid

Alabama, among other states, should have expanded Medicaid when they had the opportunity to do so, and with SIGNIFICANT REWARD! In other words, at the very first. Now, if any state decides to expand Medicaid, there’s little, if any, incentive, except that there will be some savings to the state, and benefit to their citizens, by having access to healthcare.

A sick workforce can’t survive.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) continually tell America that the sickest, the fattest, the most diabetic, the most smokers, and cancer-ridden, are in the Southeast… which largely voted for Trump, and has been predominately GOP-voting for at least the past 25+/- years. And I write of Alabama in particular.

In a November 2012 brief entitled “An Economic Evaluation of Medicaid Expansion In Alabama under the Affordable Care Act” by Professors Drs. David J.Becker, Ph.D.and Michael A. Morrisey, Ph.D of the University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Public Health, Lister Hill Center for Health Policy, they presented the case for the numerous potential benefits of expanding Medicaid in Alabama, which was not merely an improvement in the overall quality of life for Alabamians, but significant economic benefit to the entire state.

Drs. Morrisey and Becker are Professor and Director, and Assistant Professor, respectively, at the University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Public Health, Lister Hill Center for Health Policy, and have researched and written extensively the subject. The University of Alabama at Birmingham is one of three independent, autonomous universities in the UofA System.

Then-Governor Dr. Robert Bentley, MD, a Republican, was forced to resign in shame in the midst of his second term after pleading guilty to charges of corruption and ethics violations, and refused to expand Medicaid in “Sweet Home.”

The Bureau of Labor Statistics has most recently shown that employment in the Healthcare sector is thriving nationwide. The figures below are from the BLS’ most recent report “THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION — MARCH 2018,” and is expressed in thousands. The columns in order, are: Not Seasonally Adjusted, March 2017, January, February, March 2018, and Seasonally Adjusted for the same times, respectively. (ESTABLISHMENT DATA Table B-1. Employees on nonfarm payrolls by industry sector and selected industry detail)

Drs. Morrisey and Becker identified that had then-Governor Bentley expanded Medicaid, a Federal/State program that pays healthcare costs for the impoverished, the state could have not merely eked it’s way out of recession, but it would have propelled itself in rocket-like fashion, to a position of economic strength and stamina.

They cited a provision in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) which provided incentive to states to expand Medicaid by offering a one-time bonus of paying for 100% of all costs in 2014, followed by nominal reductions each year thereafter. And if states chose to expand Medicaid, they would have paid LESS (a smaller percentage) even after all incentives expired. Medicaid is a Federal-State sharing program in which the states bear a certain portion, while the Federal Government picks up the remaining share.

They wrote in part, that “Under the ACA, Alabama would receive a significantly higher Federal Matching Assistance Percentage (FMAP) for the expansion population than the 68.5% it currently receives for the non ‐ expansion population. The ACA provides for a uniform FMAP to all states of 100% in 2014 ‐ 2016, 95% in 2017, 94% in 2018, 93% in 2019 and 90% in all years thereafter.”

Presently, because Alabama has chosen to NOT expand Medicaid under the provisions of the ACA, they are STILL paying MORE for Medicaid than if they would have expanded it… even now, in 2018. That’s because the OLD law, under which the state labors, requires Alabama (and other states that did not expand Medicaid) to pay 31.5%. If Alabama would EXPAND Medicaid even now, in 2018, they would pay only 10%.

Governess Kay Ivey, also a Republican, who as Lt. Gov. assumed office following Bentley’s resignation after pleading guilty to corruption and ethics violation charges, has similarly expressed her reticence to expand Medicaid.

In 2016, Alabama spent $5,461,151,125 for Medicaid.

Noting that their “analysis does not consider potential savings from reduced spending on uncompensated care, mental health care and other services currently provided to the expansion population,” assuming the state expanded Medicaid and would pay “6.2% of program costs through 2020,” Drs. Morrisey and Becker projected three scenarios of a high, moderate, and low “take-up,” meaning enrollment into the program, and wrote that, “we estimate that the state of Alabama would be responsible for $771 million (6.2%) of the estimated $12.5 billion in new Medicaid program costs over the 2014 ‐ 2020 period,” and noted specifically, that “If more previously uninsured or privately insured individuals elect to enroll in Medicaid costs to the state and Federal government would rise. If take ‐ up were lower, the costs to the state and Federal government would fall.”

