The New Democratic Leadership Council Report On Health Care Reform

I am strongly in favor of single payor yet the least we should settle for is the public plan option.


Excerpted from The New Democratic Leadership Council's report on Health Care Reform:

There is general agreement on what type of rules should be put in place: require insurers to accept all applicants (a term known in health policy as “guaranteed issue”); prevent them from excluding pre-existing conditions; limit the amount that insurers can charge due to age, gender, and health status (known as “community rating”); and prohibit insurers from limiting benefit plans and lifetime limits. Taken together, these reforms would assure that individuals can buy quality meaningful coverage in this market and their coverage won’t be dropped just when they need it most. These are critical reforms, but their application in the states demonstrates that, in a vacuum, they won’t fix the market. The few states that have put in place guaranteed issue and full community rating ended up with an individual insurance market with very high premiums as people were allowed to buy insurance only when they needed health care.

An email I received from the DLC summarizes the report by

"Sarah Bianchi that outlines three issues critical to successful health reform: overhauling insurance rules while requiring all individuals to be part of the system; assuring health care is affordable; and creating a competitive marketplace through effective insurance exchanges. The report, "What It Takes: Three Keys to Successful Health Care Reform," is available in its entirety here at http://www.dlc.org/documents/DLC_Bianchi_Health-Reform.pdf"

Banchi served as the national policy director of the Kerry campaign in 2004, has advised President Bill Clinton, Vice President Al Gore, and the late Senator Edward Kennedy on health care policy. She argues that, regardless of whether the final health bill includes a "public option," Congress needs to get the following three issues right:

- Insurance Reforms Won't Work Without an Individual Requirement: There is a general consensus on the real need to prohibit insurance companies from excluding those with pre-existing conditions, limiting what insurers can charge due to age, gender and health status, and requiring them to offer adequate benefits. However, these reforms won't fix the market unless there is a meaningful requirement that individuals buy health insurance.

- Affordability and Cost Savings Are Crucial for Expanding Coverage: An individual requirement won't succeed unless health care is affordable. Thus, health reform must include real cost containment provisions and meaningful subsidies. Congress should resist efforts to water down the subsidies.

- A Well-Functioning Exchange Is Essential to Creating a Healthy Marketplace: A well-designed exchange that offers a variety of private options would bring costs down both by encouraging insurers to compete for their business, and reducing administrative costs. But for the exchange to succeed, Congress will need strong rules that prevent businesses from dumping high-cost employees into the marketplace, and stop insurers from cherry picking the least costly enrollees."

"Study after study shows that individuals and small businesses seeking health care often get a raw deal." The DLC Report contains a

"2001 study by researchers at Georgetown University’s Institute for Health Care Research and Policy had seven different consumer profiles submit 420 applications for coverage in the individual market. Taken together, this group was denied insurance altogether 35 percent of the time. Only 10 percent were given a so-called “clean offer,” which basically means that the rest were given some type of extra premium or benefit limitation. The personal stories behind these numbers are heartbreaking – people who pay for insurance that doesn’t cover their cancer treatment or heart medication, or that still leaves them awash in debt after a hospital stay, or those who are turned away altogether.

Blackwater Founder Implicated in Murder

Well why is that news. We all know that Blackwater has likely been more than involved in many murders and other similarly "bad" but state sanctioned acts around the world. This murder(s) is different in that it implicates the founder of Blackwater himself in the death of one or more persons who were aiding in a Blackwater investigation. Ouch!

Blackwater has clearly grown and gained a tremendous amount of power and wealth during the Bush administration. So how does the saying goes: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"

Many Americans Still See Political Future for Palin

The highly respectable Gallup Poll (seems to have) conducted polling on the heels of Sarah Palin's bizarre announcement that she is quitting as Governor of Alaska. When Gallup claims that the poll revealed that

"Many Americans Still See Political Future for Palin: "Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's resignation -- announced last Friday -- fueled speculation that she may be setting up a run for president in 2012. A new USA Today/Gallup poll conducted Monday night finds a core of 19% of U.S. voters who say they are 'very likely' to vote for her should she run, and an additional 24% who are somewhat likely to do so, giving her a decent reservoir of potential support to build upon"

WHHHAAAATTTT!!! Come on, Gallup is kidding WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE???- Who makes up that 45% polled? maybe they didn't understand the question. The question actually involved voting for this oddball lady to be our PRESIDENT. Look, maybe she'd be okay in her group of friends but the list of her problems is so long regarding holding a high political office. PLEASE, she can't even put three (3) words together in a sentence without a grammatical gaff or nonsensical meaning. Can you just imagine her meeting with world leaders? Trying to just maintain a simple conversation??? How'd you like to be her interpreter? (now that could really be pretty funny)

From the NY Times Op-Ed Columnist - Sarah’s Straight Talk

"How true is this comment???

"Truly, Sarah Palin has come a long way. When she ran for vice president, she frequently became disjointed and garbled when she departed from her prepared remarks. Now the prepared remarks are incoherent, too."

