LIAR, LIAR, PENCE ON FIRE II" - EXPLODING CAPITOL HILL LIES ABOUT HEALTH CARE.

 In an earlier article of the same name:  "Liar, Liar, Pence on Fire" (10/6/16) I focused on the outright LIES - intentional or otherwise, that the Trump campaign refused to correct or intentionally let stand as "fake news."  That was during the campaign and before the election.  Evidently, they got away with it, controlled the news cycles along the way, and resulted in confusion and doubt regarding competing "facts", real of imagined.  The traditional free press - objective, researched, vetted, and sourced - had to complete for readership and/or eyes with other "news" outlets (spin shops or spin-offs of the National Enquirer paper that finally admitted that the publication was never intended to be "news", but, rather "entertainment").  The result was a tug-o-war for the attention and credibility between the professional traditional media and other less-than-credible "news" sources, free to present anything, regardless of how disconnected from reality it might be, and to describe it as news-worthy fact.  So, lets recall some of the really BIG WHOPPERS from recent reports.

   - How about the one about Donald Trump's hand size? (who knows?)
   - Or, that Trump himself saw "thousands of Muslims in Jersey City celebrating" as the Twin Towers
     came down on 9-11. (Never took place).
   - Or, that Donald knew more about ISIS than all of the generals? (You are kidding me, right?)
   - Or, that Barack Obama was a secret Muslim born in Kenya who was connected with radical
     Muslim terrorist groups. (Finally admitted as an untruth years just last year.)
   - Or, that Senator Ted Cruz' dad was a pal of Lee Harvey Oswald and was connected with the
     assassination of JFK? (Really? Maybe a Congressional Committee should hold hearings and
     investigate to get to the bottom of this!)
   - Or, that more people attended his Inaugural ceremony that at any other Inaugural in history!
     (NOT!)
   - Or, that he won the election in a "landslide?" (He lost the popular vote election by 3 million).
   - Or, that Trump carried more electoral votes than any other candidate for President since Reagan?
     (Actually, Clinton, Bush, and Obama all won their elections with more Electoral votes.)
  -  And, now, Trump tweets that President Obama committed a felony and wire-tapped his home, his
     campaign, and him at  Trump Tower in NYC last fall.  (Whopper alert!) FBI Director Comey
     urged the Justice Department to refute that allegation as baseless within hours of Trump making
     the charge. Instead, we get the promise of a House Committee Investigation of a baseless charge?
     Get the picture? 

As you can see from the list presented, some of these LIES are before or during the campaign, and some after, during the transition, or after Trump became President. The Donald also said time and again during both the Republican Primary campaign and during the General Election, that he would NOT support the repeal of the ACA (Obamacare) without a replacement that "was much better and covered everyone."  Trump committed to "never" reducing Medicare, Social Security or Medicaid noting that, "you made a deal a long time ago" and that he would protect that deal as president.  Trump said over and over that "everybody's got to be covered."  In fact, in September of 2015 on "60 Minutes", Trump said the following,
                 
                      "I am going to take care of everybody.  I don't care if it costs me votes
                       or not.  Everybody's going to be taken care of much better than they're
                       taken care of now." - Donald Trump

If fact, Trump was so emphatic on this point that his then-competitor, Senator Cruz, accused Trump of being a fan of the "single payer system" favored by Liberal Democrats. So, the question in 2017 is, what Kool-aid did President Trump drink that made him do a complete turn-around and abandon his pledges to the elderly, the working poor, the disabled, and others who cannot afford health insurance?  What would make our President gleefully support a program that will abandon millions of Americans by setting them adrift from medical coverage via cutting Medicaid and short-changing millions of others by reducing health coverage so much that it that prompted the head of the NYC Health and Hospitals Corporation, Stanley Brezenoff, to describe the Ryan Plan - the American Health Care Act - as a "brutal attack on low income health providers" and, by inference, the low-income individuals who presently are covered by the Medicaid expansion that was contained in the Obamacare program.  The Ryan bill eliminates the medicaid expansion - and the 10 millions people covered who reside in 31 states - by 2020, just 3 years (and one congressional election) away from now.