If Alabama had chosen to expand Medicaid in 2016 – the last year the Federal Government paid 100% of ALL COSTS of expansion – the state would have SAVED $5,461,151,125… the TOTAL cost of Medicaid. If Alabama were to expand Medicaid in 2018 (this year), they would pay only 6.2% of the costs, while the Federal Government would pay 93.8%. Using a high “take-up” scenario for 2018, Drs. Morrisey and Becker projected the state would pay $243,000,000… about 77.5% LESS than what it paid in 2016. A low “take-up” scenario for 2018 would be 46.48% lowered costs to the state.

The state has a peculiar and non-standard practice of having TWO budgets, the Education Trust Fund and General Fund budgets. Medicaid is paid from the General Fund budget, which is the smaller of the two, and receives “Taxes from over 40 sources are deposited into the GF, with the largest sources being the insurance company premium tax, interest on the Alabama Trust Fund and state deposits, oil and gas lease and production tax, cigarette tax, ad valorem tax, and Alabama Alcoholic Beverage Control Board profits,” and pays for and “supports state programs such as child development and protection, criminal justice, conservation efforts, economic development, public health and safety, mental health, Medicaid, legislative activities, and the court system.”

The much larger Education Trust Fund, receives revenue from “Ten tax sources are allocated to the ETF, the largest of which are the individual and corporate income tax, sales tax, utility tax, and use tax.” Revenues from the Education Trust Fund “support, maintenance and development of public education in Alabama, debt service and capital improvements relating to educational facilities, and other functions related to educating the state’s citizens. Programs and agencies supported by the ETF include K-12 education, public library services, performing and fine arts, various scholarship programs, the state’s education regulatory departments, and two- and four-year colleges and universities. Funding from the ETF is also provided to non-state agencies that provide educational services to the people of Alabama, including the arts, disease counseling and education, and youth development.”

Medicaid requires states to cover:
• Pregnant women up to at least 138% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) ($16,643 for an individual, $33,948 for a family of four in 2017)

• Preschool-age children up to at least 138% of the FPL ($16,643 for an individual, $33,948 for a family of four in 2017)

• School-age children up to at least 100% of the FPL ($12,060 for an individual, $24,600 for a family of four in 2017)

• Elderly and disabled individuals up to at least 75% of the FPL ($9,045 for an individual, $18,450 for a family of four in 2017)

• Working parents up to at least 28% of the FPL ($3,376 for an individual, $6,888 for a family of four in 2017)

Moreover, however, Alabama could have improved its economy by expanding Medicaid. In that same report, Drs. Morrisey and Becker considered three possible scenarios also based upon a high, moderate, and low “take-up” rate which showed that Alabama could have benefited between $2.331 billion and $33.529 billion in additional value added to the state’s economy from 2014-2020 (Low-to-High, inclusively and respectively).

They concluded that, using the intermediate, or moderate “take-up” scenario, “we project that a coverage expansion would reduce the state’s uninsured population by approximately 232,000 individuals while generating $20 billion in new economic activity and a $935 million increase in net state tax revenues.”

Again, that does NOT include the savings from eliminating uncompensated care.

Bottom line?

It would STILL be exceedingly wise for Alabama to expand Medicaid.

#Trump’s Billionaire Care

“We don’t have it; we can’t afford it, and we don’t make enough to be penalized at the end of the year so either which way it goes we don’t have the money to pay for it,” he said. 

Under the Affordable Care Act, millions more Americans now have insurance through online exchanges and Medicaid. But like the Wallaces, many still lack coverage, especially in states like Tennessee where elected leaders declined to expand Medicaid. 

The Wallaces were camped out on a blanket outside Red Bank High School in Chattanooga on a Friday afternoon, the day before the clinic was set to open Saturday morning.

