This week in Know Your Future Governator, meet Steve Poizner!
Currently Mr. Poizner is our elected Insurance Commissioner and, as such, oversees everything insurance in our great state of California from car insurance to health insurance (yipes, I see this getting ugly). Mr. Poizner is also a very successful businessman and entrepreneur. His latest company SnapTrack established the great idea of putting GPS receivers into cell phones so you won’t get lost as long as you have your phone.
Now for the juicy stuff, the issues! Steve’s pet issues include economic growth, education, government reform, water and fiscal accountability.
Straight from the Steve Poizner for Governor website: http://stevepoizner.com/
On economic growth: Mr. Poizner believes we must overhaul our tax and regulatory structure. Currently, California is ranked as one of the worst states to do business in.
On education: Apparently Mr. Poizner spent a year teaching at a public school so he considers himself an expert on the subject. (Wow, a whole year! Don’t hurt yourself!) He believes that we should shift control of the classroom, facilities and budget back to the local level to improve accountability as well as grade-level proficiency.
On government reform: It appears that Steve wants to completely dismantle the current structure in Sacramento (with its 300 boards and commissions, 11 agencies, and 79 departments) and rebuild it to be more efficient. His most specific suggestion for reform: a part time legislature. Rather than having full time assembly-people and representatives, make them part time. Giving them less time to pass laws will focus their efforts on what’s truly important and giving them less money will give them incentive to have other, “real world” jobs so they can actually appreciate their constituents’ issues.
On water: I’m glad Steve brought this up; I think this is one of the more important, but least discussed issues facing our state today. His long term policy solutions of empowering local agencies to innovate or build new infrastructure and increasing surface and groundwater storage to provide stability during droughts are all well and good. But, I’m not going to lie, two of his short term solutions make me cringe. 1) Calling for the “flexible” application of the endangered species act during times of drought. I’m still not sure how that would actually help our water problem. 2) Utilizing the governor’s executive power to get water where it needs to go. Personally, I am highly suspicious of any policy that gives one person all the power.
On fiscal accountability: The only thing I actually got out of this section was that, well, we need it. Thank you Captain Obvious. The other interesting statistic he cites is that the CA legislature approved a tax increase for 95% of Californians. While this sounds terrible, I’m pretty sure he’s talking about the temporary 1% sales tax increase passed in the original budget for the year (back in Feb/March of 2009) which is scheduled to expire on July 1, 2011. But I do generally agree, yay for fiscal accountability.
Again, what does this sound like?
“I will not fail you. I will not disappoint you. And I will not let you down. For two months, I've been speaking out about the needs of bringing back fiscal responsibility to this state, bringing back the positive business atmosphere, bringing back businesses, bringing back jobs, and bringing back our education.” -Governor Schwarzenegger in his 2003 victory speech.
So Mr. Poizner, let’s talk…
HOW will you overhaul our tax and regulatory structure. I agree it needs to be done, but what exactly will you be changing?
HOW are we going to shift back control of our classrooms to the local level and still ensure that poor and underprivileged areas get the resources they need to give those kids the education they deserve? (I’m assuming that when you shift control back to the local level you shift the funding back to the local level also.)
WHAT makes you think that by calling legislators “part-time” will make them run out and get another, regular part time job? As of 2007, CA legislators make the most money of any state legislature (followed by Michigan, the only state which seems to be doing worse than California). http://www.empirecenter.org/html/legislative_salaries.cfm Even if you halved their salaries (which I doubt they would be too keen on and I’m pretty sure they would have a vote in the approval process), they would still be making over $55,000 a year. For something really nifty, check this out: http://www.capitolweekly.net/salaries/index.php?_c=y8cnuzmg4kh5nt
HOW do you plan to convince the rest of Sacramento to go along with your government reforms?
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Reappointing Ben Bernanke
It is a basic rule of economics that the markets abhor uncertainties. In ambiguous times, the markets will do wild and unpredictable things, swinging one way and then another. In fact, you could even argue that, when it comes to economic markets, uncertainty begets uncertainty. And then it all just gets crazy out of control!
In a show of certain certainty and unambiguous un-ambiguity, President Obama nominated Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke to a second term at the Federal Reserve yesterday.
The markets, of course, love it. Or they at least don’t hate it. And why would they? We’re talking about a Fed Chairman who threw billions of dollars at failing institutions like AIG and Bank of America, leading to announcements of $1.8 billion in quarterly profits at AIG only a few weeks ago, and $4 billion in profits for 2008 at Bank of America. Sure, sounds absolutely ducky for Wall Street. Back here at the corner of Main Street and Taking-It-Up-The-Ass-Between-Bank-Fees-And-Healthcare Street, national unemployment is still at an almost all time high of 9.4% for July 2009, we’ve lost almost 2.9 million jobs in the last six months alone, and GDP has declined in all three of the preceding quarters.
Do I agree that it appears as if the “Great Recession” (totally lame name if you ask me) is drawing to a close and the economy may even turn around sometime soon? Sure, it looks like that could possibly be the case. (I am feeling awfully optimistic today though. Try me again in a few days and I may have changed my mind.) Am I going to give Chairman Bernanke credit for steering us out of this mess and keeping us out of another Great Depression like everyone else seems to be doing? God no. (I said I was feeling optimistic, not that I was feeing nice.)