The Ryan-House Republican Leadership Plan does contain several positive elements borrowed from the Affordable Care Act.  The plan allows young folks to remain on their parents insurance coverage until the age of 26; prohibits insurers from denying coverage or charging more for pre-existing conditions; and, the bill maintains the rule prohibiting insurers from establishing annual and/or lifetime caps.  However, instead of creating a framework where everyone gets health coverage, the Republican Plan, in a cruel play-on-words, provides a framework where everyone has "ACCESS" to healthcare.  As Senator Sanders has often said, "I have ACCESS to buying a Trump Tower condo that costs $10,000,000.... but, I just cannot afford it."  Listen to the Republican apologists, intent of denying Medicaid coverage to millions of poor and disabled Americans, say that they are providing everyone with ACCESS to healthcare. Medicaid becomes a state-based block grant at current levels and is then capped notwithstanding the annual inflation in medical costs - a real cut or a slow bleed.  Those states that did not opt in to the Medicaid expansion of Obamacare, are prohibited from doing so, and those 31 states who did opt in, like Kentucky, lose the expanded coverage in 2020.  Expanded tax-advantaged Medical Savings Accounts don't help the poor who can't afford to build a bank account and they will be left behind.  Instead, those who can afford the condo in trump Tower can access some added tax breaks by stuffing some income into these accounts and gaining a tax deduction or a credit.

In what has been described as a "senior tax" contained in the measure, where the ACA permitted insurers to charge their oldest clients no more than 3 times the rate charged their youngest participants, the Ryan bill jacks that rate premium up to 5 times the price charged the young - a whopping 66% increase!  And, that is one reason that the growing number of opponents includes the AARP.  In addition to the AARP, opponents include the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Hospital Association, the catholic Hospital Association, the American College of Physicians (ACP), the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), the American Nurses Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Osteopathic Association, and the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. The AMA said it opposes the Ryan plan because of the "potential harm it would cause to vulnerable patient populations", especially through the rollback of Medicaid. The March of Dimes and the American Cancer Society describe the legislation as "critically flawed."

On the right, opponents for other reasons include the House Freedom Caucus, the Heritage Foundation, the Club for Growth, and the Koch brothers to name a few. Essentially these folks say that the bill does not go far enough and call the proposal, "Obamacare Lite."  Senator Rand Paul and others oppose the Ryan bill on that basis alone - not saving enough money - and want to simply repeal Obamacare and cut the Medicaid expansion right away, among other things.

In addition to cuts aimed at Planned Parenthood  by including them on a "list of designated prohibited entities", the bill reduced the Center for Disease Control by 12%.  According to Andy Slavitt, one of the architects of the ACA, "losers" under this bill include those who have coverage under the Large Employer Mandate that will be eliminated along with premium subsidies for those who cannot otherwise afford coverage, 55-64 year old folks will see their premiums skyrocket, bad medical debt will rise due to lost coverage by individuals needing medical care, anyone who accesses covered preventive care - eliminated from the Ryan plan, people who lose their job and cannot afford coverage - especially in states where Medicaid is no longer available or has retracted substantially due to the frozen block-grant to states - and women who could now be charged more for insurance coverage than men. Does all of this - and more bad news on the horizon - sound like everybody being "taken care of much better than they're taken care of now"?  Why throw millions of Americans under the bus and off of their health coverage - with insurance or covered by Medicare or Medicaid?  Why inflict all of this pain?  Perhaps, it is as president Trump commented last week - "no one knew how complicated the issue of health care was."  Really?  This has been a topic of hot political and governmental debate since 1993, for nearly a quarter of a century!  Or, (wait for it....) Trump LIED again.

According to Speaker Ryan, the need to inflict all of this on the American people is because the current ACA system is "imploding."  Said Speaker Ryan, "Obamacare is collapsing."  Ryan claims that insurers are losing money and are withdrawing from offering coverage all across the nation. Red ink is just everywhere! Insurance companies cannot afford to stay in business and take all of these losses! Really?  Not quite.

Just as with every other American corporation that is listed on the US Stock Exchange, annual financial reports are required to be filed, not to mention federal income tax filings.  As public corporations, these documents are easy to locate and are available to review, print, read, and publish.  No Wikileaks required.  So, I reviewed three of the largest health insurers in the nation - Aetna, Humana, and Blue Cross/Blue Shield.  I read their reports for the past 5 years, ending in 2015, the last filing that I was able to pull up. Obamacare was adopted in 2009-10 so the 5 year period from 2010 to 2015 should be representative of the financial impact on these three insurers.  Here is the data reflected in each company's financial report.  You can make your own determination as to the "financial stress" that these outfits suffered as a result of the ACA.

   HUMANA:  Humana reported annual after-tax profits of $1.1 - 1.2 Billion each year from 2012 to 2015.  In fact, Humana was so fat with cash that it re-purchased outstanding stock in 2014 with an outlay of $4.6 Billion dollars.  And, on the stock market, Humana stock far outpaced the Standard and Poor's 500 Stock Index, increasing in value by 240% between 1/1/2010 and 1/1/2015.  Some financial strain....