They said they make too much money for Medicaid, and they looked into an Obamacare exchange plan but couldn’t afford the premiums. 

President Trump has promised to replace the ACA with something better. But the Congressional Budget Office estimates a plan passed by the House of Representatives would leave 23 million more Americans uninsured, and Senate Republicans have yet to reveal the details of their plan. 

Can We #RepealAndReplace #ObamaCare?

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA, aka ACA, or more often as “ObamaCare”) might be analogized to an onion, insofar as:
1.) It has many layers, and;
2.) Peeling back the layers may cause tears.

Enacted in 2010, it has been decried primarily by Republicans, none of whom voted for the bill’s passage, either in the House, which approved it 219-212 with 34 Democrats voting “NO” – or in the Senate, which approved it 60-39 along party lines, with 1 Republican (Jim Bunning, KY) “Not Voting.”

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act contains nine titles, each addressing an essential component of reform:
1.) Quality, Affordable Health Care For All Americans
2.) The Role Of Public Programs
3.) Improving The Quality And Efficiency Of Health Care

4.) Prevention Of Chronic Disease And Improving Public Health
5.) Health Care Workforce
6.) Transparency And Program Integrity

7.) Improving Access To Innovative Medical Therapies
8.) Community Living Assistance Services And Supports
9.) Revenue Provisions

Immediate improvements through reform included:
• Eliminate lifetime and unreasonable annual limits on benefits
• Prohibit rescissions of health insurance policies
• Provide assistance for those who are uninsured because of a pre-existing condition

• Require coverage of preventive services and immunizations
• Extend dependent coverage up to age 26
• Develop uniform coverage documents so consumers can make apples to apples comparisons when shopping for health insurance

• Cap insurance company non-medical, administrative expenditures
• Ensure consumers have access to an effective appeals process and provide consumers a place to turn for assistance navigating the appeals process and accessing their coverage
• Create a temporary re-insurance program to support coverage for early retirees

• Establish an Internet portal to assist Americans in identifying coverage options
• Facilitate administrative simplification to lower health system costs

While no law is perfect – and the ACA is not perfect – there are provisions within it which many think worthy of keeping, notable among them, provisions for guaranteed coverage, prohibiting cancellation, extending dependent’s coverage, removing annual & lifetime limits,

End ObamaCare’s Health Insurance Monopoly

Fact is, “ObamaCare” – which is properly known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or ACA for short – though it’s monikered with POTUS Obama’s name, was largely a Republican brainchild from the über-conservative Heritage Institution.

The cornerstone of the act is predicated upon two items which are the very heart of the act: 1.) Guaranteed Coverage, and; 2.) Community Rating.

In was, in essence

The @GOP’s Love/Hate Relationship With @realDonaldTrump Is Beginning To Show Hair

November 12, 2016
Day 4: The shit’s starting to hit the fam… er, fan

Donald Trump, the GOP Presidential nominee who appears to have won the 2016 General Election, has reportedly made remarks that he might not, after all, as he proclaimed in his “Contract with the American Voter” that he would “5.) Repeal and Replace Obamacare Act. Fully repeals Obamacare and replaces it with Health Savings Accounts, the ability to purchase health insurance across state lines…”

Strike One:
According to his first post-election interview, which was exclusive to the Wall Street Journal, “President-elect Donald Trump said he would consider leaving in place certain parts of the Affordable Care Act,” and that “Mr. Trump said he favors keeping the prohibition against insurers denying coverage because of patients’ existing conditions, and a provision that allows parents to provide years of additional coverage for children [up to age 26] on their insurance policies.”

Regular readers will recall that yesterday I had made the same observation, that portions of the law are worth keeping.

President-elect Donald Trump leaves a meeting with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), at the U.S. Capitol November 10, 2016 in Washington, DC Zach Gibson/Getty Images

Strike Two:
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (KY, R) has pointedly said he opposes and will refuse Trump’s first order of business in his Contract with the American Voter which is “Constitutional Amendment for Congressional Term Limits.” The Senator, who has been in office since 1984 (32 years), said, “I would say we have term limits now. They’re called elections. And it will not be on the agenda in the Senate.”