Government Run (Single Payer) Health Insurance Favored by more per major poll results

Americans overwhelmingly support substantial changes to the health care system and are strongly behind one of the most contentious proposals Congress is considering, a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

Read entire article at New York Times

On Obama and Iran (The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan 9/20/2009)

Quoting:

"Did you notice how many times he invoked the word "justice" in his message? That's the word that will resonate most deeply with the Iranian resistance. What a relief to have someone with this degree of restraint and prudence and empathy - refusing to be baited by Khamenei or the neocons, and yet taking an eloquent stand, as we all do, in defense of freedom and non-violence."

Follow this link for the full post. The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan

Attack of the Zombie Republicans - Page 1 - The Daily Beast

Attack of the Zombie Republicans - Page 1 - The Daily Beast: "The GOP’s living dead won’t stop haunting their party, says lifelong Republican John Batchelor. Now Rush, Newt, and Dick are doing what zombies do best: laying waste to everyone’s brains."

I love the title of this The Daily Beast article; and it's a great way to state the truth!

My Way News - Oregon couple win credit risk ruling against Chase

Mostly quoting from this really nice and well organized news site but I don't care for it's hokey name "My Way News." I like the way it gathers, compiles, and organizes the news and the major press and media sources it uses. Unlike Google or other news compiler sites, "My Way" claims there are ZERO banner, pop up ads, and the like congesting the site.

(I think the AP was the source of this story) "In a legal victory for consumers, a federal appeals court has ruled that Chase Bank must clearly disclose that it can raise the annual percentage rates for cardholders based on credit risk. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of an Oregon couple who claimed that Chase violated the Truth in Lending Act, reversing a lower court ruling that had dismissed their complaint. Bottom line, from what I gleaned in this brief article I wouldn't call this a victory just because these parties "prevailed" against the bank. It was a win because the language explaining what the bank could do with the rates were inadequate to alert the reasonable consumer of the bank's ability to raise interest rates whenever it wants to, otherwise the parties would have lost the case. It's basically a finding that "notice" was unreasonable and insufficient as opposed to the rate itself being unconscionable or usurious. This is actually not a ruling one should pronounce as a "legal victory. For me the bank wouldhave had to find the actions the bank wants to take is wrong even with notice. That wasn't the case. On the other hand, I suppose that the consumer so so so rarely if ever prevails against the creditor that any win whatsoever is a headline. How sad is that. Usually it's a couple of questions and that's the case - did you pay the bill, No, Case over. Consumer loses. There are rarely any defenses, this notice issue allowed the judges to give the consumer a win. It was discretionary to the court and the court went for it in an unusual way. (remember the same attorney may be in there every day with 20 lawsuits one after the other. the judge gets used to the attorney, friendly, and the attorney just keeps winning each case one after another. That's the reality of the courthouse))

Cheryl and Walter Barrer filed a class-action lawsuit against the bank after it nearly tripled the annual percentage rate - or APR - on their credit card from about 9 percent to more than 24 percent in April 2005. The couple claimed that Chase violated the act by failing to disclose the criteria it used to raise the rate, including the risk factors involved. The court noted that Chase cited general reasons that included outstanding loans it deemed 'too high' and too many recently opened credit accounts." The Court found that Chase owed a duty to its customers/cardholders to "clearly and conspicuously" disclose that it could change interest rates "for any reason at all." Such disclosures, he added, must be made in a way "that a reasonable cardholder would notice and understand." The Court found that Chase breached that duty. Judge Susan Graber was even more critical of the bank in a dissenting opinion that concurred with the majority in part. Graber said allowing the bank to change the rate for any reason so long as it clearly disclosed that it reserved that right could lead to "bizarre and unexpected" results.

This ruling was not related to nor did it mention the new credit card and lender rules signed into law by President Obama some weeks ago, however, the atmosphere in the country is clearly in favor of promoting consumer protection. Some judges on the panel expressed dismay that the curt did not go further in its opinion in regulating the rates. (See Judge Graber's comments above)

The new law goes into effect in or about the month of March, 2010. According to the My Way article the law is "designed to protect debt-ridden consumers from surprise charges. He criticized policies that allowed for confusing fine print; the sudden appearance of unexplained fees on bills; unannounced shifts in payment deadlines, interest charges or rate increases even when payments aren't late; and payments directed to balances with the lowest interest rates rather than the highest. The new credit card rules, which go into effect in nine months, prohibit companies from giving cards to people under 21 unless they can prove they have the means to pay the debt or a parent or guardian co-signs. A customer also will have to be more than 60 days behind on a payment before seeing a rate increase on an existing balance. Even then, the lender will be required to restore the previous, lower rate if the cardholder pays the minimum balance on time for six months."..."...consumers also will have to receive 45 days' notice and an explanation before their interest rates increase."