What prevented a run on the banks this time around? Don’t get me wrong, we came close, but the public still had confidence (see paragraph #1) in a very important institution: the FDIC. No matter how bad it got, we always believed that we could get our money back. So do I think that Chairman Bernanke prevented the failure of so many banks and kept the economy from totally tanking? No, I think that credit should go to the consumer and its confidence in the FDIC. Thank you FDR and the 73rd congress.
For these very reasons, as it turns out, some people in Congress are less than thrilled by his reappointment also. However, the senate will, more than likely, reconfirm Chairman Bernanke for the standard reasons:
You don’t change horses in midstream.
Better safe than sorry.
Don’t rock the boat.
Better the devil you know than the devil you don’t.
Should we look forward to four more years of Bernanke? Or should we take the Senator Ron Paul (L-TX) approach who said about the reappointment, “Chairman Bernanke’s reappointment is rather irrelevant. Our current monetary system is unmanageable, and changing the individual in control will not change the long-term outcome.”
To read a more scandalous (scathing) article on the Federal Reserve, check this out: http://www.minyanville.com/articles/fed-bernanke-bubble/index/a/24208
In a show of certain certainty and unambiguous un-ambiguity, President Obama nominated Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke to a second term at the Federal Reserve yesterday.
The markets, of course, love it. Or they at least don’t hate it. And why would they? We’re talking about a Fed Chairman who threw billions of dollars at failing institutions like AIG and Bank of America, leading to announcements of $1.8 billion in quarterly profits at AIG only a few weeks ago, and $4 billion in profits for 2008 at Bank of America. Sure, sounds absolutely ducky for Wall Street. Back here at the corner of Main Street and Taking-It-Up-The-Ass-Between-Bank-Fees-And-Healthcare Street, national unemployment is still at an almost all time high of 9.4% for July 2009, we’ve lost almost 2.9 million jobs in the last six months alone, and GDP has declined in all three of the preceding quarters.
Do I agree that it appears as if the “Great Recession” (totally lame name if you ask me) is drawing to a close and the economy may even turn around sometime soon? Sure, it looks like that could possibly be the case. (I am feeling awfully optimistic today though. Try me again in a few days and I may have changed my mind.) Am I going to give Chairman Bernanke credit for steering us out of this mess and keeping us out of another Great Depression like everyone else seems to be doing? God no. (I said I was feeling optimistic, not that I was feeing nice.)
What prevented a run on the banks this time around? Don’t get me wrong, we came close, but the public still had confidence (see paragraph #1) in a very important institution: the FDIC. No matter how bad it got, we always believed that we could get our money back. So do I think that Chairman Bernanke prevented the failure of so many banks and kept the economy from totally tanking? No, I think that credit should go to the consumer and its confidence in the FDIC. Thank you FDR and the 73rd congress.
For these very reasons, as it turns out, some people in Congress are less than thrilled by his reappointment also. However, the senate will, more than likely, reconfirm Chairman Bernanke for the standard reasons:
You don’t change horses in midstream.
Better safe than sorry.
Don’t rock the boat.
Better the devil you know than the devil you don’t.
Should we look forward to four more years of Bernanke? Or should we take the Senator Ron Paul (L-TX) approach who said about the reappointment, “Chairman Bernanke’s reappointment is rather irrelevant. Our current monetary system is unmanageable, and changing the individual in control will not change the long-term outcome.”
To read a more scandalous (scathing) article on the Federal Reserve, check this out: http://www.minyanville.com/articles/fed-bernanke-bubble/index/a/24208
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Know Your Future Governator: Meg Whitman
Welcome to the Know Your Future Governator series. The five part series (for now) will cover the five candidates who have more or less thrown their hats into the ring for the California Governor’s race of 2010.
So far the candidates are:
For the Dems: Gavin Newsom and Jerry Brown
For the Reps: Meg Whitman, Steve Poizner, and Tom Campbell
This week in Know Your Future Governator, meet Meg Whitman!
Most well-known as the former CEO of eBay, Ms. Whitman took the company from a 30 person start up to a major internet corporation with over 15,000 employees. Since her resignation in November 2007, she has been actively involved in the political arena.
As a former consultant of Bain & Company, Whitman supported former Bain & Company CEO Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign in 2008 and was on his “National Finance Team”. After Romney left the race and endorsed Senator John McCain, Whitman followed suit and joined the McCain presidential campaign as a national co-chair, even giving a speech at the 2008 Republican National Convention.
Check out her speech on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWuL_SgdQww
So where is Meg on the issues? Her three major platforms appear to be jobs, spending and education (I’d like to give her an air-five for at least making education a priority before I even start tearing anything apart).
