Why do we spend so much money on health care with such rotten results in this country?
We spend more, per capita, than anyone else in the world. By far.
And yet by any measure, we are not a very healthy nation.
This report by Jobs with Justice blames waste.
We waste billions.
We waste billions through
(a) hundreds of different forms for doctors and hospitals to fill out to try to chase after their money from insurance companies that make money by not paying bills
(b) ridiculously generous patent monopolies to the drug companies that allow them to charge crazy-high prices to consumers for drugs
(c) direct subsidies to private insurance companies that take on Medicare patients, since the for-profit insurance companies are far less efficient than the public Medicare program which handles 90% of all seniors.
Unreal how much money we waste on the for-profit paper chase in health insurance.
Friday, October 08, 2004
Thursday, October 07, 2004
Is Bush prompted by an earpiece during debates?
I love this stuff -- some left-wing bloggers think that President Bush might be wearing an earpiece like television anchors so that his team can send him prompts during debates and press conferences (the way that producers tell anchors about breaking news through their earpiece).
The main website is www.IsBushWired.com and scroll down to the photographs of Bush on the site.
Can you imagine?: his campaign team whispering in Bush's ear the right phrases to use after a moderator's question, like some high-tech puppeteer. Yes. I can imagine that happening with this ruthless Bush campaign.
The main website is www.IsBushWired.com and scroll down to the photographs of Bush on the site.
Can you imagine?: his campaign team whispering in Bush's ear the right phrases to use after a moderator's question, like some high-tech puppeteer. Yes. I can imagine that happening with this ruthless Bush campaign.
Chicago corruption has *got* to go
This is a cancer on the Democratic Party.
The papers are full of stories about bribes, payoffs, idle city workers and contractors and taxpayer ripoffs. The feds are investigating, but this is no excuse for our civic failure to eliminate the corruption.
This quote from an FBI agent chilled me:
"I never cease to be amazed at the level of corruption in this city," said Thomas Kneir, the soon-to-retire boss of the FBI's Chicago office, after federal prosecutors unveiled criminal charges against two alleged bribe-taking city officials with a promise of many more defendants in the days ahead.
It's from this Mark Brown column in the Sun-Times.
Why can't we clean up our own house?
We've got a tenuous grip on majority status in Illinois, and if the Republicans are successful at painting 'Chicago Democratic control' of Illinois government as 'corruption and FBI investigations' we're going to have a hard time earning a majority of the vote in 2006.
It's crucial to the growth of the Democratic Party that we eliminate the cancer of old school corruption. How are we going to get taxpayers to spend more money on poor kids who need high-paid teachers if we don't trust the government to spend the money honestly? How are we going to convince the taxpayers to buy health insurance in one big, efficient pool for everyone without parasitic middlemen industries if we don't trust the government? How is the CTA going to get more state money if people don't trust the city government to stamp out featherbedding and patronage desk jobs? We're the victims of corruption. And we have got to stamp this out. We can no longer tolerate a culture of tolerance among Cook County Democrats for corruption.
I think people feel intimidated to crusade against Democratic corruption because of (a) a perception that the best vote-getters either condone or participate in corruption and (b) a perception that the best vote-getters will turn on candidates who campaign against corruption. Maybe (hopefully) I'm wrong. But we need to build up a force in the Cook County Democratic Party that will crusade against corruption -- and earn more votes in primaries for doing so.
Ideas are welcome.
The papers are full of stories about bribes, payoffs, idle city workers and contractors and taxpayer ripoffs. The feds are investigating, but this is no excuse for our civic failure to eliminate the corruption.
This quote from an FBI agent chilled me:
"I never cease to be amazed at the level of corruption in this city," said Thomas Kneir, the soon-to-retire boss of the FBI's Chicago office, after federal prosecutors unveiled criminal charges against two alleged bribe-taking city officials with a promise of many more defendants in the days ahead.
It's from this Mark Brown column in the Sun-Times.
Why can't we clean up our own house?
We've got a tenuous grip on majority status in Illinois, and if the Republicans are successful at painting 'Chicago Democratic control' of Illinois government as 'corruption and FBI investigations' we're going to have a hard time earning a majority of the vote in 2006.
It's crucial to the growth of the Democratic Party that we eliminate the cancer of old school corruption. How are we going to get taxpayers to spend more money on poor kids who need high-paid teachers if we don't trust the government to spend the money honestly? How are we going to convince the taxpayers to buy health insurance in one big, efficient pool for everyone without parasitic middlemen industries if we don't trust the government? How is the CTA going to get more state money if people don't trust the city government to stamp out featherbedding and patronage desk jobs? We're the victims of corruption. And we have got to stamp this out. We can no longer tolerate a culture of tolerance among Cook County Democrats for corruption.
I think people feel intimidated to crusade against Democratic corruption because of (a) a perception that the best vote-getters either condone or participate in corruption and (b) a perception that the best vote-getters will turn on candidates who campaign against corruption. Maybe (hopefully) I'm wrong. But we need to build up a force in the Cook County Democratic Party that will crusade against corruption -- and earn more votes in primaries for doing so.
