Saturday, October 14, 2017

Silly Facts

When it comes to current events, it seems we live in a world drawn into three camps: "us", "them", and "not going to talk about anything other than cat videos for fear of being forced into one of the first two camps".   Facts (or at least the notion of an objective reality that may not conform to my preconceived notions/meta-narrative) and the messy nuances of life have no place in this world.

Take the ACA hubbub.  The narrative is Trump is trying to illegally kill the ACA.  Like him or not, this isn't accurate.

By way of explanation, under the ACA people whose household income falls between 100 and 400 percent of the poverty level qualify for two kinds of financial assistance.

The first is a tax credit to reduce insurance premiums, authorized under ACA Section 1401. The ACA supports these premium reductions with a permanent appropriation built into the law.

The second is a reduction in cost-sharing, under ACA Section 1402.  Unlike the premium reductions, these are not funded via tax credits but by direct reimbursements to insurance companies.  Also unlike the premium reductions, Congress did not pass an approprations bill to accompany this article of the ACA.

Why?  Congress didn't want to pass a law that essentially cuts checks to Big Healthcare Companies.  So the Obama administration appropriated the funds.  This isn't legal, as appropration of funds is only allowed by the House of Representatives.

Whether one is for or against the ACA, the reality is Congress needs to act to preserve it due to the fact that they relied on the illegal appropriation of funds by the executive branch to make the ACA viable.

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/HofR-challenge-to-ACA-DCt-5-12-16.pdf

Sunday, October 01, 2017

Well said Mr. Rowe / Preach it Smokey

From a recent "Mike Rowe's "Off The Wall"" Facebook post:

"Last week, in your comments about the NFL, you made several references to “black people.” As a woman of color, I’ll remind you that the correct term is “African-American,” as I’m sure you know. You do good work with your foundation, but if you want to be heard by everyone, maybe you should speak more respectfully."

Carla Jamison

Hi Carla

If a black person tells me that they would like to be referred to as an “African-American,” I’m happy to address them as such. Doing otherwise would be rude. Likewise, if a white person asks me to call them “Irish-American,” or “Polish-American,” I’ll try to accommodate them as well. However - if someone attempts to enlighten me on the preferences of all black people or all white people, my antenna go up. Why? Because I'm not convinced a person’s true identity has anything to do with the color of their skin, the content of the DNA, or the country of their ancestors.

As a fan of biography, I’m curious to know more about my own history, as well as the history of others. But as a fan of The United States, I place no relevance whatsoever on the amount of German blood coursing through my veins, or the amount of African blood coursing through yours. I'm interested in what you believe, Clara, but I don't consider your ethnicity when evaluating the merits of your arguments. In other words, your heritage is interesting, but knowing where you came from has nothing to do with where you’ll wind up, or what kind of person you really are.

I could write a few thousand words on the evils of the hyphen, and its role in identity-politics. But I doubt I could say it better than Smokey Robinson did in a Def Poetry Jam seven years ago. If I were King of the World, this would be required viewing in every single high-school – starting tomorrow. The language is salty, but the sentiment is precisely what America needs to hear - no matter where you're from...

Have a great weekend.
Mike

https://youtu.be/iIkNsj6cDGc