AETNA:  Aetna described 2015 as "a landmark year" for the company in their financial filings and Annual Report to Shareholders (dated April, 2016). It was so good in fact, that they put forward an offer to buy Humana for $37 BILLION!  In 2016, Aetna reported growth in net after-tax income from $1.912 Billion in 2013 to $2.427 Billion in 2015.  No red ink in sight. Just another sad case of excessive wealth building.

BLUE CROSS/BLUE SHIELD:  BC/BS, unlike those listed above, is a segmented company divided among states and, in some cases, by function in the health care system.  In the overall, summary report for 2016 states that "overall profitability for industry leaders has improved based upon available statutory reporting as of June 30, 2016."  BC/BS parent company raised eyebrows in their reporting of holding onto a $9.9 BILLION surplus.

So much for the Ryan position that the insurance industry is "imploding" due to the burdens of the ACA and that the need for change and "reform" is driven by a system in "collapse."  Another LIE.

Tired of LYING?  LIARS?  Those who manipulate "alternative facts" or misdirection to hoodwink the American public into swallowing bad public policy to address imaginary "crises" with a "beautiful wall", a Muslim Ban, tax cuts for the wealthy and large corporations, large cuts in the EPA and HUD, transfer of tax dollars from public schools to for-profit private schools and more?  Then ... STAND UP, SPEAK OUT, AND MARCH ON!

Stay tuned for updates.  In the meanwhile, call your member of Congress, join a march, write a card. Let your voice be heard and your concern be expressed.
    

FUN WITH DICK AND JANE. A RUSSIAN HERE, A RUSSIAN THERE - WHO IS "FAKE NEWS" NOW?

As the saying goes, there are "lies and, then, there are damnable lies." I will let the reader determine which are which.

Of course, the news of the day is that the new Attorney General Jeff Sessions, decided to "recuse" himself from involvement in any investigation conducted by the Justice Department (that includes the FBI) into Russian manipulations or cyber "attacks" designed to interfere in the 2016 US elections. He did so as Republican resolve to protect his position began to crumble against the backdrop of Democratic demands for his resignation.  As the Trump nominee for the AG position, Session LIED in response to both written questions and questions offered by Senator Franken about the Trump campaign's contacts and/or collusion with Russian officials or operatives during the course of the campaign or during the transition period.  Sessions absolutely denied that he had "any contact at all" with Russian officials.  He did not qualify his statement in any way.  OOPS......  

Turns out that he, indeed, had meetings with the Russian Ambassador Kislyak at least 2 times - once during the Republican Convention in July and then a second time in September, 2016.  What is worse - for Sessions - this LIE was offered under oath at the Senate Committee considering his nomination.  LYING BEFORE A CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE IS A FEDERAL FELONY.  In responding to a press question yesterday, President Trump said that he had 100% confidence in Jeff Sessions..... just as he had done the week before General Flynn was cast to the wolves and resigned as National Security Director on February 13th. Today, President Trump is slamming Democrats who call for Sessions resignation as conducting "a witch hunt" and more "fake news." In my view, this is just a defiant defense of his AG - Sessions - describing him as "an honest man" who could have been "more clear" in his appearance before the Senate Committee. What an understatement that is.... Trump, Spicer, and other White House staffers are climbing into the bunker and donning flack jackets so as to not get fatally wounded in the coming combat over Russian interference in the electoral process. I should note here that, in spite of virtually all of the US Intelligence community - some 17 agencies and offices - concluded that Russian cyber infiltration and manipulation intending to hurt Hillary and help Trump took place, Trumpers continue constant denials that such "contacts" occurred or that, if they did, there was no motivation to impact the election. Republican leaders - Trump, Ryan and others - continue to dispute that there was any Russian involvement in the election and that such reports represent "fake news" or, to use Chief of Staff Priebus' technical terminology, "baloney."  Deny, deny, deny..... is evidently the operative strategy.  So, lets look at the following questions.  What are the facts?  And, what is the evidence of - at best, just contact between the parties or, at worst, collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian officials to disadvantage Hillary and help Trump.  The "evidence" list follows:

1. Paul Manafort resigns as Trump Campaign Chairman over both allegations and evidence that he was directly connected with  Russian interests and supporters in the Ukraine and more. He was on the payroll of the deposed Ukranian Prime Minister and Russian supporter and billionaire, Viktor Yanukovych.  When confronted by the media, Manafort denied any connection with the Russians, describing the allegations as "absurd." Incidently, during the Republican Convention in July, the Platform Committee had one serious "debate."  The dispute was over an inclusion in the Platform of a draft provision supporting US supplying heavy weaponry to the Ukrainian Army resisting the incursion of Russian troops operating in support of Ukrainian Separatists in Eastern Ukraine. Team Trump opposed placing such language in the Platform (recall that Manafort worked for the deposed pro-Russian Prime Minister).  The Trump gang won the day and the provision to supply aid was deleted from the final Republican Platform document.  Manafort insisted that Team Trump had nothing whatsoever to do with removing that language from the Platform and that he had no connections with Russians at all. He resigned from the campaign a week later. He LIED.  President Trump claims that he had no knowledge of this matter.