Ideas are welcome.
Stern's anti-FCC (and anti-Bush) crusade a good thing
Howard Stern's jump away from government-regulated broadcast radio to non-regulated satellite radio is a great thing for the Kerry campaign.
Stern's 12 million daily listeners, most of whom probably are younger, whiter and less likely to read a newspaper than the average voter (in other words, more likely to be persuadable swing voters) have been hearing an anti-Bush crusade for months, if not years. The FCC's ridiculous 'crack-down' on indecency should have an anti-Bush backlash in November, and Howard Stern might be a significant part of that.
Yes, I know Kerry voted with the 99 other senators to authorize the FCC to levy higher fines against Viacom for allowing the nation to see Janet Jackson's nipple (oh, horrors! think of the children!), but it's Bush's FCC. He appointed Colin Powell's kid to run it.
Stern's 12 million daily listeners, most of whom probably are younger, whiter and less likely to read a newspaper than the average voter (in other words, more likely to be persuadable swing voters) have been hearing an anti-Bush crusade for months, if not years. The FCC's ridiculous 'crack-down' on indecency should have an anti-Bush backlash in November, and Howard Stern might be a significant part of that.
Yes, I know Kerry voted with the 99 other senators to authorize the FCC to levy higher fines against Viacom for allowing the nation to see Janet Jackson's nipple (oh, horrors! think of the children!), but it's Bush's FCC. He appointed Colin Powell's kid to run it.
Tuesday, October 05, 2004
Keep Steve Stone in the Cubs booth
After the Cubs implosion in the last week of baseball, the fate of Steve Stone is up in the air. Chip Caray is taking a walk to work with his father broadcasting the Braves games. I never liked Chip's persona, but I wish him well. Now that Steve Stone told the truth about the Cubs -- this team should have *easily* made the playoffs, and there is no justification for them coming up short -- the Tribune brass is apparently thinking about whether to keep him or not.
Keep Steve Stone!
He's the smartest broadcaster I've ever heard. Baseball is a complicated game, and Stoney teaches it well. I like Santo and Hughes on the radio, but Steve Stone is the best. So any Tribsters that are reading this blog: keep Steve Stone. And maybe get Mark Grace to do the play-by-play. Or Leon Durham. Or Rick Sutcliffe.
Keep Steve Stone!
He's the smartest broadcaster I've ever heard. Baseball is a complicated game, and Stoney teaches it well. I like Santo and Hughes on the radio, but Steve Stone is the best. So any Tribsters that are reading this blog: keep Steve Stone. And maybe get Mark Grace to do the play-by-play. Or Leon Durham. Or Rick Sutcliffe.
Monday, October 04, 2004
Good story on San Francisco's use of instant runoff voting
I was just in the land of instant runoff voting (isn't that what everyone calls San Francisco now?)
Here is a nice AP story on the upcoming November election where voters will get a first choice *and* a second choice for municipal elections in San Francisco.
Wouldn't that be nice in every election?
I've got a part-time job working on this stuff (and walked a lot of precincts in 2002 for this measure in San Francisco), so consider this my disclosure that I am interested party.
If you like instant runoff voting, then join the Midwest Democracy Center.
And speaking joining the Midwest Democracy Center, this Saturday at 6 pm we're having a house party in Chicago with former Nirvana bassist Krist Novoselic. He's turned into a progressive advocate in Washington State with a good website here and a new book out: Of Grunge and Government. At the house party, 20 bucks gets you a book and an introductory membership to the Midwest Democracy Center, so we can continue to lobby for smarter elections.
Email me at dan@djw.info and I'll send you the address to the house party.
Here is a nice AP story on the upcoming November election where voters will get a first choice *and* a second choice for municipal elections in San Francisco.
Wouldn't that be nice in every election?
I've got a part-time job working on this stuff (and walked a lot of precincts in 2002 for this measure in San Francisco), so consider this my disclosure that I am interested party.
If you like instant runoff voting, then join the Midwest Democracy Center.
And speaking joining the Midwest Democracy Center, this Saturday at 6 pm we're having a house party in Chicago with former Nirvana bassist Krist Novoselic. He's turned into a progressive advocate in Washington State with a good website here and a new book out: Of Grunge and Government. At the house party, 20 bucks gets you a book and an introductory membership to the Midwest Democracy Center, so we can continue to lobby for smarter elections.
Email me at dan@djw.info and I'll send you the address to the house party.
Kerry will be better than Clinton
Two reasons why President Kerry will be better than President Clinton.
1. He's already shown excellent judgment by picking Barack Obama as the keynote for the DNC. That was a bold move. At the time, Jim Edgar or Jim Thompson could have gotten in the race, and Barack might have lost. It was not the lock that it is now. And what a better pick that Clinton's keynotes: centrists like Evan Bayh. His choice of a real progressive is a great sign for his Administration.