Straight from the Meg Whitman for Governor website: http://www.megwhitman.com/index.php
On jobs: Ms. Whitman says that she will 1) Streamline the permitting and approval processes to make it easier for businesses to expand or locate in California 2) Eliminate inefficient and unnecessary regulations that increase business costs, decrease competitiveness and threaten California jobs and 3) Lower taxes to give businesses the incentive to invest, innovate, hire more workers and prosper
On spending: she promises to 1) Commit to at least $15 billion in savings and efficiencies within 4 years 2) End runaway spending by implementing a sustained government spending freeze 3) Reduce the size of government while making it more responsive and productive
On education: Meg claims that she can 1) Give students and parents more choice and control by expanding charter schools 2) Reward success by giving more pay to high-performing teachers 3) Make California’s schools the nation’s leaders in Math, Science and the other bedrock skills needed to succeed in the 21st century economy
This is all very well and good and everything, but sounds like politics as usual. Take a look back to Arnold’s victory speech when he won the special election against Gray Davis in 2003:
“I will not fail you. I will not disappoint you. And I will not let you down. For two months, I've been speaking out about the needs of bringing back fiscal responsibility to this state, bringing back the positive business atmosphere, bringing back businesses, bringing back jobs, and bringing back our education.”
And how has that worked out for us?
On the other hand, Meg Whitman has something the current governator was seriously lacking when he first took the job: managerial experience. She did amazing things for eBay and I have no doubt that Ms. Whitman could run our state government just as well as the next guy (or gal).
For now though, while there’s still some competition out there, I ask that she get specific.
HOW are you going to streamline the permitting and approval processes to make it easier for businesses to expand or locate in California? Which regulations will get cut to eliminate inefficient and unnecessary regulations that increase business costs, decrease competitiveness and threaten California jobs?
HOW will you reduce the size of government while making it more responsive and productive?
HOW will “success” be measured in order to reward teachers and increase their pay?
HOW can we make California’s schools the nation’s leaders in Math, Science and the other bedrock skills needed to succeed in the 21st century economy?
So far the candidates are:
For the Dems: Gavin Newsom and Jerry Brown
For the Reps: Meg Whitman, Steve Poizner, and Tom Campbell
This week in Know Your Future Governator, meet Meg Whitman!
Most well-known as the former CEO of eBay, Ms. Whitman took the company from a 30 person start up to a major internet corporation with over 15,000 employees. Since her resignation in November 2007, she has been actively involved in the political arena.
As a former consultant of Bain & Company, Whitman supported former Bain & Company CEO Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign in 2008 and was on his “National Finance Team”. After Romney left the race and endorsed Senator John McCain, Whitman followed suit and joined the McCain presidential campaign as a national co-chair, even giving a speech at the 2008 Republican National Convention.
Check out her speech on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWuL_SgdQww
So where is Meg on the issues? Her three major platforms appear to be jobs, spending and education (I’d like to give her an air-five for at least making education a priority before I even start tearing anything apart).
Straight from the Meg Whitman for Governor website: http://www.megwhitman.com/index.php
On jobs: Ms. Whitman says that she will 1) Streamline the permitting and approval processes to make it easier for businesses to expand or locate in California 2) Eliminate inefficient and unnecessary regulations that increase business costs, decrease competitiveness and threaten California jobs and 3) Lower taxes to give businesses the incentive to invest, innovate, hire more workers and prosper
On spending: she promises to 1) Commit to at least $15 billion in savings and efficiencies within 4 years 2) End runaway spending by implementing a sustained government spending freeze 3) Reduce the size of government while making it more responsive and productive
On education: Meg claims that she can 1) Give students and parents more choice and control by expanding charter schools 2) Reward success by giving more pay to high-performing teachers 3) Make California’s schools the nation’s leaders in Math, Science and the other bedrock skills needed to succeed in the 21st century economy
This is all very well and good and everything, but sounds like politics as usual. Take a look back to Arnold’s victory speech when he won the special election against Gray Davis in 2003:
“I will not fail you. I will not disappoint you. And I will not let you down. For two months, I've been speaking out about the needs of bringing back fiscal responsibility to this state, bringing back the positive business atmosphere, bringing back businesses, bringing back jobs, and bringing back our education.”
And how has that worked out for us?
On the other hand, Meg Whitman has something the current governator was seriously lacking when he first took the job: managerial experience. She did amazing things for eBay and I have no doubt that Ms. Whitman could run our state government just as well as the next guy (or gal).
For now though, while there’s still some competition out there, I ask that she get specific.
HOW are you going to streamline the permitting and approval processes to make it easier for businesses to expand or locate in California? Which regulations will get cut to eliminate inefficient and unnecessary regulations that increase business costs, decrease competitiveness and threaten California jobs?
HOW will you reduce the size of government while making it more responsive and productive?
HOW will “success” be measured in order to reward teachers and increase their pay?
HOW can we make California’s schools the nation’s leaders in Math, Science and the other bedrock skills needed to succeed in the 21st century economy?
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
The Christian Mafia - Sending us to Swim with the Fishes?
And today, something more than just a little creepy.
After the extramarital affairs of Senator John Ensign (R – NV), Former Congressman Chip Pickering (R – MS), and Former Senator (current Governor) Mark Sanford (R – SC) came to light, people have become more curious about the link between them all – C Street House.
So what is this place anyway? A house run by, and lived in by members of a Christian Conservative organization that calls itself “The Family” (or sometimes "The Christian Mafia"). The members historically include at least a dozen Congressmen at any one time. Currently, Joe Pitts (R-Penn.), Frank Wolf (R-Va.), Zach Wamp (R-Tenn.), Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), Ander Crenshaw (R-Fla.), Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.), and John R. Carter (R-Texas) are all residents of the C Street House.