2. General Flynn personally and the entire White House Staff in addition to Vice President Pence vigorously denied that he had any meetings "whatsoever" with any Russians operatives or officials in the run up to the election. And, that after the election, Flynn insisted that he didn't have any conversations with Russian representatives regarding US sanctions or any other matter. Two weeks later Flynn was thrown under the bus by Trump and resigned after admitting that he was "less than forthcoming" with the Vice president and the White House regarding meetings that he DID HAVE with the Russian Ambassador during the campaign.  Meanwhile, he LIED. President Trump claims that he had no knowledge of this and when he found it out, he asked for Flynn's resignation.

3. Donald Trump, Jr, not involved at the White House presently but active and a "counselor" to the candidate during the campaign, traveled to France and delivered a speech before a group, the Center for Politics and Foreign Affairs - a pro-Russian outfit in Paris What was that speech about? Why, the Trump campaign, of course... and American politics in general.  He was paid $50,000 for that speech.  Though not involved in the present Trump Administration unlike Ivanka and son-in-law Jared Kushner, he was deeply embedded in the campaign.  Is this "contact" between the Trump Campaign and Russian representatives?  You decide..... 

President Trump has yet to comment on this matter.  What do you think he will say?

4. Carter Page, a Trump Campaign Advisor, just yesterday admitted that he met with the Russian Ambassador at the Republican Convention during the summer of 2016.  What do you think they discussed, the Kentucky Derby? President Trump claims that he had no knowledge of this matter.

5. In the last few days, press reports revealed (and the Trump camp did not deny) that Jared Kushner, son-in-law, campaign advisor, and, presently, a White House Advisor to the President, met with  Russian Ambassador Kislyak at Trump Tower in December of 2016. With all of the attention to the comings and goings at Trump Tower in NYC during the Transition, how was this visit missed? Easy....  it seems that the Russian Ambassador entered Trump Tower through the back door and took the freight elevator up to the residence.  President Trump claims that he had no knowledge of this matter.

6. Then there is the Sessions matter outlined above.  President Trump had no knowledge of this matter until now. Trump, after all has said that "to my knowledge" no one connected to my campaign had any contact with Russian officials or operatives. Sessions has modified his public statements from not having any meetings with any Russians to "I do not recall" any meetings with any Russian officials to "discuss any political campaign." Sessions has also said that he misunderstood Senator Franken's question. President Trump claims that he had no knowledge of any Russian meetings with his campaign staff or representatives.

7. Chief of Staff Reince Priebus responded to a question about Russian contact during the campaign or after saying, "absolutely not."  In response to the same question, Vice President Pence commented, "of course not."  Priebus and Pence were deeply embedded in the campaign and at Trump Tower during the transition period.

8.  The White House - specifically now Chief of Staff Priebus - encouraged (read, colluded) with the Republican Chairs of both Committees to comment to the press that there was nothing to reports that there was communication between the Trump Campaign and Russian officials or operatives regarding the campaign.  This is clearly a violation of the separation of powers between the branches of government and a bold-faced attempt by the White House to influence both the conclusions of the two Committees before they have gathered together their research and investigated the matter and to "spin" the press and the media away from further coverage by diverting their attention from this issue to other areas.

9.  A few days ago, Republican Speaker, Paul Ryan, echoing the Chair of the House Intelligence Committee who followed the White House line exactly, said, "we have seen no evidence from any of these on-going investigations that anybody in the Trump Campaign or the Trump team was involved in any of this." You would think that Ryan was surrounded by a recreational marijuana cloud and was disconnected from reality!  Or, he LIED.  (I should note here that the "committees" Speaker Ryan referred to are the Intelligence Committees of the House and Senate, both under Republican control, and who conduct their business in secret and behind closed doors.  No "sunshine" there.)

Hmmmmm......  The Trump Campaign....  Major players included:  General Flynn, Trump Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort,  Trump family members including Donald Junior and Trump's son-in law Jared Kushner, Jeff Sessions as a Chief Campaign Surrogate, Campaign consultant Carter Page, now Chief of Staff Reince Priebus, and, of course, Vice President Mike Pence. Yet, with all of this swirling around the campaign and the transition period, including family members and meetings with the Russian Ambassador at Trump Tower and at the Republican Convention, Donald Trump continues to deny having any knowledge whatsoever of "any contact between his campaign and Russian officials or representatives." Instead, President Trump has continued to attack the media in this matter, describing recent press reports and media coverage as "a witch hunt." Interestingly, the Russian Ambassador used the very same language - "a witch hunt" - to describe the media attention that this issue has attracted.  Perhaps they are both reading from the very same script....

