The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive
Saturday, June 30, 2012
Something to laugh about...
Would you miss them?
Recently on Think Progress' website a blog was posted by Igor Volsky titled 10 Things You Would Miss About Obamacare, and I loved it.
Volsky's blog was self-explanatory. Volsky makes the diagnosis that we need an "overall" healthcare system, but in case you forgot these are the things you would miss from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.
Needless to say Volsky is a fan of the proposed healthcare system. He has so nicely made a list of what "we" or "you" might miss if it were shut down or ruled unconstitutional. I felt like the biggest problem of the blog was that he should have listed things we wouldn't miss. Afterall people tend to read as well as grasp literature that is perceived to be unbiased.
On a more positive note... Volsky listed "rules" that were already in place that most people take for granted and are unaware it is Obamacare.
I definitely think if you are not a fan of Obamacare you need to read this blog, it may help sway your position.
Update: Because I read this article in the beginning of the week and wrote about it at the end there is a slight update. After weeks of political propoganda the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Act.
Volsky's blog was self-explanatory. Volsky makes the diagnosis that we need an "overall" healthcare system, but in case you forgot these are the things you would miss from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.
Needless to say Volsky is a fan of the proposed healthcare system. He has so nicely made a list of what "we" or "you" might miss if it were shut down or ruled unconstitutional. I felt like the biggest problem of the blog was that he should have listed things we wouldn't miss. Afterall people tend to read as well as grasp literature that is perceived to be unbiased.
On a more positive note... Volsky listed "rules" that were already in place that most people take for granted and are unaware it is Obamacare.
I definitely think if you are not a fan of Obamacare you need to read this blog, it may help sway your position.
Update: Because I read this article in the beginning of the week and wrote about it at the end there is a slight update. After weeks of political propoganda the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Act.
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Will President Obama Prove Successful with the Supreme Court?
In BBC News Mark Mardell wrote an article titled, President Obama Faces Touch Choices on Healthcare, he uses this article to highlight the possible impending doom the Supreme Court could inflict on the President's upcoming election this year.
As we all know the "healthcare" he is referring to is also called Obamacare. This link will help you sift through the facts of the plan and not the talking points.
While I like the article and it was incredibly easy to read it was still media. Most of the time when reading or even watching media about the election it is either RED or BLUE with no purple people in between. What does that mean? I mean with any article or show it is going to be spun in favor of one party or another, but usually nothing about the in-betweeners who just want to know the facts from both parties.
Mardell did a very nice job of explaining why Obama is facing tough choices, focusing on the 'individual mandate' (which is being said to be unconstitutional) stated in Obamacare. He has input from representatives from both sides, a former speech writer for the Clinton administration, and a health specialist from Freedomworks, a Conservative campaign group. Both seem to agree Obama will fail, but both have very different opinions on the impact of that failure.
There were two things about this article that I felt were disappointing. I felt like there should have been a light shined on the current condition of our healthcare, and why we need change like the Obamacare... or why we do not. For instance, according to the CDC in 2011 46.3 million American's were uninsured, and another 58.7 million were uninsured part of that year. People are dying because they do not have the resources they need to combat acute and chronic illnesses such as cancer, heart disease, and even mental health services. We are on such an uneven playing field when it comes to healthcare and insurance. If parent's of babies with PKU or Phenylalanine disorders do not have insurance or cannot afford the incredibly expensive formula they are forced to feed them regular formula which ultimately causes mental retardation in those infants. These are only a few issues we face as a nation and I believe he should have touched base on some of the hot topics. The other part of his article I did not "like" was a comment made, "The president can moan about the Supreme Court if he likes, but he can't campaign for a law they have ruled to be unconstitutional", but in all fairness it is only because I know it is true.
Mardell did a great job of giving information to both sides as well as giving his opinion of what to expect in the upcoming months.
As we all know the "healthcare" he is referring to is also called Obamacare. This link will help you sift through the facts of the plan and not the talking points.
While I like the article and it was incredibly easy to read it was still media. Most of the time when reading or even watching media about the election it is either RED or BLUE with no purple people in between. What does that mean? I mean with any article or show it is going to be spun in favor of one party or another, but usually nothing about the in-betweeners who just want to know the facts from both parties.
Mardell did a very nice job of explaining why Obama is facing tough choices, focusing on the 'individual mandate' (which is being said to be unconstitutional) stated in Obamacare. He has input from representatives from both sides, a former speech writer for the Clinton administration, and a health specialist from Freedomworks, a Conservative campaign group. Both seem to agree Obama will fail, but both have very different opinions on the impact of that failure.