2. His background as a legislator means that he's more likely to listen to others than the background of executives like Governor Clinton (who tend to make their decisions without a ton of input).
1. He's already shown excellent judgment by picking Barack Obama as the keynote for the DNC. That was a bold move. At the time, Jim Edgar or Jim Thompson could have gotten in the race, and Barack might have lost. It was not the lock that it is now. And what a better pick that Clinton's keynotes: centrists like Evan Bayh. His choice of a real progressive is a great sign for his Administration.
2. His background as a legislator means that he's more likely to listen to others than the background of executives like Governor Clinton (who tend to make their decisions without a ton of input).
Friday, October 01, 2004
Want to see me live? I know, the line starts at the back
This Tuesday, October 5th at the Second City e.t.c. stage, I'll be a guest in Peter Grosz and T.J. Shanoff's production of "Talk Show." It's the format of a talk show, where Peter and TJ are the hosts, and when there's a panel discussion of guests to talk about what's going on (sort of like Politically Incorrect), I'll be one of those guys.
Here's a new release on it. Come on by.
Here's a new release on it. Come on by.
Blago administration continues the asthma epidemic
What a lame move.
The Illinois EPA decided to keep the federal government's ridiculous grandfather clause for old coal power plants in place, instead of modernizing our state rules for air quality.
Why? Oh, it would be "irresponsible" for the state to set up better rules than the federal rules. The coal power plants, much of which are now owned by independent companies, might have to charge more if they installed pollution controls, instead of spewing cancer-causing filthy smoke into the air for people to inhale. That's the bottom line.
The report is here.
Well, those coal power plants *should* cost more to operate, because right now they are imposing a real cost on the rest of us. The kids with asthma bear real costs, but the electric companies and ratepayers don't pay for that. They should, to make the price of electricity accurate, and not subsidized by the sick (as they do now). Plus, the more the price of electricity reflects its real and true cost, the more competitive renewable energy like wind and solar become.
What a horrible recommendation by the Illinois EPA.
I hope the General Assembly rejects the findings and passes modern regulations on filthy, old coal power plants.
Waiting for the federal EPA to force these old coal power plants to upgrade is like waiting for the federal Department of Labor to force the worst employers to pay their workers a decent wage. We don't expect that to happen, so the state passes a higher minimum wage than the federal minimum wage, and the state passes our own set of overtime regulations to the Bush overtime take-away doesn't apply here.
(This does show how labor runs the show with Blagojevich far more than liberals do).
The other point from the EPA's report is that Illinois would still face pollution from neighboring states, and that some of the benefit from the cleaner coal would be enjoyed by people in other states downwind of the power plants.
So what?
Then those other states can improve their regulations too. Plus, modernizing state rules for air pollution will make it more likely that the feds will improve their regulations. The report calls on the Governor to "demand" the federal EPA pass tighter regulations. Yeah, good luck. If we really want stronger federal regulations, then we should go ahead and implement our own strong state regulations, and create a race to the top instead of a race to the bottom.
The Illinois EPA decided to keep the federal government's ridiculous grandfather clause for old coal power plants in place, instead of modernizing our state rules for air quality.
Why? Oh, it would be "irresponsible" for the state to set up better rules than the federal rules. The coal power plants, much of which are now owned by independent companies, might have to charge more if they installed pollution controls, instead of spewing cancer-causing filthy smoke into the air for people to inhale. That's the bottom line.
The report is here.
Well, those coal power plants *should* cost more to operate, because right now they are imposing a real cost on the rest of us. The kids with asthma bear real costs, but the electric companies and ratepayers don't pay for that. They should, to make the price of electricity accurate, and not subsidized by the sick (as they do now). Plus, the more the price of electricity reflects its real and true cost, the more competitive renewable energy like wind and solar become.
What a horrible recommendation by the Illinois EPA.
I hope the General Assembly rejects the findings and passes modern regulations on filthy, old coal power plants.
Waiting for the federal EPA to force these old coal power plants to upgrade is like waiting for the federal Department of Labor to force the worst employers to pay their workers a decent wage. We don't expect that to happen, so the state passes a higher minimum wage than the federal minimum wage, and the state passes our own set of overtime regulations to the Bush overtime take-away doesn't apply here.
(This does show how labor runs the show with Blagojevich far more than liberals do).
The other point from the EPA's report is that Illinois would still face pollution from neighboring states, and that some of the benefit from the cleaner coal would be enjoyed by people in other states downwind of the power plants.
So what?
Then those other states can improve their regulations too. Plus, modernizing state rules for air pollution will make it more likely that the feds will improve their regulations. The report calls on the Governor to "demand" the federal EPA pass tighter regulations. Yeah, good luck. If we really want stronger federal regulations, then we should go ahead and implement our own strong state regulations, and create a race to the top instead of a race to the bottom.
Best line in debate (which Kerry apparently won)
"Invading Iraq in response to 9/11 would be like Franklin Roosevelt invading Mexico in response to Pearl Harbor."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)