Resignations, recusing, and red-faced officials dodging, denying, parsing, misdirecting, and distancing. What do you think?  I think that it is time for a Special Prosecutor.  Stay tuned.

"RAGE, RAGE AGAINST THE DYING OF THE LIGHT." - Dylan Thomas

In his famous untitled poem written in 1947 and first published in the journal Botteghe Oscure in  1951, Welsh poet Dylan Thomas (1914-1953) expressed resistance against the intolerable.  At the very least, his untitled poem, known by its first line, "Do not go gentle into that good night," encourages resistance against injustice, wrong-doing, or, in the case of the death of his father, the end of life itself.  Given the obvious elements of the Trump agenda - including isolationism, xenophobia and anti-immigrant and refugee sentiment - it seems that there is a plot to dim or turn off the lights in the welcoming torch atop the Statue of Liberty.  Our entire history as a nation , with one or two glaring examples of mistakes in the past, is built on the warm welcome that had been extended to our families as immigrants from elsewhere and the welcome that we, in turn, have extended to others who want to share the "American Dream" over the decades.  Sure, assimilation has been an issue over time - from the Irish, to the Polish, the Italians, and, more recently, Latinos and those from the Middle East, we have not been perfect - either as a polyglot nation or a mosaic mixture of cultures from everywhere around the globe.  Yet, uniquely among nations, the United States stands as the globe's most powerful economy, most deadly military, and the only superpower remaining on the planet.  This history of a clash of cultures, the exchange of ideas and knowledge, and the mixture of people from wholly different backgrounds that takes place here may very well be the entire source of our global success and the key to our future prosperity.  I, for one, cannot stand idly by as the light on the torch of the Statue of Liberty's "open door" is dimmed or extinguished.  Like many of you, I will not "go gentle into that good night."  Instead, I choose to "rage, rage against the dying of the light."

OK, while we are not facing the end of "life", we may be in the midst of a dramatic change in our national "life" - the freedoms, the reasoned government processes, and the protections that we have become accustomed to in this country. Trumpism has arrived by an astonishing and circuitous route, confounding the Republican Party through the primary election season and pulling off a surprise victory against Hillary Clinton and the Democrats in the fall. He and his merry band, along with his bizarre policy proscriptions and tweeting foreign policy directives through Twitter, are now seated squarely in control of the levers of power in the United States.  His Presidency has given validation and purchase to the "Alt. Right" movement and to policies of isolationism, anti-immigrant and refugees, misogynistic behavior, and an extreme form of "trickle-down" policy featuring tax cuts for the very wealthy and large corporations, program cuts for the rest of us, and the dismantling of the social safety net that had been carefully constructed since FDR and the New Deal decades ago.

Even worse, efforts are underway to repeal American freedoms that have expanded since FDR's "Four Freedoms" and the expansive programs of the post WWII world - from Veterans assistance through the Great Society Programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, food stamps, student aid for college, and the great Civil Rights and Voting Rights movements. More recently, the expansion of personal freedoms - to marry who you love, regardless of religious objections and the decreasing gender discrimination in law, in the workplace, in life and more, are evidence of a continuing and growing public expression of individual freedom of choice.  Yet, empowered by his "landslide" election (NOT), and encouraged by large crowds at "rallies" (read political theater), Trump continues on a path toward contracting freedom of choice, restricting civil liberties (his absurd charge that millions of fraudulent votes were cast in the election), and his Senior Advisor Steve Bannon's call for the main stream press to, "just shut up."  Coupled with Trumps stated goal of "relaxing" libel laws so that newspapers can be more easily sued if he doesn't like or disagrees with what they print, and his constant attack on the media as "fake news", reveal a broad attack on the First Amendment. His actions and statements amount to a broad attack on the First Amendment's guaranteed right of freedom of speech. Of course, there is much more - his trade policies, immigrant hatred, building a "great wall" instead of a "bridge" to the future, questioning the value of our alliances around the globe, and his "bromance" with Putin.  But, I will leave these to another time.  There is enough danger mentioned already to support a call to arms - "RAGE, RAGE AGAINST THE DYING OF THE LIGHT!"