According to Jeff Sharlet, author of The Family, “[The Family is] the oldest Christian Conservative organization in Washington and it goes back seventy years to when the founder believed that God gave him a new revelation saying that Christianity had gotten it wrong for 2,000 years. And that what most people think of as Christianity as being about helping the weak and the poor and the meek and the down and out, he believes that God came to him one night in April 1935 and said what Christianity should really be about is building more power for the already powerful. And that these powerful men, who are chosen by God, can then, if they want to, dispense lessons to the rest of us through kind of trickle down fundamentalism.”
To see more of the disturbing interview, go here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGWu-kBLDu8
The Family also organizes the National Prayer Breakfast held on the first Thursday in February each year under the name “The Fellowship Foundation”. The National Prayer Breakfast is widely attended by most members of Congress, the President (who is also usually a speaker), and many foreign diplomats. Read more about Abraham Vereide who initiated the prayer breakfast idea, and is the founder of International Christian Leadership, The Family, and The Fellowship Foundation (technically all the same organization) here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Vereide.
Let’s also not forget that the C Street House is actually owned by yet another organization, Youth With a Mission, who aren’t actually youth as far as I can tell. The group, who charges far less than market value for rent on the C Street House (seriously, these guys are paying even less than half of what I pay for rent on my apartment), has recently gone public with plans for Christian world control. Oh, how I wish I were kidding. The Youth With a Mission founder, Loren Cunningham, explains the 7 mountains of culture and how Christians must reclaim all 7 mountains in this video: http://www.reclaim7mountains.com/.
So you tell me, is fostering members of The Family within their own enclave part of reclaiming one of the mountains of culture? Because that’s certainly what it looks like from where I’m sitting.
After the extramarital affairs of Senator John Ensign (R – NV), Former Congressman Chip Pickering (R – MS), and Former Senator (current Governor) Mark Sanford (R – SC) came to light, people have become more curious about the link between them all – C Street House.
So what is this place anyway? A house run by, and lived in by members of a Christian Conservative organization that calls itself “The Family” (or sometimes "The Christian Mafia"). The members historically include at least a dozen Congressmen at any one time. Currently, Joe Pitts (R-Penn.), Frank Wolf (R-Va.), Zach Wamp (R-Tenn.), Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), Ander Crenshaw (R-Fla.), Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.), and John R. Carter (R-Texas) are all residents of the C Street House.
According to Jeff Sharlet, author of The Family, “[The Family is] the oldest Christian Conservative organization in Washington and it goes back seventy years to when the founder believed that God gave him a new revelation saying that Christianity had gotten it wrong for 2,000 years. And that what most people think of as Christianity as being about helping the weak and the poor and the meek and the down and out, he believes that God came to him one night in April 1935 and said what Christianity should really be about is building more power for the already powerful. And that these powerful men, who are chosen by God, can then, if they want to, dispense lessons to the rest of us through kind of trickle down fundamentalism.”
To see more of the disturbing interview, go here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGWu-kBLDu8
The Family also organizes the National Prayer Breakfast held on the first Thursday in February each year under the name “The Fellowship Foundation”. The National Prayer Breakfast is widely attended by most members of Congress, the President (who is also usually a speaker), and many foreign diplomats. Read more about Abraham Vereide who initiated the prayer breakfast idea, and is the founder of International Christian Leadership, The Family, and The Fellowship Foundation (technically all the same organization) here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Vereide.
Let’s also not forget that the C Street House is actually owned by yet another organization, Youth With a Mission, who aren’t actually youth as far as I can tell. The group, who charges far less than market value for rent on the C Street House (seriously, these guys are paying even less than half of what I pay for rent on my apartment), has recently gone public with plans for Christian world control. Oh, how I wish I were kidding. The Youth With a Mission founder, Loren Cunningham, explains the 7 mountains of culture and how Christians must reclaim all 7 mountains in this video: http://www.reclaim7mountains.com/.
So you tell me, is fostering members of The Family within their own enclave part of reclaiming one of the mountains of culture? Because that’s certainly what it looks like from where I’m sitting.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
And The Race Is On!
Well folks, it’s about that time. The California gubernatorial election will soon be upon us, and candidates have begun to throw their hats into the ring. (Yay! Elections and mudslinging! Can’t you just not wait!?) Primary elections for both of the major parties will be held on June 8, 2010 and the general election will take place on November 2, 2010.
Now keep in mind that the nomination papers that a candidate has to file to run in the primary elections are not due until March 12 of next year, and for independents to run in the general election nomination papers are not due until August 6 of next year, so the following list has the potential to change dramatically. However, as it stands now, the major players in the gubernatorial election are:
For the Democrats:
Gavin Newsom – Mayor of San Francisco
Jerry Brown – Attorney General and former Governor of CA (1975-1983)
For the Republicans:
Meg Whitman – former CEO of eBay has formally announced her candidacy
Steve Poizner – Insurance Commissioner has formed an exploratory committee
Tom Campbell – former Congressman has formed an exploratory committee
Over the next few (five, give or take candidates entering and leaving the race) Sundays, I’ll be posting blogs about each of the candidates to help you learn about their political platforms and issues, as well as any important history.