Many laws contain a notice provision and sometimes the law will specify how the provision must be worded, the minimum font size, bold or not, and so on. Off the top of my mind, some of Florida's insurance laws related to informed waivers of coverage, those being the uninsured motorist coverage or personal injury protection (PIP) laws are very specific as to notice and how any waiver or acceptance must be executed. In those cases the failure to follow the exact requirements or in other words should there be any deviation as to the requisite form on the part of the document drafter is a lose for it or win for the consumer. For example, if the law requires the creditor to use font size 14 in it's notice provision for raising interest rates and the consumer shows the actual font size used was 13 then the consumer wins. I believe it would be a violation even if the party admits to reading it. Nothing prevents states from enacting laws using the same type of requirements regarding consumer financial rights of other types of kinds e.g. health or medical benefits, insurances of all kinds, . Now that would be the way to go on these notices but that it not the job of the court, that would be a function delegated to the legislature of the particular state. But the real issue is not notice it's the rate charged.

Many times the court will include a footnote or sentence in its written opinion stating the court would like to do this or that is but the law is lacking and thus the court is without power. The opinion will state something to the effect that the state legislature may wish to consider amending the law in a manner consistent with the opinion so the curt can in the future "do justice" or grant relief. These court opinions are sent over to the proper person or committee designated to handle them.

Creationists at so-called Discovery Institute faces fear in biologist and evangelical Collins if at NIH

The likely candidate for appointment by President Obama for Director of the NIH (National Institute of Health) is famed biologist and geneticist Francis Collins, an acknowledged evangelical Christian. Contrary to his religious faith, Collins supports and promotes evolution (and opposes intelligent design or creationism). Collins other oddity as a scientist is that he has strong religious beliefs where so many scientists are self declared atheists.

If you tale a quick look over at Discovery Institute's website it would not be at all evident that it's purposes are religious in nature. In fact, if you Google it the site comes up with the following description: "a nonpartisan public policy think tank conducting research on technology, science and culture, economics and foreign affairs." Further down in the Google search you find the organization's true purpose: "Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture is the nation's leading think-tank challenging various aspects of evolutionary theory..." Buried 1/2 way through the About Us section of the site I found the purpose of it's membership "....The point of view Discovery brings to its work includes a belief in God-given reason and the permanency of human nature..." i.e. to promote Intelligent Design under the guise of promotion of free thinking and elsewhere "...to provide people of all age groups the opportunity to learn by listening and by doing..." One of the posted articles on the site this month Why Darwinism is False

Oh, by the way, does it surprise you that it's organized for tax purposes as "not for profit."

Billy Bob Thornton is a TRUE PSYCHO! Definitely no publicity stunt. See if u agree?

OMG!! I really don't care about Billy Bob Thornton* but this videoed radio interview on CBC radio about his "band" and his "music" is SURREAL. If this guy is 10% as CERTIFIABLE as he sounds then how does he continue to work ANYWHERE? I actually felt bad for his odd ball band members. It's about 10 minutes long but about 30 seconds in you can feel and hear the interviewer thinking he may need the guys in the white coats. Aren't these guys supposed to be glad to promote themselves on this well regarded radio show in Canada? I guess this is the real guy and his real personality.

*think actor in Sling Blade, compares this musical interview to Tom Petty, and remember he was married to Angelina Jolie (remember the blood necklaces?) way back.

Purple frog (Nasikabatrachus sahyadrensis)

QUERY: How do I find these obscure sites (and why do I care)? I just finished looking at endangered or newly discovered species like this "purple frog." The site claims that "the purple frog spends most of the year underground, surfacing only to breed during the monsoon" season. (I could not make this stuff up). This is the first new frog family found since the early 1900's and it is endangered.
The EDGE site (Evolutionarily Distinct ; Globally Endangered )is really fascinating.

Ethel Rosenberg's conviction by zealous prosectors

For First Time, Figure in Rosenberg Case Admits Spying for Soviets - NYTimes.com: "Mr. Sobell’s admission bolsters what has become a widely held view among scholars: that Mr. Rosenberg was, indeed, guilty of spying, but that his wife was at most a bit player in the conspiracy and may have been framed by complicit prosecutors.

The revelations on Thursday “teach us what people will do to get a conviction,” said Bruce Craig, a historian and the former director of the National Coalition for History, a nonprofit educational organization. “They took somebody who they basically felt was guilty and by hook or crook they were going to get a jury to find him guilty.”"

Richard N. Haass: The Iraq War in Perspective

Richard N. Haass: The Iraq War in Perspective: "George W. Bush inherited a robust economy, a budgetary surplus, a rested military, and, even after 9/11, a world largely at peace and well-disposed toward the United States. He handed off to his successor a recession, a massive deficit and debt, a stretched and exhausted military, two wars, and a world marked by pronounced anti-Americanism. I am hard-pressed to find another set of back-to-back presidential transitions in which so many of the basic features of the domestic and international landscapes changed so dramatically for the worse. The Iraq war of course cannot be blamed for all of this, but it absorbed a great deal of this country's resources and, as a consequence, contributed significantly to the deterioration of the absolute and relative position of the United States in the world. It is quite possible history will judge the war's greatest cost to be opportunity cost, the squandering by the United States of a rare and in many ways unprecedented opportunity to shape the world and the nature of international relations for decades to come. Instead, Iraq contributed to the emergence of a world in which power is more widely distributed than ever before and U.S. ability to shape this world much diminished."

Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work? - TIME

Until now, I never considered decriminalization as an option but though we would need to maintain and ramp up a strong anti-drug (as we have for anti-cigarette smoking) campaign and message, it should be considered for the reasons in Time's article. I see the positives far outweighing the negatives. Just consider the reduction in all phases of crime, control of the drugs sold and ingested, free up the policing powers and the justice system for other more serious matters, and the substantial revenue and tax generated for our use and benefit instead of lining the major and small time drug dealers pockets.

Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work? - TIME: "Drugs in Portugal: Did Decriminalization Work?"

Probe: Old Irish Catholic schools abused thousands ( 2,575 page Dublin report to be issued)

The Associated Press: Probe: Old Irish Catholic schools abused thousands: "DUBLIN (AP) — A commission report into the abuse of thousands of Irish children in Roman Catholic institutions is published Wednesday after a nine-year investigation repeatedly delayed by church lawsuits, missing documentation and alleged government obstruction.

The Commission to Inquire Into Child Abuse will release a 2,575-page report in an attempt at a comprehensive portrait of sexual, physical and emotional damage inflicted on children consigned to the country's defunct network of reformatories, workhouses, orphanages and other church-run institutions from the 1930s to 1990s.

Most of the children were ordered into church care because of school truancy, petty crimes or because they were the offspring of unwed mothers. Many faced regimes of terror involving ritual beatings and intimidation. But until the investigation came along, thousands of survivors said they had nowhere safe to tell their stories — because swathes of Irish Catholic society sought to label them liars.

Some of those victims say they feel hopeful now that vindication might be at hand."


There has been terrorist acts against young Catholics via the Church all over the world. What a terrible thought. How did these people get away with it for soooo long.

The Unrelease

I agree with this blogger and her post. Click above.

One Historian's View of Bush in his article against Obama

Prior to the 2008 election, some fifty (50) noted US historians signed a statement in support of Barack Obama. The History News Network published materials related to the statement yet published an op-ed by a historian and HNN writer named Jeremy Cameron Young titled "A Historian Against Obama."

I just read the article and post about it now (not because I am not an Obama supporter as I am) not for what it says about Obama but for what it clearly says about George W. Bush. How many times both Bush and Cheney have pointed to their legacies claiming they will all be judged by historians. Well, how about some historians in the present. Young states that the next President must be strong enough to overcome the bleakest situations facing America given that no past President has followed the likes of Bush who he unequivocally blames for America's problems. He writes that though he agrees:

"...with the “Historians for Obama” that the situation America faces today is stark. Ours is a nation soaked in Iraqi blood, shamed by the systematic use of torture, aggressively culpable in global climate change, increasingly unfair in domestic wealth and power distribution. Our military is strained to the breaking point, our poor and ill increasingly helpless, our environment ravaged by corporate greed. Seven years of regressive government have left Washington barren of moral authority both at home and in the world. Simply put, America is in crisis."

He sums up:

"...there can be no civility or compromise with a president who spies on American citizens without a warrant, who tortures suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay, who manipulates and fires U.S. Attorneys in order to politicize their positions, or who pardons an aide who has outed a CIA agent. We do not need Obama to heal the rift between good and evil, or to bind up the nation’s wounds with Bush’s venom still in her bloodstream. Obama’s balms of civility and bipartisanship may lull Americans into complacency, but they seem ill-equipped to end the outrages and injustices of the current administration’s policies and restore America to moral solvency. Obama has given us no indication that he will exercise the bold, far-reaching, and, yes, partisan leadership that will be necessary to undo the travesties of the past seven years."

A blog called Baseline Scenario describes itself as being dedicated to explaining some of the key issues in the global economy and developing concrete policy proposals" It's contributors are well-renowned, highly credential and strives to do what few others explain to beginners and experts alike what's happening to the world economy and "what to do about it." These super-smarties come from the likes MIT (Mass Institute of Technology) Sloan School of Management and have generally served in various governmental posts on finance, economy, and such. A number of recent posts and articles have some as Baseline urging Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner that the road towards resolution of the banking industry's problems is through government receiverships imposed through the bankruptcy courts. Baseline regular contributors, MIT's Simon Johnson and Yale's James Kwak's op-ed appeared in the March 2009 L.A. Times entitled Geithner's Plan Isn't Money in the Bank. The brief and plainly written opinion lets the everyday reader know that other ideas and solutions which are contrary to Geithner's are supported by those who are highly qualified to make such recommendations. The article says that what these guys believe is the "best mechanism" towards fixing the banking problem is what the Obama Administration (more particularly Geithner, I suppose) refers to only as a "last resort".

My lay opinion is not made up about Geithner and I am an Obama supporter but one can't ignore the ideas and solutions floated by those who are highly capable and qualified to make them. Perhaps Geithner is not thinking out of the box. I am certainly not happy with the blank checks that Obama continued to write after Bush's first $750 bn. Not at all. it feels like amateur hour or dare I say, cronyism all over again.

There is SCARY STUFF out there among so-called mainstream conservatives. Check this out.