Strike Three:
Furthermore, McConnnell has also said that he’s opposed to

How And Why Insurance Companies Control Your Medical Care

Some have accurately, and justifiably observed that the Affordable Care Act, also colloquially known as “ObamaCare,” is a big fat, sloppy wet kiss to the Big Insurance industry and their for-profit, Wall $treet corporate masters, because their profits have continued to soar since it’s inception. Note that UnitedHealth Group reported a profit of $11 billion (on revenues of more than $157 billion) in 2015, up from $10.3 billion (on revenues of $131 billion) in 2014. Consider also how Anthem’s business changed in just one recent year. At the end of 2014, the majority of Anthem’s revenues still came from its Commercial Health Insurance customers. During 2015, however, revenues from their commercial operations actually declined 4.2%, to $37.6 billion, while revenues from their government operations skyrocketed 21%, to $40.1 billion. A significant reason why, is because of the big investments Insurance Companies continue to make in House and Senate campaigns. As a result, the Insurance Industry’s tentacles will likely only get deeper into both the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

Medical equipment is pictured on the wall of an examination room inside a Kaiser Permanente health clinic located inside a Target retail department store in San Diego, California November 17, 2014. Four clinics are scheduled to open to provide pediatric and adolescent care, well-woman care, family planning, and management of chronic conditions like diabetes and high blood pressure for Kaiser members and non-members. REUTERS/Mike Blake (UNITED STATES – Tags: HEALTH BUSINESS SOCIETY) Fair Use

by Christy Ford Chapin

It’s that time of year again. Insurance companies that participate in the Affordable Care Act’s state health exchanges are signaling that prices will rise dramatically this fall.

And if insurance costs aren’t enough of a crisis, researchers are highlighting deficiencies in health care quality, such as unnecessary tests and procedures that cause patient harm, medical errors bred by disjointed or fragmented care and disparities in service distribution.

While critics emphasize the ACA’s shortcomings, cost and quality issues have long plagued the U.S. health care system. As my research demonstrates, we have these problems because insurance companies are at the center of the system, where they both finance and manage medical care.

If this system is so flawed, how did we get stuck with it in the first place?

Answer: Organized physicians.

As I explain in my book, “Ensuring America’s Health: The Public Creation of the Corporate Health Care System,” from the 1930s through the 1960s, the American Medical Association, the foremost professional organization for physicians, played a leading role in implementing the insurance company model.

What existed before health insurance companies?

Between the 1900s and the 1940s, patients flocked to what were called “prepaid physician groups,” or “prepaid doctor groups.”

Prepaid groups offered inexpensive health care because

UNC Chapel Hill Research: Medicaid Expansion Helps Rural Hospitals

As of the date of this posting – Monday, 19 September 2016 – there are 19 states which have NOT Expanded Medicaid, and Alabama is one of those 19.

In alphabetical order, they are:

Current Condition of Medicaid Expansion
Has YOUR state expanded Medicaid?
Orange=NO

1.) Alabama
2.) Florida
3.) Georgia
4.) Idaho
5.) Kansas
6.) Maine
7.) Mississippi
8.) Missouri
9.) Nebraska
10.) North Carolina
11.) Oklahoma
12.) South Carolina
13.) South Dakota
14.) Tennessee
15.) Texas
16.) Utah
17.) Virginia
18.) Wisconsin
19.) Wyoming

 

 

 

 

 

Lack Of Medicaid Expansion Hurts Rural Hospitals More Than Urban Facilities

By Shefali Luthra September 7, 2016

It isn’t news that in rural parts of the country, people have a harder time accessing good health care. But new evidence suggests opposition to a key part of the 2010 health overhaul could be adding to the gap.

The finding comes from a study published Wednesday in the journal Health Affairs, which analyzes how the states’ decisions on implementing the federal health law’s expansion of Medicaid, a federal-state insurance program for low-income people, may be influencing rural hospitals’ financial stability. Nineteen states opted not to join the expansion.

Rural hospitals have long argued they were hurt by the lack of Medicaid expansion, which leaves many of their patients without insurance coverage and strains the hospitals’ ability to better serve the public. The study suggests they have a point.