Let's take another look at the election outcome.  First, Donald Trump LOST the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by nearly 3 million votes.  Including the independent candidates, his percentage of the popular vote was 46% in favor and 54 against (Clinton - 48.2%; Ind. 5.7%).  Bottom line, Trump lost the popular vote - badly.  Trump argues that his electoral vote was a "massive landslide and the biggest victory since Ronald Reagan."  Also false.  Trump did indeed win the electoral vote - 306-232.  Turns out, that percentage spread of electoral votes (56.88%) places Trump 13 from the bottom of all presidential elections since George Washington in 1789! Higher percentages of electors were scored by George H.W. Bush (79.8%), Clinton twice (68.77% and 70.45% after impeachment), and Obama twice (67.84% in 2008; 61.71% in 2012).  So much for the Trump "massive landslide."

And, then there is the Congress.  Most times, the party that captures the presidency also scores gains in the houses of congress.  Although Trump cobbled together a winning electoral strategy, the Republicans lost seats in the House (-5) and the US Senate (-2).  This outcome certainly is not reflective of any broad groundswell for the Trump candidacy, or the Republican agenda.

As I write this, the members of Congress have returned home on President's Week recess.  And, they are encountering crowds that are "raging against the dying of the light."  Since the first day of the Trump term that witnessed near 1 million women and their supporters on the streets of Washington, DC in the "Women's March on Washington" and 4,000,000+ marching in support around the nation and across the globe in "sister" marches, active protests have taken place in cities and towns across America and at airports too, in response to the Trump Immigration Executive Orders. Many cities have re-affirmed their pledge to immigrants as "sanctuary cities" and several federal courts, including the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals have blocked the Trump Orders by injunction, preventing Homeland Security from arresting/detaining travelers at airports here and abroad.  The Courts prevented the implementation of the Trump Orders based on the argument that the orders violated the US  Constitution. Against the backdrop of these demonstrations, marches, and protests, the Members of Congress came home - to anger, to questions, to demands for action and to a penetrating question that, I, along with others, chanted outside the home of our local Member of Congress, first term member, John Faso - "Who's side are you on, John Faso, who's side are you on?"  The issue being framed is, whether the Member of Congress represents his/her constituents or the political party who's banner they ran under?  Do, you represent people or Party? Neighbors or funders?  And, does your agenda and vote reflect what is good for the people of your district?  Or, in blind lock-step with the "leader" of your Party, a member of Congress from a Wisconsin district with little in common with your home area?  Will you come into the light or have you gone over to the Dark Side?  That is the question facing all those who have been elected to "represent the people."  Just which "people" do they represent?  Who's side are YOU on?  Stay tuned.

THE BILLIONAIRE'S BALL: AND, WHO HAS A MANDATE?

Appoint an oligarchy of billionaires to run the show?  No... not the Apprentice, but the United States of America!  Govern by PROCLAMATION?  Executive ORDERS to eliminate regulations on banks and against polluters?  Eliminate regulations that protect consumers, remove restrictions from mining companies that prevent the dumping of contaminants into streams?  Executive ORDERS to implement a "gag rule" on federal employees - especially those who advocate environmental protection and agree with 95% of scientists that global warming is real and is caused, not as a Chinese plot, but by human activity and carbon emissions?  "Instructions" to the press by Senior Counselor to the President Steve Bannon that the press should "shut up?" Is this the movie plot to some nightmare future in the Trumpworld vision of what the United States should be?  In any case, what is the administration afraid of?  And, what are "alternative facts" anyway?

During his first two weeks in office, President Trump has ignored the other two branches of government - the legislative and the judicial branches - along with their shared power and system of checks and balances - and has been governing by EXECUTIVE EDICT!  "Edict" is defined as "a decree or law of major import promulgated by a king, queen, or other sovereign of  government; an authoritative command or dictate; a law ordained by a sovereign, by which he (or she) forbids or commands something..."  (Free Legal Dictionary.com).  President Trump has insisted that his appointments be quickly adopted without waiting for the traditional legal process of vetting by the FBI, reports to Committees of Jurisdiction, completion of Committee disclosure and information forms, and compliance with the standards and rules that have been commonplace in the advice-and-consent process of the US Senate for decades.  Trump has approached his appointment powers as President in the very same way that he has operated his businesses - his way or the highway.  Most Senate Committees insisted that their process be followed and at least one nominee - Secretary of the Army nominee Vincent Viola, another billionaire investor and owner of the Florida Panthers hockey team - withdrew his nomination because he either could not or would not shed his business interests in order to eliminate potential conflicts of interest that could occur in his role as Secretary of the Army.  Like Trump, Viola's plan was to transfer control of his company to his family but not divest himself of ownership of the company.  That didn't pass muster with the Military Code of Ethics which applies in this case. On the other hand, Acting United States Attorney General Sally Yates, a career prosecutor, was fired by President Trump - recalling his role in "The Apprentice"- after refusing to enforce his Muslim Entry Ban on January 30th. The Trump way or the highway.....