Speaking of history… an interesting side note and FYI: the CA Governor is prohibited from serving more than two terms, but Jerry Brown is exempt from the rule because the term-limit rule only applies to terms served after 1990. Way to sneak in under the wire Mr. Brown!
Please feel free to comment and let me know what issues are important to you in this election, but here are my top five:
1. The Budget. Duh. Somebody needs to get this thing under control already. Be it through amending the constitution to do something about Proposition 13 (1978) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_(1978)), or fixing that whole 2/3 vote needed to pass the budget or increase taxes, or some other fancy-shmancy thing that I haven’t thought of. The California budget is a problem, and it will continue to be a problem until somebody makes some fundamental changes to the system. Let’s do it!
2. Education. According to http://www.statemaster.com/state/CA-california/edu-education we rank 49th in percentage of students above a basic reading level in 4th and 8th grades (they wouldn’t be able to read and understand this blog), are 46th on the best educated index, and are 46th in the total number of teachers per capita. We spend more actual dollars and have more students enrolled in public schools than other state in the union and we are currently doing them a huge disservice because we don’t seem to be actually educating them.
3. It’s the economy, stupid! With the state unemployment rate pushing 12%, we are in some dire straits. Do I think the state government should be employing all those people? Oh hell no! (As if our budget problem wasn’t bad enough? I’m sure employing all those people would help a lot!) But, the government can help the private sector create jobs here through tax incentives, making it easier to incorporate or start a business here, and (as much as I heart the environment) getting rid of some of the ridiculous regulations that make it incredibly expensive to do business in California. Check this out to see what I mean: http://www.calchamber.com/GovernmentRelations/BusinessIssues/Pages/Environmental.aspx.
4. The Prison System. The current budget for the CA Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation is approximately $11 billion even while the CA state prisons are operating at 200% of their capacity. How should we fix this one? Shit, I have no idea. Maybe if we did a better job educating our population (see #2) or giving them something to do (see #3), we wouldn’t all become criminals? Just a thought.
5. Immigration. I know, the dreaded “I” word that nobody ever wants to talk about. But let’s be real for a minute, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that most, if not all, of the above issues would be a little bit better (not fixed, mind you, but better) if we could get our immigration issue under control. According to http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/immigrationnaturalizatio/a/caillegals.htm, in 2004 illegal immigration costs California approximately $10.5 billion per year. Yikes. Again, do I have any idea how to fix the problem? Not really. I don’t think that an extra tall fence or vigilante justice are the answer, but neither is complete amnesty for those already here.
Can anyone out there help us? Find out over the next five weeks!
Now keep in mind that the nomination papers that a candidate has to file to run in the primary elections are not due until March 12 of next year, and for independents to run in the general election nomination papers are not due until August 6 of next year, so the following list has the potential to change dramatically. However, as it stands now, the major players in the gubernatorial election are:
For the Democrats:
Gavin Newsom – Mayor of San Francisco
Jerry Brown – Attorney General and former Governor of CA (1975-1983)
For the Republicans:
Meg Whitman – former CEO of eBay has formally announced her candidacy
Steve Poizner – Insurance Commissioner has formed an exploratory committee
Tom Campbell – former Congressman has formed an exploratory committee
Over the next few (five, give or take candidates entering and leaving the race) Sundays, I’ll be posting blogs about each of the candidates to help you learn about their political platforms and issues, as well as any important history.
Speaking of history… an interesting side note and FYI: the CA Governor is prohibited from serving more than two terms, but Jerry Brown is exempt from the rule because the term-limit rule only applies to terms served after 1990. Way to sneak in under the wire Mr. Brown!
Please feel free to comment and let me know what issues are important to you in this election, but here are my top five:
1. The Budget. Duh. Somebody needs to get this thing under control already. Be it through amending the constitution to do something about Proposition 13 (1978) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_(1978)), or fixing that whole 2/3 vote needed to pass the budget or increase taxes, or some other fancy-shmancy thing that I haven’t thought of. The California budget is a problem, and it will continue to be a problem until somebody makes some fundamental changes to the system. Let’s do it!
2. Education. According to http://www.statemaster.com/state/CA-california/edu-education we rank 49th in percentage of students above a basic reading level in 4th and 8th grades (they wouldn’t be able to read and understand this blog), are 46th on the best educated index, and are 46th in the total number of teachers per capita. We spend more actual dollars and have more students enrolled in public schools than other state in the union and we are currently doing them a huge disservice because we don’t seem to be actually educating them.
3. It’s the economy, stupid! With the state unemployment rate pushing 12%, we are in some dire straits. Do I think the state government should be employing all those people? Oh hell no! (As if our budget problem wasn’t bad enough? I’m sure employing all those people would help a lot!) But, the government can help the private sector create jobs here through tax incentives, making it easier to incorporate or start a business here, and (as much as I heart the environment) getting rid of some of the ridiculous regulations that make it incredibly expensive to do business in California. Check this out to see what I mean: http://www.calchamber.com/GovernmentRelations/BusinessIssues/Pages/Environmental.aspx.
4. The Prison System. The current budget for the CA Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation is approximately $11 billion even while the CA state prisons are operating at 200% of their capacity. How should we fix this one? Shit, I have no idea. Maybe if we did a better job educating our population (see #2) or giving them something to do (see #3), we wouldn’t all become criminals? Just a thought.