Specifically, the researchers, from the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, found that

Alabama Governor Bentley signs Executive Order No.4 Creating Alabama Health Care Improvement Task Force

Yesterday, Monday, April 6, 2015, Alabama Governor Robert J. Bentley, MD signed Executive Order No.4 creating a 38-member “Alabama Health Care Improvement Task Force.”

Though the unspoken ostensible purpose of the task force is to likely make recommendations to the Governor for the expansion of Medicaid in Alabama, it’s being couched to the less-than-observant (or less-than-smart, take your pick), as a home-grown alternative to the big bad wolf of D.C. known as “ObamaCare.”

Again, for the benefit of the uneducated, in addition to decreasing fraud, waste and abuse, increasing efficiency, eliminating discrimination against women, children & people with “pre-existing” conditions, mandating numerous improvements to the quality of the delivery of healthcare from all states in order to receive payment (performance-based payment), the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (sometimes abbreviated as ACA, though popularly known as “ObamaCare”), contains a provision encouraging (but not requiring – that decision was made the U.S. Supreme Court) the state’s governors to expand Medicaid for their impoverished residents. The law provides for 100% payment for so doing, then gradually declines to 90%.

Governors in Kentucky and Arkansas have decided to Expand Medicaid in their states, and are already enjoying savings.

Currently, Alabama’s matching portion (the %age it pays to purchase Medicaid) is 32.4%; so to expand Medicaid, and have it ALL paid for, and then to pay a LOWER rate than is presently being paid is one of the smartest fiscal decisions the state could make.

Already, the Governors of Kentucky and Arkansas – both well-known Republican strongholds, with opposition to the ACA – have expanded Medicaid in their states, and are already reaping the rewards.

Here’s a chart showing the compensation plan to the states:

Cullman Alabama Mother & Son Plead Guilty to Theft from Poverty Healthcare Program

Cullman County Scum.

“Some folks just need killing.”

Either that, or chop off their hand, or foot.

This is OUTRAGEOUS!

Stealing from the poor!

This makes me LIVID!!

They’re both human ostomy bags.

—

Mother, son charged in federal health agency fraud; more than $100k used on items including adult website, fish finders

By Kent Faulk | kfaulk@al.com
Follow on Twitter
on August 27, 2014 at 5:15 PM, updated August 27, 2014 at 5:16 PM

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama – A mother and son from Cullman have been charged in a scheme to defraud federal health agencies and a nonprofit east Alabama health center of more than $100,000, which they used to buy personal items such as electronic fish finders, truck tires, cell phones and an adult website membership, federal prosecutors announced.

Sheila Osborne Parker and James Robert Parker were charged in separate documents today in U.S. District Court in Birmingham, according to a joint press release issued by U.S. Attorney Joyce White Vance, FBI Special Agent in Charge Richard D. Schwein Jr., IRS Criminal Investigation Special Agent in Charge Veronica Hyman-Pillot, and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and Office of Inspector General, Atlanta Regional Office Special Agent in Charge Derrick Jackson.

AL.com and The Birmingham News recently reported that a federal grand jury has been investigating the financial dealings of the federally-funded Birmingham Health Care center, which at one time a pioneer in the care of the homeless in Birmingham, sources tell AL.com.

Sheila Parker, 59, faces six counts of wire fraud, two counts of bank fraud and two counts of failing to file federal income tax returns, according to the press release. James Parker, 33, faces five counts of wire fraud and two counts of failing to file income tax returns. The mother and son have both entered plea agreements with the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Sheila Parker worked for Birmingham Health Care, a nonprofit organization in Birmingham intended to provide free or low-cost health care services to the homeless and to people living below poverty level in the metro area, according to the press release.

In 2008, BHC assumed responsibility for

More Hobby Lobby Store Hypocrisy: Investigation finds close ties to creepy resigned Southern minister sex molester

This just gets creepier and creepier.

In light of these recent revelations, perhaps the SCOTUS might want to vacate their decision.