I was browsing the internet today, as I tend to do, just looking for interesting information, new books to read, catching up on blogs, and so on. If I had to label myself I'd pick progressive Democrat. Again as I've gotten older I started to listen to talk radio, preferring it to my shock over music. So I've listened to the likes of Limbaugh, Boortz, Hannity, Savage, and (help me) Glenn Beck fast becoming a total crazy man. Actually I find it harder to name the liberal-progressive hosts. My favorite is Ed Schultz, then Rachel Maddow, Mike Kuby, the Young Turks, and Thom Hartmann. I like to (hope) think I am relatively enlightened (as compared to the general population) regarding the issues and the varying opinions that exist among the cross sections of the population.

Anyway, I came to a very busy looking site called Free Republic. It is a discussion board. I was trying to see how to review the topics with answers and replies. I right off randomly found this question. But when I read it I thought it was a just a joke. But then I read the replies and found that these people were deadly serious. Here' the question as it was posted on May 2, 2009 and the replies are still coming:

"Suppose you could wave your hand and magically make an entire mindset disappear such that nobody would ever again embrace that ideology. Suppose further the choice was either/or.
Which would you choose: liberalism or terrorism?"

There were 20 or so people who took the time to comment and/or reply and maybe one of them chose liberal but with a reason why he or she couldn't choose terrorism. Here's the last comment posted

"Liberalism. We can shoot a terrorist just because he’s a terrorist. Unfortunately, we can’t shoot a liberal just because he’s ignorant."

These people are NOT KIDDING. There were those that said liberals are the cause of terrorism so liberals have to go. Or some said there was no difference. I haven't kept looking around but I am certain I'll find some really scary stuff. I mean this is a mainstream (obvious to me now) conservative website. It's been around a long time and there are thousands and thousands of participants.

Is it me? If I had been asked about this beforehand I would have thought that a very small population would seriously answer in this manner. AND what about the person who posted the question (actually thought about the choice and took the trouble to post it as a question to others on a public website)? This is far past a Limbaugh who gets paid big $$$$ to say things about the president failing. These posters are people who walk and work among us......

A TIMELY AND IMPORTANT MUST READ ON ISLAM

TROOPS TRAINED BY U.S. NOW DEFECT and history repeats itself

Do we EVER LEARN. As the US prepares to leave Iraq, a group of insurgent Iraqis known as the "Awakening Militia" was "turned" and paid $$$$ to train to fight for their country's survival and against Al-Queda, are changing sides and joining the insurgencies. Well now that they'e learned from us how we would attack and defend they can take that knowledge and give it to Al Queda. How many here in the US argued that we are merely paying for these Iraqis to behave themselves until we leave? What was the point in all this? The U.K. Times paper prints in part:

"Many fighters have abandoned their security posts, allowing militant groups to fill the gap. Abu Omar, the leader of an Awakening militia in northern Baghdad, said more than 50 out of 175 fighters had quit. The Iraqi resistance representative claimed some militias had lost even more. “Up to half their members have resigned from the Awakening and rejoined the resistance,” he said. The US had been paying nearly 100,000 Sons of Iraq to participate in its security “surge”, but handed over responsibility for their welfare to the Iraqi government last month. Their pay has since dried up. Only 5,000 members of the Awakening have been employed by the Iraqi security forces."

Key phrase. "Their pay has since dried up." Do we ever learn? These Iraqis that we here liked to mock in the training films and criticize for taking so many breaks explained to us as required to comply with their various religious and cultural needs must be LAUGHING all the way to the Al-Queda bank. I am so angry about the money being spent on the war and things related thereto when our own US citizens suffer - go with little food, clothing, education, health care - so we give all the money fit to print to a country now desimated and left with only those inhabitants who had no way to escape the country or those who did not want to escape or otherwise infiltrated from outside Iraq to take advantage of receiving an all expense paid US education, training and armaments.

"Thriller" (original upload)

Inmates in the Philippines are dancing to all these American songs. I had to check it out. This one video, Thriller, has over 23 million views on You Tube.

From: The Justice Report Blog

I believe that on one of the biggest of the many problems with the criminal justice system is the prosecution or state attorneys. It seems that rather than the State (prosecution) Attorneys searching and exposing the truth and the real perpetrator, all too many times the prosecution is on a power trip; a control freak who becomes interested in the statistical win and its attendant bragging rights in the office. These prosecutors may honestly come to believe their own bullshit or believe that the denial of the rights for the accused is worth the end results and though i'd sometimes like to agree the system must work properly to work at all.

Now, John Terzano blogging for The Justice Report says:

Prosecutors have power. They have been given that power in part to effectively ensure public safety. Yet, everyday in courtrooms across the country, prosecutors are abusing their broad powers and engaging in misconduct that can and does lead to flawed verdicts and the conviction of innocent people. It is a severe problem—it is a widespread problem. Our criminal justice system can and should do better.

Arguably the most powerful figures in the criminal justice system, prosecutors are heavily involved in the investigation of crimes; they are solely responsible for what charges, plea bargains, and sentences a criminal defendant will face; and they have complete control over what evidence will be disclosed to the defense during discovery. The responsibility of a prosecutor is not to simply seek convictions, but to seek justice. This means that, in addition to convicting the guilty, the prosecutor has a duty to protect the innocent and guard the rights of the accused. Yet within our criminal justice system there is a lack of transparency and accountability which has allowed prosecutorial abuse of power and misconduct to become common place.