5. Immigration. I know, the dreaded “I” word that nobody ever wants to talk about. But let’s be real for a minute, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that most, if not all, of the above issues would be a little bit better (not fixed, mind you, but better) if we could get our immigration issue under control. According to http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/immigrationnaturalizatio/a/caillegals.htm, in 2004 illegal immigration costs California approximately $10.5 billion per year. Yikes. Again, do I have any idea how to fix the problem? Not really. I don’t think that an extra tall fence or vigilante justice are the answer, but neither is complete amnesty for those already here.
Can anyone out there help us? Find out over the next five weeks!
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Healthcare Gets Personal
This week, for me, healthcare got personal. Really, really personal.
As I am currently self-employed (or unemployed as the naysayers choose to call me), I am now in charge of obtaining my own individual health insurance. Let me walk you through the circus that was applying for health insurance:
June 26th: My last day at Deloitte. Thanks again to everyone who came to my party; that was a good time!
June 30th: My employer sponsored healthcare expires. I’m busy writing my book (John’s Symphony, coming soon) so I ignore it for now.
July 16th: Oh crap, I need to get on that whole healthcare thing. I spend four hours filling out an application for PacifiCare, the individual health insurance company under the United Health Group umbrella. I had been very happy with my United Healthcare insurance that I had through Deloitte, so I think this is a safe bet.
July 21st: I get a phone call from the mysterious underwriters of the insurance I am applying for. They have some questions about my application. We go through their questions, which are the exact same questions that I answered on the application (so underwriters can’t read?). At the end of the conversation, I ask when I can expect to hear back from them. They say they have to request my medical records from my doctor.
July 27th: I’ve heard nothing and have been uninsured for almost a month. I call the number on the PacifiCare website, and am shuffled around to no less than five different customer service representatives until finally, someone tells me that they’re still waiting on my medical records. I call my doctor to see what the holdup is. Turns out it takes them about two weeks to process those requests. Yikes.
August 10th: It’s been more than two weeks and I’m wondering what the heck is going on. My eligibility to apply for Cobra expires on the 29th, which is coming up soon. I check my mailbox and have a letter waiting for me from PacifiCare letting me know that I have been denied insurance for the following reasons:
Asthma, Elevated Cholesterol.
Imagine my surprise at being denied health insurance for two medical issues that I’m not even being treated for currently because my doctor doesn’t think they’re a problem. As I told the underwriters, I’ve never had an asthma attack and never been hospitalized. Ever. In fact, I ran a half-marathon not six months ago. Yet for some reason, even though I share similar conditions with 20 million Americans who are asthmatic and with 47.7% of American women who have total cholesterol levels over 200 mg/dL, I am somehow a high enough insurance risk that they won’t even cover me?! Do they cover anyone!?
See http://www.aafa.org/display.cfm?id=8&sub=42 for asthma statistics and http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4506 for cholesterol statistics.
Do they have the right to deny me? As a private sector company, absolutely. Ironically though, if I end up on Cobra the same umbrella company is still insuring me. Either way I am, apparently, still a risk to them. So what is going on here?!
I have a theory, and by all means, please let me know what you think.
Under the PacifiCare individual plan, my premiums would be $86 (not adjusted for premium increases for preexisting conditions). Under Cobra, my premiums would be $353 (which, as a person with $0 in income, I totally cannot afford). Either way those dollars eventually end up at the same company, United Healthcare. Which plan do you think they would prefer me to be on?
Still think our healthcare system isn't broken?
As I am currently self-employed (or unemployed as the naysayers choose to call me), I am now in charge of obtaining my own individual health insurance. Let me walk you through the circus that was applying for health insurance:
June 26th: My last day at Deloitte. Thanks again to everyone who came to my party; that was a good time!
June 30th: My employer sponsored healthcare expires. I’m busy writing my book (John’s Symphony, coming soon) so I ignore it for now.
July 16th: Oh crap, I need to get on that whole healthcare thing. I spend four hours filling out an application for PacifiCare, the individual health insurance company under the United Health Group umbrella. I had been very happy with my United Healthcare insurance that I had through Deloitte, so I think this is a safe bet.
July 21st: I get a phone call from the mysterious underwriters of the insurance I am applying for. They have some questions about my application. We go through their questions, which are the exact same questions that I answered on the application (so underwriters can’t read?). At the end of the conversation, I ask when I can expect to hear back from them. They say they have to request my medical records from my doctor.
July 27th: I’ve heard nothing and have been uninsured for almost a month. I call the number on the PacifiCare website, and am shuffled around to no less than five different customer service representatives until finally, someone tells me that they’re still waiting on my medical records. I call my doctor to see what the holdup is. Turns out it takes them about two weeks to process those requests. Yikes.
August 10th: It’s been more than two weeks and I’m wondering what the heck is going on. My eligibility to apply for Cobra expires on the 29th, which is coming up soon. I check my mailbox and have a letter waiting for me from PacifiCare letting me know that I have been denied insurance for the following reasons:
Asthma, Elevated Cholesterol.