—

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/hobby-lobby-bill-gothard-institute-basic-life-principles/

Hobby Lobby Funded Disgraced Fundamentalist Christian Leader Accused of Harassing Dozens of Women

By David Corn and Molly Redden | Wed Jul. 2, 2014 6:00 AM EDT

---

Social Title:

Hobby Lobby funded disgraced fundamentalist Christian leader accused of harassing dozens of women

For a decade or so, Hobby Lobby and its owners, the Green family, have been generous benefactors of a Christian ministry that until recently was run by Bill Gothard, a controversial religious leader who has long promoted a strict and authoritarian version of Christianity. Gothard, a prominent champion of Christian home-schooling, has decried [1] the evils of dating, rock music, and Cabbage Patch dolls [2]; claimed [3] public education teaches children “how to commit suicide” and undermines spirituality; contended [4] that mental illness is merely “varying degrees of irresponsibility”; and urged wives to “submit to the leadership” [5] of their husbands. Critics of Gothard have associated [6] him [7] with Christian Reconstructionism [8], an ultrafundamentalist movement that yearns for a theocracy, and accused [9] him of running a cultlike organization. In March, he was pressured to resign [1] from his ministry, the Institute in Basic Life Principles, after being accused by more than 30 women of sexual harassment and molestation—a charge Gothard denies.

More MoJo coverage of the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision.

• Hobby Lobby’s Hypocrisy: The Company’s Retirement Plan Invests in Contraception Manufacturers [10]

• The 8 Best Lines From Ginsburg’s Dissent [11]

• Why the Decision Is the New Bush v. Gore [12]

• How Obama Can Make Sure Hobby Lobby’s Female Employees Are Covered [13]

• Hobby Lobby Funded Disgraced Fundamentalist Christian Leader Accused of Harassing Dozens of Women [14]

The Institute traces it origins to 1964, when Gothard designed a college seminar based on biblical principles to help teenagers. The ministry says [15] it was established “for the purpose of introducing people to the Lord Jesus Christ” and to give individuals, families, businesses, and governments “clear instruction and training on how to find success by following God’s principles found in Scripture.” The group, which operates what it calls “training centers” across the United States and abroad, says more than 2.5 million people have attended its paid events, which have brought in tens of millions of dollars in revenue. Gothard and the Institute have drawn support [16]from conservative politicians, including Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, and former Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue. The Duggar family, the stars of the reality show 19 Kids and Counting, have been high-profile advocates [17] of Gothard’s home-schooling curriculum and seminars. (One of Gothard’s alleged victims has called [18] on the Duggars to break with Gothard and the Institute.) Don Venoit, a conservative evangelical who has long been a critic of Gothard, contends [19] that Gothard’s approach to Christian theology emphasizing obedience to authority creates a “culture of fear.” In 1984, Ronald Allen, now a professor of Bible exposition at Dallas Theological Seminary, observed [20] that Gothard’s teachings were “a parody of patriarchalism” and “the basest form of male chauvinism I have ever heard in a Christian context.” He added, “Gothard has lost the biblical balance of the relationship between women and men as equals in relationship. His view is basically anti-woman.”

According to the 79-year-old Gothard, the Greens and Hobby Lobby—which this week won a landmark Supreme Court case [21] with a decision ruling that the firm does not have to

Why did Parker Griffith vote AGAINST the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act?

Official portrait, Parker Griffith, MD as freshman member of the United States House of Representatives, Alabama 5th Congressional District.

Campaign photograph – 53rd Alabama Governor Robert Bentley, Jr., MD

As a politician, Parker Griffith has been described as “maverick.”

To describe it diplomatically, he has been “somewhat unpredictable.”

To be blunt, he’s a loose cannon.

His most recent political aspiration includes 2014 candidacy for Alabama governor under the Democratic ticket, challenging first term Republican Robert Bentley (described as “wildly popular”), whom is similarly a retired physician, and former Alabama State House Representative from Tuscaloosa, whom has publicly announced his opinion that he will be re-elected during a tour of Julia Tutwiler Prison for Women, where sexual assaults, and abuses of innumerable kind have become so rampantly commonplace that Alabama’s prison system is verging upon federal takeover.