DNA DATABASES REPORTEDLY EXPANDING

The New York Times reports:

that

starting this month, the Federal Bureau of Investigation will join 15 states that collect DNA samples from those awaiting trial and will collect DNA from detained immigrants — the vanguard of a growing class of genetic registrants.

The F.B.I., with a DNA database of 6.7 million profiles, expects to accelerate its growth rate from 80,000 new entries a year to 1.2 million by 2012 — a 17-fold increase. F.B.I. officials say they expect DNA processing backlogs — which now stand at more than 500,000 cases — to increase.

Now I know that some are troubled by the expansion of the DNA collection from violent, sex offender types to minors picked up for petty crime. I know there have been arguments made that DNA may one day be used for noncriminal purposes, e.g. denying health insurance or employment. Presently, the positive uses associated with the expansion and widespread access and use of DNA databases for legitimate activities by far outweigh any speculative negatives. Enhancement of the state and federal justice system's ability to detain and charge the actual perpetrator and accurately solve those crimes involving DNA evidence. Presently most state and local criminal justice agencies have databases with search ability limited to that state's own DNA collection records, i.e. the search is first confined to DNA profiles developed from a prior crime's evidence or from individuals from whom DNA was taken because he or she was most likely charged or convicted for a prior in-state crime. Of course, the state can reach out to the FBI to expand the search but it can take months due to federal backlogs (another MAJOR problem of another kind) to receive an answer. While law enforcement requests out of state assistance in analysis, potentially innocent people are confined to jail and the guilty quite literally "run" free.

Liaquat Ahamed on the Economic Climate

Liaquat Ahamed is the highly regarded author of the new bestselling book entitled of Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke the World warns that we are presently in the same place economically speaking as we were at the onset of the Great Depression. Fortunately it seems we have learned from the mistakes made and Obama is apparently getting it generally right. He has some major concerns about the European communities suffering from the same economic turmoil but lacking in a strong (centralized) leadership to impose the "massive injection of public money" into their banking industry to repair the crippling and growing financial crisis.

clipped from www.amazon.com If you take our present situation, 16 months into the current recession, we're about at the same point compared to the Great Depression. In 1930 the stock market was down about 60%, profits had fallen in half and unemployment had climbed from 4% to about 10%.. Presently, our stock market is down 50 to 60 percent, profits are down 50 percent, and unemployment is up from 4.5% to 8% - 10% depending on where you live in this country. Over the next 18 months between January 1930 and July 1932 the bottom fell out of the world economy. It did so because the authorities applied the wrong medicine to what was a very sick economy. They let the banking system go under, they tried to cut the budget deficit by curbing government expenditure and raising taxes, they refused to assist the European banking system, and they even raised interest rates. It was no wonder the global economy crumbled. Luckily with the benefit of those lessons, we now know what not to do. This time the authorities are applying the right medicine: they have cut interest rates to zero and are keeping them there, they have saved the banking system from collapse and they have introduced the largest stimulus package in history.

I have been really looking for a good book on this subject and am likely going to order this Amazon.

Obamanomics Explained (in short)

Great article giving a short, informative, and for me, uplifting take on the future under the Obama plan. Makes sense to me, for sure. I only hope that those who place their own power, wealth, and control ahead of this nation aren't successful in cutting off Obama at the knees before his ideas take root.

MIT's Simon Johnson's "THE QUIET COUP"

This is a must read.

"The crash has laid bare many unpleasant truths about the United States. One of the most alarming, says a former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, is that the finance industry has effectively captured our government—a state of affairs that more typically describes emerging markets, and is at the center of many emerging-market crises. If the IMF’s staff could speak freely about the U.S., it would tell us what it tells all countries in this situation: recovery will fail unless we break the financial oligarchy that is blocking essential reform. And if we are to prevent a true depression, we’re running out of time."
Quoting The Atlantic

See more by SIMON JOHNSON

Nat Geo Theory on CAT'S NINE LIVES

OBAMA NOMINEE AT STATE DEPT LEGAL ADVISER SEEMINGLY GREAT SELECTION

I was looking over Yale Law School's faculty website for Harold Hongju Koh, its Dean. Dean Koh was just nominated by President Obama to serve as Legal Adviser for Department of State. Dean Koh is a leading expert in public and private international law, national security law, and human rights law. Dean Koh is a strong proponent for restoration of the United States reputation in the eyes of the world post-Bush Administration. He didn't pull any punches when discussing what he sees as the unconstitutional acts instituted by now former President Bush and his VP Cheney during his frank and entertaining speech, Back to the Future to those attending the 2007 annual meeting of the American Constitution Society. Dean Ho speaks of the numerous actions and omissions of the Bush Administration and the terrible effect on our reputation both here and around the world while offering suggestions to restore it around the world. You can read the speech transcript here.

A short article (click my title link) over at The Plank on The New Republic has some advice to Dean Koh and additional links to his more recent viewpoints.

RABBITS BIGGER THAN SOME DOGS

BUT NOT THIS "PUPPY"

The Real Scandal at AIG by Robert Reich

The real scandal of AIG isn't just that American taxpayers have so far committed $170 billion to the giant insurer because it is thought to be too big to fail.