There were two things about this article that I felt were disappointing. I felt like there should have been a light shined on the current condition of our healthcare, and why we need change like the Obamacare... or why we do not. For instance, according to the CDC in 2011 46.3 million American's were uninsured, and another 58.7 million were uninsured part of that year. People are dying because they do not have the resources they need to combat acute and chronic illnesses such as cancer, heart disease, and even mental health services. We are on such an uneven playing field when it comes to healthcare and insurance. If parent's of babies with PKU or Phenylalanine disorders do not have insurance or cannot afford the incredibly expensive formula they are forced to feed them regular formula which ultimately causes mental retardation in those infants. These are only a few issues we face as a nation and I believe he should have touched base on some of the hot topics. The other part of his article I did not "like" was a comment made, "The president can moan about the Supreme Court if he likes, but he can't campaign for a law they have ruled to be unconstitutional", but in all fairness it is only because I know it is true.
Mardell did a great job of giving information to both sides as well as giving his opinion of what to expect in the upcoming months.
Wednesday, June 13, 2012
First to Suffer...Women, Infant, and Children
Confucius said, "In a country well governed poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed wealth is something to be ashamed of.”
An article on CNN spurred my thoughts to dig deeper on what is to me a huge issue facing our nation. House Republican's to Cut WIC Spending by 10%. Really???
Currently our nation faces a very big question....Where are we going to cut spending? Especially during an election year pressures run high. Among some things Congress is looking to cutting is SNAP (Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program), WIC, and Medicare. I am most passionate about the WIC program and the absolute atrocity it is to cut funding from a program that is already underfunded.
The Texas Legislature, in my opinion, does not have the capacity to make the better decisions for our state. And, in some context, I am also saying Republicans do not have the capacity to make the best decisions for everyone in Texas, especially women and children. Texas is dead last in the number of non-elderly women without health insurance, and 6th nationally in the percentage of women in poverty, according to the Texas Legislative Study Group. If that is not enough to persuade you to believe Texas or Rick Perry need to make a change one in five Texas children lack health insurance, the highest rate in the nation. Rick Perry tried to opt out of Medicaid, which provides insurance for the most vulnerable of Texan's, pregnant women and children.
WIC, a nutritional assistance program for pregnant women, infants and children has received bipartisan support in the past, but now has been faced with some pretty hefty budget cuts. While originally reported that WIC may have to turn away as many as 79,000 mothers in 2012 under the approved U.S. House of Representatives budget this has not happened. YET.
The WIC program is intently focused on helping low income families reduce the incidences of malnutrition. The program strongly advocates breastfeeding and has been providing manual as well as "hospital-grade" breast pumps for free. The program is incredibly diverse, ranging from helping a mom deal with a stubborn or "picky" eater to breastfeeding peer counseling to a struggling mother. The WIC program is much different from SNAP (Formerly known as food stamps) in that mothers must take classes on nutrition and the food they are given is limited to peanut butter, whole grains, milk, cheese, fruits, vegetables, legumes, and tuna. For ever $1 dollar invested into WIC, we save $3 dollars on healthcare costs.
According to the WHO, World Health Organization, beyond the immediate benefits for children, breastfeeding contributes to a lifetime of good health. Adults who were breastfed as babies often have lower blood pressure and lower cholesterol, as well as lower rates of overweight, obesity and type-2 diabetes. There is evidence that people who were breastfed perform better in intelligence tests.
WIC operates on a budget close to $6.7 billion dollars wich comes from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. On top of the $532 million cut in 2011, there will be another $685 million cut in 2012. Our Texas Legislature is allowing much of this budget cut to go against the "fresh produce" (which mostly goes back into the community through spending at local Farmer's Market's) allotment for WIC, and it's breastfeeding resources. El Paso County registered 2.5 million dollars pumped into the community by WIC recipients.
Sec. 165.001. LEGISLATIVE FINDING. The legislature finds that breast-feeding a baby is an important and basic act of nurture that must be encouraged in the interests of maternal and child health and family values. In compliance with the breast-feeding promotion program established under the federal Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. Section 1771 et seq.), the legislature recognizes breast-feeding as the best method of infant nutrition.
Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., Ch. 600, SS1, eff. Aug . 28, 1995.
However, there was no reduction in the amount of baby formula subsidized out. But, Williamson County is borrowing from the City of Austin because they do not have enough breast pumps or the funding to purchase more.
Right now 26 states are looking at cutting Peer Counselors from the WIC budget. These women are vital to the program in keeping new moms informed. Without Peer Counselors WIC may very well just be a formula handout program. I am not saying we need to be a "nanny" state, but we need to be sensible in the decisions we make as a nation and state.