It was during his tour of that prison that “Our kindly country doctor governor toured Tutwiler in early March and quietly said, “we are probably going to have to build some new prisons in my second term.””

Griffith’s greatest obstacle is his past. More specifically, the greatest mountain he must conquer is his decision to switch parties (from Democrat to Republican) while in his first term in Congress, which abruptly ended his political aspirations.

The nightmare of his actions still haunts Alabama voters, many whom have not forgotten – including those in his hometown, Huntsville & Madison County. Like the ghastly spectre in Charles Dickens’ classic fiction “A Christmas Carol,” Parker Griffith must come face-to-face with the Ghost of Election Past, and Bentley with the Ghost of Alabama Yet to Come.

And in this real-life play, Bob Cratchit is played by the people, while 18.1% of the state’s population (the state poverty rate) are cast as the sickly child, Tiny Tim. They and others are the ones whom are denied by the Scrooge, played by Governor Bentley and Republican-dominated state legislature.

In reality, Griffith and Bentley play dual roles in this real-life political /social /medical /economic drama.

Charles Dickens circa 1850: he ‘kept on going by taking on too much’. Photograph: Herbert Watkins

Is there salvation for Griffith?

Will Bentley expand Medicaid?

Can anyone really help the citizens of Alabama?

Tune in next time! when we hear _?_ say…

Griffith’s last foray into politics – as Representative for Alabama’s 5th Congressional District – did not bode well, for after the first full year of a two-year term, he announced he was changing political party affiliation, for which he was resoundingly criticized at home by his constituency, in the press for his actions, and then subsequently resoundingly defeated by GOP challenger “Mo” Brooks in the 2010 Republican primary.

When he represented Alabama’s 5th Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives, Parker Griffith voted against

Why Expand Medicaid in Alabama?

If Alabamians can’t work because they’re sick, and can’t get care because they’re poor, they can’t be productive citizens.

Should we just throw ’em to the wolves?

What will become of Alabama’s present, much less it’s future?

—

Alabama medical students argue for expansion of Medicaid

on May 07, 2014 at 9:39 AM, updated May 07, 2014 at 9:51 AM

By Swaroop Vitta and Davis Bradford

In medical school, our professors often show us maps of the U.S. illustrating where diseases strike hardest and where patient outcomes are the worst. Most of the time, Alabama is red, really red. Red is bad. So bad that over 600,000 Alabamians are uninsured and have limited to no access to health care.

Alabama is our home and this state’s spirit of compassion made us who we are. Every Sunday a small group of us with other medical students and volunteer physicians heads to a homeless shelter across from Regions Field that houses our free clinic. As we open our doors to many men and women that could not otherwise see a physician, we see first-hand what life without health insurance in Alabama is like.

A story:

Ms. C, a hardworking Alabamian, came into clinic with a terrible headache. It turned out that it was due to emergently high blood pressure. Ordinarily, this is easily treatable, but because Ms. C had gone without care for so long, she was now in danger of a stroke. Only the emergency room could provide relief.  But for Ms. C, like so many others in Alabama, that relief was accompanied by a bill she could never pay with the risk of unsurmountable debt. Ms. C has since become our regular patient. While her health has improved, there is only so much a group of well-intentioned medical students can do.

Had Ms. C received medical care during the years before we saw her, her high blood pressure could have been controlled before it left her with permanent injuries. Despite treatment, the chronic issues from those years without care now leave her unable to work. And at 58 years of age, her options are running low.

Even when work was an option, Ms. C’s income was

It’s all about the money… says Hobby Lobby Store Lawyer Paul D. Clement to SCOTUS.

Here, all along, we’ve been made to believe that Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. – a privately held firm headquartered in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, which boasts themselves “as a major private corporation in Forbes and Fortunes list of America‘s largest private companies,” – objects on religious grounds (even though their owners are Protestant) to providing insurance coverage to their employees, which insurance includes coverage for female contraceptives.