Imagine my surprise at being denied health insurance for two medical issues that I’m not even being treated for currently because my doctor doesn’t think they’re a problem. As I told the underwriters, I’ve never had an asthma attack and never been hospitalized. Ever. In fact, I ran a half-marathon not six months ago. Yet for some reason, even though I share similar conditions with 20 million Americans who are asthmatic and with 47.7% of American women who have total cholesterol levels over 200 mg/dL, I am somehow a high enough insurance risk that they won’t even cover me?! Do they cover anyone!?
See http://www.aafa.org/display.cfm?id=8&sub=42 for asthma statistics and http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4506 for cholesterol statistics.
Do they have the right to deny me? As a private sector company, absolutely. Ironically though, if I end up on Cobra the same umbrella company is still insuring me. Either way I am, apparently, still a risk to them. So what is going on here?!
I have a theory, and by all means, please let me know what you think.
Under the PacifiCare individual plan, my premiums would be $86 (not adjusted for premium increases for preexisting conditions). Under Cobra, my premiums would be $353 (which, as a person with $0 in income, I totally cannot afford). Either way those dollars eventually end up at the same company, United Healthcare. Which plan do you think they would prefer me to be on?
Still think our healthcare system isn't broken?
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Viva Las Vegas!
Last weekend I went to Las Vegas. I had a fantastic time. Being an adult and with a group of people who have respectable incomes lends itself to having fun in Vegas. While I was in sin city, it occurred to me (on a slightly inebriated elevator ride) that being in Vegas is an awful lot like being in politics.
For example, when you first show up in Vegas it’s bright and shiny and exciting. Much like politics where, at first, everything is new and different and you really believe that you can make a difference. After a few days, you come to realize that, during the day, Vegas is literally hell on earth at a dry, dusty, miserable scorching 104 degrees. Politics also can be a hell on earth, with endless meetings, presentations, lobbyists, caucuses, committee meetings, people who want favors, people you already owe favors to, press conferences, and did I mention meetings? It is no wonder that most politicians not only don’t write their own bills (clearly that work is done by their highly underpaid staffers), but they don’t usually read the whole 1,000-2,000 page bills that they vote on.
Also, in Las Vegas, as I just discovered last weekend, you have the potential to win big or go home a big, fat loser. My good friend taught me how to play and bet on blackjack, and by the end of the weekend I came home with extra money in my pocket! It was amazing! It’s exactly the same in politics. When a politician is first elected, they (theoretically) have the political capital to win big. Of course, if the bill or program that they propose goes down in flames or ends up being an economic drain then they too can go home angry and defeated, maybe even losing their reelection.
Don’t forget that Vegas (and politics) costs money to get there! Plane tickets to Vegas are among the only flights whose prices have not gone down during the current recession and forget about how much it costs to stay in a hotel on the actual Vegas strip. You also must factor in the fact that us girls have to take cabs to get anywhere (we definitely aren’t walking in our four inch stiletto heels), drinks will cost you an arm and a leg (or your first born whichever you’re more willing to part with), and if you’re going to gamble then you should pretty much be prepared to kiss all that money good-bye. This is just like running for office! McCain and Obama spent outrageous amounts of money in the last election: $333 million and $730 million, respectively. It’s not as if they can use that money for anything other than gambling on themselves in the presidential election. Historically speaking, he (or she) who spends the most money wins and gets to keep playing. (www.opensecrets.org)
Just like someone in Las Vegas, politicians must maintain their composure at all times. Girls: you must look great at all times, and wearing dresses that short means you can’t get too drunk otherwise you may flash everyone at the party on accident. Guys: never, ever run out of cash or you too may get caught unable to buy your girlfriend of the evening a drink (or a cab ride back to the hotel), also, don’t freak out when you lose all your money gambling. We expect our politicians to keep it together constantly. You think you’re getting away with that extramarital affair? HA! Our presidents must be tough on terrorism, but compassionate on human rights issues; politicians must not be seen as flip-floppers, but are forced into compromise by the very nature of their positions; they must be good to their families, but should spent almost all of their time working for their constituents.
So, like I was saying, being in politics is a bit like going to Las Vegas. Exciting and glamorous (and expensive) at first, but after a little while you become jaded, calloused, and are totally broke.
For example, when you first show up in Vegas it’s bright and shiny and exciting. Much like politics where, at first, everything is new and different and you really believe that you can make a difference. After a few days, you come to realize that, during the day, Vegas is literally hell on earth at a dry, dusty, miserable scorching 104 degrees. Politics also can be a hell on earth, with endless meetings, presentations, lobbyists, caucuses, committee meetings, people who want favors, people you already owe favors to, press conferences, and did I mention meetings? It is no wonder that most politicians not only don’t write their own bills (clearly that work is done by their highly underpaid staffers), but they don’t usually read the whole 1,000-2,000 page bills that they vote on.
Also, in Las Vegas, as I just discovered last weekend, you have the potential to win big or go home a big, fat loser. My good friend taught me how to play and bet on blackjack, and by the end of the weekend I came home with extra money in my pocket! It was amazing! It’s exactly the same in politics. When a politician is first elected, they (theoretically) have the political capital to win big. Of course, if the bill or program that they propose goes down in flames or ends up being an economic drain then they too can go home angry and defeated, maybe even losing their reelection.