Such institutions are no longer within the capitalist system because they are no longer accountable to the market. So to whom should they be accountable? When taxpayers have put up, and essentially own, a large portion of their assets, AIG and other behemoths should be accountable to taxpayers. When our very own Secretary of the Treasury cannot make stick his decision that AIG's bonuses should not be paid, only one conclusion can be drawn: AIG is accountable to no one. Our democracy is seriously broken.

The administration is said to have been outraged when it heard of the bonus plan last week. Apparently Secretary of the Treasury Tim Geithner told AIG's chairman, Edward Liddy (who was installed at the insistence of the Treasury, in the first place) that the bonuses should not be paid. But most will be paid anyway, because, according to AIG, the firm is legally obligated to do so. The bonuses are part of employee contracts negotiated before the bailouts. And, in any event, Liddy explained, AIG needed to be able to retain talent.

AIG's arguments are absurd on their face. Had AIG gone into chapter 11 bankruptcy or been liquidated, as it would have without government aid, no bonuses would ever be paid; indeed, AIG's executives would have long ago been on the street. And any mention of the word "talent" in the same sentence as "AIG" or "credit default swaps" would be laughable if it laughing weren't already so expensive.

Quoting from Reich's article

Related articles by Zemanta:

• They Don't Want To Nationalize The Banks, But How About AIG?
• AIG still paying bonuses. Oh wells.
• Why It's Cutting
• AIG Will Still Pay Out $160 Million in Bonuses

Greg Palast

Greg Palast Just read Greg's January 29th posted article titled Obama is a two-faced liar. Aw-RIGHT! Very good and very clever - the usual Palast material.

About Opinion on The Washington Post

I am a Hillary loyalist yet I wholeheartedly support President Obama Krauthammer is interesting throughout most of his analysis regarding the early Obama mishaps. I was most disappointed (and frankly a bit shocked) about the multiple nominations of tax evaders. As I re-read this post the problem of outright tax evasion continues to be pervasive in his cabinet and agency nominees. I sure know that no one I know would be afforded any slack by the IRS in an audit. As a Florida bar member I could even have problems with my license to practice law. But this tax evasion problem has turned into a necessary qualification for membership in the Obama administration. These people have plenty of money and means from which to pay the taxes. I had previously written in my draft post that time would tell more as it passed, but now.... what the hell is going on? Is not paying the taxes (some of which were small numbers) the rule rather than the exception? These nonpayments are not just people taking advantage of loopholes because so-called loopholes taken advantage of properly are perfectly fine and legal. They are meant to be used. These tax "problems" are among those educational, financial, professional, and/or governmental elite (I shouldn't use that word). Are there really so few accurate taxpayers and tax reporters qualified to out there from which Obama can select to nominate. It makes me wonder what one would really find if a wholesale investigation of the tax returns for this nation's smarty pants would turn up - just as an exercise in fact finding.

USA not the only country with immigration mess

According to the U.K.'s Daily Mail at least "Eighty foreign killers are exploiting the chaotic asylum system to set
up home in Britain, it was revealed yesterday. The convicted murderers
from Albania have been given British passports despite being officially
listed as 'wanted' by Interpol."  See, don't you feel better having this info?  Not. 

Powered by ScribeFire.

McCain campaign takes months to donate clothes...

If they can't just call the charity to pick the stuff up can you imagine what would have happened to the problems of our country?

Huffington Post published a report from  NewMajority that "Sarah Palin's infamous wardrobe has not been given to charity as promised by the McCain campaign after the amazing bill was revealed in October."  HP goes on to quote McCain statements to the media months ago claiming that many of the clothes had already been "returned."   When the RNC was questioned apparently it could only defend itself by saying the paper bags stuffed with the clothes are being processed for donation.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Bush Drops Fake Cowboy Shtick

From Digg:George Bush bought his "ranch" down in Crawford in 1999 shortly before he started running for president. And now that he's done with politics, he is moving out of there as soon as he possibly can. The Bushes have bought a new home in a tony neighborhood in Dallas. So, what happened to retiring down to the Ranch?

read more | digg story

WAR CRIME INVESTIGATION A MUST! REPUBLICANS NEED CONSEQUENCES

When Obama was interviewed on This Week with George Stephanopoulos Obama said that he wants to "look to the future and not the past" despite the many calls to investigate crimes that may have been knowingly committed by the soon to be former President G.W. Bush.

JONATHAN TURLEY is one of many complaining about Obama's forgive and forget attitude when it comes to the Bush Administration's war crimes - though with that I am loathe to even admit that our elected officials are guilty.

Turley puts it quite simply: "If waterboarding is torture and torture is a war crime, the the Bush Administration committed war crimes."


Even more frustrating and true crappola:

"It is the latest spin from democrats. Democrats first insisted that they could do nothing about criminal programs like the torture and surveillance programs because they did not control Congress. Then, when they controlled Congress, they insisted that there was not enough time left in the Administration to investigate and that we would have to wait for the next Administration. Now that they have been given the White House, they are insisting that we need to look forward and not behind."