Here is their attorney – Paul D. Clement, himself the 43d former Solicitor General of the United States – arguing their case:

Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
Docket Number: 13-354
Date Argued: 03/25/14

Alabama Medicaid Incompetency: State must repay Federal Childrens Health Insurance Program $88,197,498

Did you know? (No, you probably didn’t.)

In a report dated August 2013, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS OIG) conducted a criminal and administrative investigation and found that Alabama claimed, and was paid millions in unallowable performance bonus payments under the Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (CHIRPA).

This FRAUD was because of INCOMPETENCY in Alabama governance.

The HHS OIG found that the Alabama state agency overstated its FYs 2009 and 2010 current enrollment in its requests for bonus payments. The State agency overstated its current enrollments because, rather than

How Honest is Your Doctor?

If you had an option, would you rather pay $10/month, or $80/month for a prescription medication that accomplished/did the exact same thing?

Research shows that the results of the 2 differently priced medicines have never been shown to be any better in any way.

Which would you choose?

Why?

What if your doctor prescribed the more expensive medication for you based on the fact that

Wash Your Nasty Hands!

“It’s essential to wash your hands, because 50% of all food borne illness has been tied back to unclean hands, or unwashed hands, or improperly washed hands.”

–Carl Borchgrevink, Associate Professor in The School of Hospitality Business, Michigan State University

Forget washing, just take a giant spoon into the toilet, grab up a heaping helping of that stinky brown goodness & eat it.

Yeah.

Folks wouldn’t imagine doing that, but they won’t wash their hands, either.

What’s the difference?

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/261875.php

The CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) says that the one thing people can do to lower the spread of infectious diseases is to

Is Obamacare a Government Takeover of Medicine?

The truth speaks for itself.—

Carolyn McClanahan, Contributor

Physician/Financial Planner. I discuss all things money and medicine.

8/28/2012 @ 10:32PM

The purpose of this blog is to educate non-policy wonks on the content of the Affordable Care Act, discuss the practical logistics of how the law will be implemented, and share my perspective on potential “good” and “bad” of the law. The law is far from perfect, but it is the most significant attempt our country has ever made at reforming our costly and inefficient health care system. In case you are a reader who thinks the entire law is “bad,” I implore you to learn about the ten sections of the law in this previous post.

In addition to speaking gigs, I also do “talk radio” about once a month. The questions I’m asked give some indication of where education on the ACA is lacking. One refrain I’ve heard over and over is that Obamacare is a “government takeover” of medicine. This post explores that concept.

“Government takeover” fears seem to take on several different variations.

• Medicine will be a government run entity – doctors will be employed by the government and care will be paid for by the government.

• All of the doctors will be employed by the government, but insurance companies will still exist.

• The government will dictate what doctors can and cannot do.

• The government will make it so onerous to practice medicine that everyone will quit.

• If the government has one iota of involvement in any form, it is a government takeover.

So what really happens with the Affordable Care Act?

University of Notre Dame Students Petition Administration to Drop Birth Control Mandate Lawsuit

“She should have died hereafter;
“There would have been a time for such a word.
“To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
“Creeps in this petty pace from day to day
“To the last syllable of recorded time,
“And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
“The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
“Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
“That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
“And then is heard no more: it is a tale
“Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
“Signifying nothing.
(Enter a Messenger)
“Thou comest to use thy tongue; thy story quickly.”

-Spoken by Macbeth; Act 5, Scene 5

—

University Of Notre Dame Students Petition Administration To Drop Birth Control Mandate Lawsuit Against Feds

Tyler Kingkade
tyler.kingkade@huffingtonpost.com

Posted: 08/01/2012 6:45 pm Updated: 08/01/2012 6:48 pm

At first, Kathryn Pogin was simply writing a personal letter to the Rev. John Jenkins, C.S.C., the president of the University of Notre Dame.

It was a response to his announcement the school would sue the federal government over the requirement that health insurance plans, including those provided by Notre Dame to faculty, staff and students, cover birth control and contraception without co-pays. The university claimed that the mandate would require it to violate Catholic teachings.

But when Pogin, a Notre Dame Ph.D. student in philosophy, showed the letter to Benjamin Rossi and a couple of other friends, they decided to