And, then there is Steve Bannon...... and his appointment to the National Security Counsel as a permanent member. In a break from history and, some argue, from federal law and practice, Trump ordered the Counsel to seat Bannon, regardless of the law which defines with precision as to who the permanent members would be, notably including the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the National Intelligence Director. President Trump appointed Bannon and demoted (read removed) the Joint Chiefs Chair and the Director of National Intelligence, regardless of their statutory status.  Presidential Press Spokesperson, Chuck Spicer, poo-pooed this violation of law with the comment that the President, "is entitled to appoint whoever he pleases to advise him on policy matters."  Sounds like yet another royal "edict" to me.

OK... so, maybe Trump is entitled to issue orders, edicts, and rule by proclamation....  After all, he was elected with a "massive mandate!"  Whoa!  Let's look at THAT outrageous claim.....  In the first place, Donald Trump LOST to Hillary Clinton in a nation-wide vote by 3 MILLION VOTES.  So, his argument is that he actually won?  Because 3 to 5 million illegal immigrant and fraudulent votes were cast?  This is utter nonsense, no matter how many times that it might be repeated.  In the first place, 2/3 or more of the state-based elections are conducted and supervised by REPUBLICAN SECRETARIES OF STATE. All 50 states have denied that they discovered any voter fraud of any kind at all. In fact, with more that 165,000,000 votes cast in November, not more than 4 cases of voter fraud have been reported.  Even adding those 4 votes to Trump - say from his daughter Evanka, his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and his Senior Counselor Steve Bannon, and his son, Donald Junior who all are registered in two states - he still lost the popular vote by nearly 3 MILLION VOTES.  No matter how you slice it, Trump was REJECTED by a majority of American voters.

Well, you might argue, he won "a massive landslide" in the electoral vote.  This also is a FRAUD and a stretch of the facts. Trump did win the electoral vote - 306-232 - but a change in just 2 states would have led to a different outcome.  Still, even that doesn't change the fact that Trump lost the popular vote 48.2% for Clinton and 46.1% for Trump, a difference of 2,865,000 votes, not 4 votes.  And, reflecting that vote split, the Democrats picked up House Seats and Senate Seats along the way as well. Taking Independent candidacies into account, 54% of Americans who cast their ballot for president in November, 2016 voted against Trump. Nevertheless, Trump continues on the path of Edict, Order, and rule by Proclamation.  The only "massive landslide" of sorts that has taken place recently was the MASSIVE WOMEN'S MARCH ON WASHINGTON that took place the day after Donald Trump was inaugurated as the 45th President of the United States. More than 1 million women and their supporters marched in DC on a positive message of Human Rights for all People.  They were joined by hundreds of local "sister marches" that took place in every state and in thousands of cities and towns across the nation and in 33 countries around the world, totaling some 5 million + protestors. Perhaps that is the number that President Trump had in mind when he described "5 million fraudulent votes" being cast. The 5 million who marched that day and the millions who have marched since - in protest of renewed attacks on the environment, against Trump cabinet picks, in support of the Health Care for All, and more - suggests that the "emperor has no clothes."

    As recently editorialized in "The Nation" magazine (Feb. 6-13, 2017), "Trump has no mandate to privatize medicare or medicaid, no mandate to ramp up attacks on voting and labor rights, no mandate to deny climate change, and no mandate to make the world a more dangerous place." And, now, given the most recent court rulings in Washington State and in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, it appears that he also has no mandate to reverse the proud American tradition of welcoming immigrants - and especially refugees - to join us in seeking the fulfillment of the American Dream.  With Trump's recent edict banning Muslim immigration to the US from 7 selected countries and an outright bar on accepting refugees from Syria, our President has attempted to erase the words of welcome that were etched on the base of the Statue of Liberty that have welcomed immigrants from around the globe for generations as written by Emma Lazarus in 1883. Her sonnet was inscribed on the base of the statue in 1903, and has served as a beacon of hope in welcoming immigrants to the United States for more than 100 years.  In part, the inscription reads, "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore.  Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door." May this sentiment ever be so.

Millions have marched against the TRAVEL BAN imposed by President Trump, and opponents have lined up against the measure, including dozens of Republican Senators and House Members. Given the announcement by the Justice Department that they will appeal the Federal Judge's ruling that implements a temporary stay of the Trump Order, and are asking the Court of Appeals to set aside the lower Court ruling, it appears that the issue may yet land in front of the Supreme Court.  The Court of Appeals will hear the case but has refused to disturb the lower court injunction against the order.  It seems as though President Trump has yet to learn that a our democracy will function as the founders intended and that those who would attempt to deny, destroy, dismiss, or ignore our history and the  precedents established that are our heritage, will be swept away by the tide of history and the might of the majority.  Majority trumps mandate. And, that may yet prove to be Donald Trump's undoing.