Quoting Obama:

“And part of my job is to make sure that, for example, at the C.I.A., you’ve got extraordinarily talented people who are working very hard to keep Americans safe. I don’t want them to suddenly feel like they’ve got spend their all their time looking over their shoulders.”

How right is Turley when he responds to Obama's comment that "people should be looking over their shoulder when they are contemplating a war crime."


I can so clearly recall my real anticipation when the Democrats took the majority in both Congressional houses some years back. I felt that finally we Democrats can lead by example, we can get some bills introduced and passed that we want. And as I quoted above, all we got we excuses and filibustering. What the hell is wrong with this party - why don't our "elected officials" have the guts and strength to use the power we gave them? Only the Republicans can put their policies in place? Boy i was really hoping that with full control the Congress and President would grow some and put those certain Bushies and the like DOWN....Now I'm not advocating anything illegal but the only will the Democrats seems to have is they know he to schmooze with those oil, gas, and pharmaceutical lobbyists, don't they? No problem. Actually, even the lobbyists push the Dems around.

Remember one of the very first announcements Pelosi said was that impeachment for Bush was off the table. The Dems immediately gave Bush the breathing room and the implicit gold seal of approval for everything he had done thus far. And back then we barely saw the light of the truth concerning Iraq and Pakistan. So now we all know that Bush lied outright and so much more to put us in Iraq, forget about the real bad guy, bin Laden, Bush would have said and done anything to stick our soldiers in an unjustified, unnecessary, and unwinnable war. Not a plan in place. Spend money we don't have and that we so desperately could use over here. Kill our own young people not to mention the populace of a country we invaded in the tens of thousands. For what???? Certainly nothing to do with the American citizen. Maybe something to benefit the Cheneys and the Bushes of the world. Yes, those straight laced, bible thumping, church goer Republicans are far stronger willed than the democrats. Those Republicans managed to actually vote to impeach Clinton and then accuse him of wagging the dog every time Clinton did anything to curtail terrorism or simply push his policy. Certainly anyone who was in any way involved in current events remembers that Clinton would have done so much more for the United States had the Dems fought back hard against the Republicans and supported Clinton as they support Bush and that low life Cheney, even Rove. What have the Democrats done about high level Republicans failing to show up before committee when subpoenaed - zero, zip, nada. WHAT? Ignored a subpoena? Can you imagine the pure hell that would have rained down on the Clinton administration, President Clinton or Hillary Clinton if either of them failed to appear for deposition? Yet no Rove, no Cheney. Remember how VP Cheney said that he's NOT PART of the executive branch. What happened with that? Again nothing. Dems in office just let that one slide, too. Do you think VP Gore could have refused to appear before the investigation committee voluntarily? My mind still can't get around the idea that the Dems allowed the Republicans (and some Dems defected too) to cause the level of suffering that Clinton and his family went through for some private fooling around. Clinton could have contributed so very much more to the US if his friends and his party protected him. Republicans have something that the Democrats just don't - brass balls. We Democrats are the straight arrow nerdy wimps without their ability to do what needs to be done when appropriate; Republicans are like the school jocks. How disgusting!!!

And now Pres-elect Obama doesn't want to get "distracted" by what? The severe violations of the Constitution, the loss of life, what? Isn't that his job? Soon to be President Obama really needs to show he's not all talk; show everyone that there are consequences for their actions; that Democrats are no longer afraid of the Republican machine. Like Bush says all the time that he "decided to do something about it" when speaking of Iraq. Well, we need to do something about what Bush AND Cheney did and didn't do. I hear Bush talking and he says something true: when you find out about something, what did you do about it? What is our Presdient Obama going to do about the war crimes he is aware and the crimes he is yet to be aware of? If the Republicans never suffer the consequences of their bad acts then they will just keep misbehaving. President-elect Obama needs to show the Republicans they can't screw with the Dems anymore on his watch.

Powered by ScribeFire.

CUTE THINGS FALLING ASLEEP

CUTE THINGS FALLING ASLEEP is a compilation of all sorts of cute animals, babies, and the like literally falling asleep before your eyes. It's just a nice, sweet site for a laugh!

Should the Defense Department Prepare to Defend Us from Each Other

According to a claimed "independent research and media group of writers, scholars, journalists and activists called The Centre for Research on Globalisation, points to a visiting professor whose simple title is longer than this post and beaucoup credentials to boot, at the War College, Strategic Intelligence Center named Nathan Freier, is concerned that our Department of Defense and other like agencies are strategically unprepared for a reasons including its mere inability to imagine situations that have not previously occurred. In his 88 page government publication entitled KNOWN UNKNOWNS: UNCONVENTIONAL “STRATEGIC SHOCKS” IN DEFENSE STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT he urges the need to consider the potential defenses needed in preparing for and responding to civil unrest here in this country that may result from what could wind up as the “loss of functioning political and legal order.”
He is concerned about the failure to consider and prepare for violent unrest among our citizenry as a result of the severe economic conditions. He uses the terms "strategic shock" when our defense systems are to "strategically shocked" to properly and quickly react when confronted with highly unusual or unanticipated situations.