Don’t forget that Vegas (and politics) costs money to get there! Plane tickets to Vegas are among the only flights whose prices have not gone down during the current recession and forget about how much it costs to stay in a hotel on the actual Vegas strip. You also must factor in the fact that us girls have to take cabs to get anywhere (we definitely aren’t walking in our four inch stiletto heels), drinks will cost you an arm and a leg (or your first born whichever you’re more willing to part with), and if you’re going to gamble then you should pretty much be prepared to kiss all that money good-bye. This is just like running for office! McCain and Obama spent outrageous amounts of money in the last election: $333 million and $730 million, respectively. It’s not as if they can use that money for anything other than gambling on themselves in the presidential election. Historically speaking, he (or she) who spends the most money wins and gets to keep playing. (www.opensecrets.org)
Just like someone in Las Vegas, politicians must maintain their composure at all times. Girls: you must look great at all times, and wearing dresses that short means you can’t get too drunk otherwise you may flash everyone at the party on accident. Guys: never, ever run out of cash or you too may get caught unable to buy your girlfriend of the evening a drink (or a cab ride back to the hotel), also, don’t freak out when you lose all your money gambling. We expect our politicians to keep it together constantly. You think you’re getting away with that extramarital affair? HA! Our presidents must be tough on terrorism, but compassionate on human rights issues; politicians must not be seen as flip-floppers, but are forced into compromise by the very nature of their positions; they must be good to their families, but should spent almost all of their time working for their constituents.
So, like I was saying, being in politics is a bit like going to Las Vegas. Exciting and glamorous (and expensive) at first, but after a little while you become jaded, calloused, and are totally broke.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
I Love a Good Protest
Each August, Congress takes a month long recess. Most years, congressmen take this opportunity to go on vacation or simply hang out back at home. This year, President Obama has asked Congress to take the health care issue to the people. Many congressmen are finding out how people feel about the problem in the form of town hall events.
Many of these town halls, which have been held already in Florida, New York, Georgia, Texas, Wisconsin, and Ohio, are being disrupted by angry protestors.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEH9M0Wgvzc&NR=1&feature=fvwp
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all about a good old fashioned protest when it has the potential to be productive. However, these protests appear to be designed to not let supporters of the health care bill have a voice or just to scare the crap out of their elected officials.
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking-news/story/1172648.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20090805/pl_bloomberg/a8lefaompeb0_1
We’ve actually resorted to hanging effigies of our Representatives? Wow.
The saddest part of this issue, for me, is that the whole point of a town hall meeting is to hear all sides of the story. If you disagree with how your representative is voting, then go, present your argument, and we can have an honest debate about the issue. Yelling and screaming over someone who actually has something to say or an important question is rude, childish, and, as far as I can tell, is disrupting someone’s right to freedom of speech. (Read the constitution recently? I’m pretty sure the First Amendment is still in effect.)
One representative, Rep. Tim Bishop (D-NY), has even suspended town hall meetings after residents called the Suffolk County Police to escort him back to his car through a large crowd of rowdy protestors.
The group that appears to be behind many of the disruptions is known as the Tea Party Patriots. If you happen to be all about interrupting town hall meetings and want more information here’s the website: http://teapartypatriots.org/HC.aspx
On a completely different note, if you’ve heard that by signing up for the Cash for Clunkers program the federal government will be granted access to your computer and files, it is absolutely not true.
But just for grins, here’s a link to the original story (which does sound pretty terrifying when you first watch it): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWs12ccbOiE
Here’s a link to the myth debunking website Snopes: http://www.snopes.com/computer/internet/clunkers.asp
Many of these town halls, which have been held already in Florida, New York, Georgia, Texas, Wisconsin, and Ohio, are being disrupted by angry protestors.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEH9M0Wgvzc&NR=1&feature=fvwp
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all about a good old fashioned protest when it has the potential to be productive. However, these protests appear to be designed to not let supporters of the health care bill have a voice or just to scare the crap out of their elected officials.
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking-news/story/1172648.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20090805/pl_bloomberg/a8lefaompeb0_1
We’ve actually resorted to hanging effigies of our Representatives? Wow.
The saddest part of this issue, for me, is that the whole point of a town hall meeting is to hear all sides of the story. If you disagree with how your representative is voting, then go, present your argument, and we can have an honest debate about the issue. Yelling and screaming over someone who actually has something to say or an important question is rude, childish, and, as far as I can tell, is disrupting someone’s right to freedom of speech. (Read the constitution recently? I’m pretty sure the First Amendment is still in effect.)
One representative, Rep. Tim Bishop (D-NY), has even suspended town hall meetings after residents called the Suffolk County Police to escort him back to his car through a large crowd of rowdy protestors.
The group that appears to be behind many of the disruptions is known as the Tea Party Patriots. If you happen to be all about interrupting town hall meetings and want more information here’s the website: http://teapartypatriots.org/HC.aspx
On a completely different note, if you’ve heard that by signing up for the Cash for Clunkers program the federal government will be granted access to your computer and files, it is absolutely not true.
But just for grins, here’s a link to the original story (which does sound pretty terrifying when you first watch it): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWs12ccbOiE
Here’s a link to the myth debunking website Snopes: http://www.snopes.com/computer/internet/clunkers.asp
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