Meanwhile, back at the Senate confirmations.....  Are we discovering that the billionaire nominees, like Trump, bristle at the "impertinence" of the elected officials and others who dare to challenge them and their worthiness to be "at the switch?"  This narcissist attitude should not come as a surprise, given Trump's operational history as a CEO of many companies and we should not expect anything different from his nominated Cabinet Members.  Instead of "draining the swamp" as Trump promised his supporters over and over, he is "stocking the pond" with corporate piranhas, many from the Wall Street crowd that he attacked during the campaign.

Stay tuned.  More on this in the next article.   

THE DRUMBEAT OF DEMOCRACY - This is what Democracy looks like!

Complacency......  Normally, this is the typical behavior of voters all across America.  From the 50% of eligible voters who are registered and eligible to vote in Presidential elections that never show up at the polls, to mid-term Congressional elections when even fewer voters participate, to local elections - especially School Board elections - where voter turn-out is but a fraction of the 50% Presidential turn-out.  Complacency.....  Never mind  expending the effort to get on a bus or into a car, travel a great distance, make a sign, and march round in the cold for hours.  One impact that the election of Donald Trump has evidently had, is to inject a shot of progressive adrenaline in the veins of concerned Americans all across the nation.  One of those places was a small rural community in up-state New York, Kinderhook.  Kinderhook lies in the NY 19th Congressional District and had been represented by Chris Gibson, a moderate Republican.  In the election that followed, John Faso, the Republican and a former NY State Senator who lost a re-election campaign and became a lobbyist.  He defeated Zephyr Teachout, a liberal Democrat in November and was sworn in last month.

But, before his first month in office, John Faso faced a demonstration and march in front of his office and in front of his nearby home, for the most part, in defense of the Affordable Heath Care Act.  According to press reports - as well as personal observation by myself as a part of the protest, more than 1000 people appeared on 48 hours notice to express support for health Care for all, against the recent Executive Order to ban immigration or visitation from 7 Muslim-majority countries and to prevent refugees from those countries - all of which had nothing to do with terrorist attacks on the United States - from entering the US. The ban, announced the Friday before the Saturday Faso demonstration took place, produced protests all across the nation.  In addition to these burning issues, those who gathered at the Faso office and home, asked the question, "who's side are you on, John Faso, who's side are you on?"  The group submitted a list of concerns and asked the newly-minted Member of Congress to represent THEM and not the Republican establishment like Speaker Paul Ryan (why would Faso represent Wisconsin?), or, even worse, Trumpism.  The list is shown below.

women’s march –NY STATE

 

   

                                                           ISSUES:                                                                                                              January 28, 2017

1.       Protect our health care!  No repeal without improved replacement plan.

2.       Announced cuts to the following entities and agencies:

DOJ:  Violence Against Women Division

             Civil Rights Division Division

             Environmental and Natural Resources Division

3.       Re-instatement of the Global gag Order on abortion and birth control information.

4.      Cuts to the Legal Services Corporation.

5.       Cut Planned Parenthood services funding.  Not that no federal money is used for

abortion services.

6.      HR 7:  A bill to prohibit federal money from being transferred to abortion service providers and insurers, including Medicaid, from support of abortion services.

7.       ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:

     Cuts to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

     EPA Gag Order issued and announced freeze on EPA grants and contracts.

     Re-instate the Keystone Pipeline in spite of US Army Corps announced study.    

8.      Respect the American tradition of welcoming immigrants to our nation.

9.      Oppose religious test for immigration by name or deed.

In addition, oppose “ALTERNATIVE FACTS.”  As former NY US Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously said, “you are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.”  What are “alternative facts?” 

*The White House falsely insists that the Trump Inaugural was larger in attendance than the first Obama inaugural.  Plainly, that was not the case.

*The “Alt. Right” world insists that George Soros bought all 1 million DC Marchers gift bags and paid for their transport to DC, essentially making the BIG LIE that the Women’s March was populated by paid agents of Soros.

* President Trump’s insistence that 3-5,000,000 “illegal votes” were cast in the election and that’s why Clinton had more popular votes than Trump.  Illegal immigrants, “dead” voters, and those registered to vote in 2 or more states (like Ivanka, Steve Bannon, and Jared Kushner?) who ALL voted for Clinton.

Here are some scenes from the Faso demonstration.

Representative Faso later announced that he would not vote to abolish the ACA without a viable and inclusive replacement; that he supports Planned Parenthood funding, that he opposes the announced Executive Order creating a Muslim Ban and a restriction on humanitarian acceptance of refugees, that he believes that "facts are facts" and not "Alternative facts", and that he agreed with several other issues that were raised.  

This is what Democracy looks like.........