Texas is already 47th in monthly benefit payments under WIC. It seems counterproducive to limit an organization that does so much for a state's people. By cutting funding to WIC we can only assume Medicaid costs and SNAP benefits will increase. The Legislature also needs to take in account the millions of dollars that will be lost upon local farmers.
This all points to a domino effect for our nation, and our state (Texas).
Thank you, Republican Party and our diversity-lacking Legislature for defending life, liberty, wealth and the pursuit of formula, corn and soybean subsidies!
An article on CNN spurred my thoughts to dig deeper on what is to me a huge issue facing our nation. House Republican's to Cut WIC Spending by 10%. Really???
Currently our nation faces a very big question....Where are we going to cut spending? Especially during an election year pressures run high. Among some things Congress is looking to cutting is SNAP (Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program), WIC, and Medicare. I am most passionate about the WIC program and the absolute atrocity it is to cut funding from a program that is already underfunded.
The Texas Legislature, in my opinion, does not have the capacity to make the better decisions for our state. And, in some context, I am also saying Republicans do not have the capacity to make the best decisions for everyone in Texas, especially women and children. Texas is dead last in the number of non-elderly women without health insurance, and 6th nationally in the percentage of women in poverty, according to the Texas Legislative Study Group. If that is not enough to persuade you to believe Texas or Rick Perry need to make a change one in five Texas children lack health insurance, the highest rate in the nation. Rick Perry tried to opt out of Medicaid, which provides insurance for the most vulnerable of Texan's, pregnant women and children.
WIC, a nutritional assistance program for pregnant women, infants and children has received bipartisan support in the past, but now has been faced with some pretty hefty budget cuts. While originally reported that WIC may have to turn away as many as 79,000 mothers in 2012 under the approved U.S. House of Representatives budget this has not happened. YET.
The WIC program is intently focused on helping low income families reduce the incidences of malnutrition. The program strongly advocates breastfeeding and has been providing manual as well as "hospital-grade" breast pumps for free. The program is incredibly diverse, ranging from helping a mom deal with a stubborn or "picky" eater to breastfeeding peer counseling to a struggling mother. The WIC program is much different from SNAP (Formerly known as food stamps) in that mothers must take classes on nutrition and the food they are given is limited to peanut butter, whole grains, milk, cheese, fruits, vegetables, legumes, and tuna. For ever $1 dollar invested into WIC, we save $3 dollars on healthcare costs.
According to the WHO, World Health Organization, beyond the immediate benefits for children, breastfeeding contributes to a lifetime of good health. Adults who were breastfed as babies often have lower blood pressure and lower cholesterol, as well as lower rates of overweight, obesity and type-2 diabetes. There is evidence that people who were breastfed perform better in intelligence tests.
WIC operates on a budget close to $6.7 billion dollars wich comes from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. On top of the $532 million cut in 2011, there will be another $685 million cut in 2012. Our Texas Legislature is allowing much of this budget cut to go against the "fresh produce" (which mostly goes back into the community through spending at local Farmer's Market's) allotment for WIC, and it's breastfeeding resources. El Paso County registered 2.5 million dollars pumped into the community by WIC recipients.
Sec. 165.001. LEGISLATIVE FINDING. The legislature finds that breast-feeding a baby is an important and basic act of nurture that must be encouraged in the interests of maternal and child health and family values. In compliance with the breast-feeding promotion program established under the federal Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. Section 1771 et seq.), the legislature recognizes breast-feeding as the best method of infant nutrition.
Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., Ch. 600, SS1, eff. Aug . 28, 1995.
However, there was no reduction in the amount of baby formula subsidized out. But, Williamson County is borrowing from the City of Austin because they do not have enough breast pumps or the funding to purchase more.
Right now 26 states are looking at cutting Peer Counselors from the WIC budget. These women are vital to the program in keeping new moms informed. Without Peer Counselors WIC may very well just be a formula handout program. I am not saying we need to be a "nanny" state, but we need to be sensible in the decisions we make as a nation and state.
Texas is already 47th in monthly benefit payments under WIC. It seems counterproducive to limit an organization that does so much for a state's people. By cutting funding to WIC we can only assume Medicaid costs and SNAP benefits will increase. The Legislature also needs to take in account the millions of dollars that will be lost upon local farmers.
This all points to a domino effect for our nation, and our state (Texas).
Thank you, Republican Party and our diversity-lacking Legislature for defending life, liberty, wealth and the pursuit of formula, corn and soybean subsidies!
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)