The right wing backlash

It seems that state governments have taken it upon themselves to oppose the center-left policies of Barack Obama and the democrats out of frustration with their current powerlessness in Washington. The list is long:

1. Oklahoma law that requires women to get a trans-vaginal sonogram prior to an abortion, an incredibly invasive procedure that has no medical merit, makes it incredibly difficult to continue the abortion after seeing an image of the fetus, and allows doctors to legally withhold information about womens' options.
2. The recent Arizona law that requires all citizens to carry identification that confirms their citizenship, allows police to question the citizenship of any citizen that could be an illegal immigrant, and makes being in the state illegally a state crime.
3. The Arizona law that requires all candidates running for president to present to the government a birth certificate.

What all of these policies have in common is their lack of any good policy. The Oklahoma law restricts abortion through unnecessary procedures, which is a direct violation of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision. The Arizona immigration bill legalizes racial profiling and damages the economy, as most of their substantial tourist industry is supported by Mexico. Finally, the Arizona law that requires candidates to prove birth in the United States is a direct swipe at Pres. Obama.

These laws are all problematic because they are completely detrimental to their constituents. They pander to the right wing base, who are unfortunately the most likely to vote in these states. As the political participation in this country declines, prepare to see more and more dangerous bills such as these.

This vaccination will cost you two chickens

You know Harry Reid is in trouble for reelection when he trails challengers like Nevada GOP chairman Sue Lowden. Harry Reid is best known for passing the health bill through the senate in December. His plan relies on state exchanges for people to purchase insurance. Sue Lowden's plan relies on.. chickens? Here is the quote.

Before we all started having healthcare, in the olden days, our grandparents, they would bring a chicken to the doctor. I’m not backing down from that system.

Now I'm no expert in health economics but I think this plan has serious flaws. First, most of the chicken farms are located in the South. Where does this leave the rest of the country? Second, does this mean that health insurance companies will be required to maintain healthy populations of poultry? Maybe they'll relocate the Medicare administration to a farmhouse. Thank you again, Republicans, for providing entertainers like Stephen Colbert with endless ammunition.

Need health savings? Try environmental justice.

As far as the massive budget deficit is concerned, both tax rises and budget cuts will be needed to solve the problem. There will be a budgetary crisis when the baby boom enters the Medicare and Social Security programs. The current budget deficit won't go away without significant economic growth, which probably isn't going to happen anytime soon. In Republican Congressman Paul Ryan's Roadmap for America's Future, which has been cited as a conservative answer to the deficit, entitlement cuts are proposed. The problem is: we need these programs. But we also need to reduce the deficit. How should the government go about doing it?

The answer is cost reduction in these programs. Nobody can really contain the costs of Social Security without increasing taxes. The elderly will always need money to live and there is no way we can decrease their level of spending without subsequent reductions in quality of life. So that leaves us with Medicaid and Medicare.

Medicaid and Medicare are both public health programs, which make them easy to reduce the cost of. To reduce the cost of a public health insurance program, all you have to do is make people healthier. With Medicare, this would involve a general improvement in public health. The elderly live in the same places and live in the same lifestyles as most other Americans, therefore they cannot be singled out so easily. People on Medicaid rolls, however are the easiest targets of them all. They are all impoverished, often African American or Latino, and often live very unhealthy lives.

These people should be the focus of public health programs that focus on nutrition, hazardous waste cleanup, and air pollution control. Their health-care is directly sponsored by the government therefore improving their environmental condition should be the first consideration when trying to reduce costs. Instead of cutting health care for these people, lets remove steel mills and power plants from inner city neighborhoods. Lets clean up polluted industrial sites that are now low-income neighborhoods. After we have done this, we will have reduced the low-income demand for Medicaid and improved their lives at the same time.

The only bump you're going to receive will occur on your head in November

Sorry, James Clyburn, there is absolutely no way that Democrats will get a bump from the recent passage of health care reform. This goes for you too, Bill Clinton. Though the bill you passed will undoubtedly help millions of uninsured Americans, they will not feel the benefits until 2014 or later. There is no telling who will be controlling congress and the White House by then, but you can be sure that they will be taking credit for this. Besides, this bill doesn't really do all that much for the people who already have health insurance through their employer. Good job passing the most progressive social legislation since the Great Society, but don't expect anybody to thank you for it.

We dare you to oppose this! No, not you, Ben Nelson..

On Monday night, the Democrats held the first of a series of test votes to attempt to bring the financial reform bill to the floor for debate and amendments. As expected, the Republicans voted against the motion to proceed as a bloc, setting the process back several days. They were joined by the conservative Democratic senator, Ben Nelson, who has been trying to appease his Nebraska voters since his vote for the health care bill in December. The Republicans have been claiming that their unified vote against the motion to proceed is because they want the bipartisan negotiations involving Bob Corker, Chris Dodd, and Richard Shelby to continue. These talks had previously collapsed after going on for several months in which the Republicans came back to the negotiating table more than three times.

Putting the politics of the financial bill aside, what the Republicans are doing here is completely hypocritical. In John Boehner's closing speech against the HCR bill, he frequently cited back room deals and closed negotiations in his opposition. By voting against the motion to debate and amend the financial reform bill, Republicans are essentially saying that they want to postpone debate on the bill in favor of closed door negotiations. What these senators do not seem to understand is that voting against a motion to begin debate is a vote against doing anything about the problem the bill is addressing. If you are really committed to solving the problem, the first step is to add your ideas through amendments on the senate floor.

I don't think I need to say this, a solid majority of Americans support this already.

Why Republicans won't be celebrating for long

The Republicans have been going on and on how they're actually winning the congressional ballot for once. This means that the Republicans are even farther ahead than this measure shows, because it tends to overstate Democratic advantages. So what happened here? Only a year ago, we were hearing claims that the Republicans were dooming themselves to the electoral fringe for a generation. Does this mean that those arguing for an ultra-conservative GOP should feel vindicated by this?

They absolutely should not. The Republicans are going to win the November 2010 midterm elections, and possibly take back the House. They might even succeed in taking the senate. Who knows. All we do know is, the Republicans have absolutely no strategy beyond 2010. Once they wrestle the purse of government from the Democrats, there is no grand plan to save this ailing country. This will keep them from ever lasting in power very long. If you don't believe me, why do you think the GOP is even more unpopular than the Democratic Party right now? It's because the Republicans have done such a good job at critisizing everything the Democrats have accomplished that people don't know what to think?

Grandma killers, or the party of George Bush? Which would you choose?