COVID-19 & Healthcare

Arizona’s ‘meth lab of democracy’ batshit crazy week

by

Batshit1Arizona’s “meth lab of democracy,” the Arizona legislature, is trying to get all the bills that GOP leadership is going to allow to be heard in committee done before the February 20 deadline. This week has been batshit crazy week with more bills to feed the batshit crazy right-wing base of the GOP.

Let’s begin with The Neo-Confederate dead-enders of the House Federalism and States Rights Committee, who consistently promote bills based the long-discredited theories of “interposition, nullification and secession” for which this country fought a bloody civil war. These dead-enders would like nothing better than to secede from the good ol’ U S of A.

H/T to the fine folks who prepare the legislative summaries for the legislature:

House Federalism and States Rights Committee

HB 2055 (SE) – Prohibits this state or any political subdivision from using any personnel or financial resources to enforce, administer or cooperate with the changes proposed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the EPA; as described in the preamble to the definition of waters of the U.S. Passed 4-2, 2 absent.

HB 2145 – Outlines requirements and limitations for delegates participating in an Article V state convention (for a “balanced budget amendment” to the U.S. Constitution). Passed 5-1, 2 absent.

HB 2176 – Authorizes the Legislature to appropriate noncustodial federal monies and establishes guidelines for appropriation. Noncustodial federal monies are block grants and other federal monies that provide the state with discretion regarding the development, implementation or operation of a program or service. HELD in committee.

HB 2368 – Prohibits the state from funding executive orders issued by the President of the United States and policy directives from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) unless affirmed by a vote of Congress and signed into law as prescribed by the U.S. Constitution. Passed 5-3 on party-line vote.

HB 2643 – Prohibits the state and all political subdivisions from using any personnel or financial resources to enforce, administer, or cooperate with the Affordable Care Act (ACA), including funding or implementing a state-based health care exchange or marketplace. Passed 5-3 on party-line vote.

Read more

In which I explain how Espresso Pundit does not know what the Ad Hominem fallacy is

by

Crossposted from DemocraticDiva.com

Arizona Board of Regents member Greg Patterson, aka the Espresso Pundit, has come at me with what pedantic mansplainers everywhere consider to be the most potent weapon they have in their arsenal. In other words, Patterson is accusing me of committing a logical fallacy. Sexist pedants love to trot out the List of Logical Fallacies to slay the arguments of women who disagree with them because ladies are so emotional and illogical amirite? However, since these pedants so often mistake their own opinions for objective fact, their attempts to characterize things as logical fallacies tend to go comically awry, as we see here:

Here’s an example of actual Ad Hominem. In which Braham Resnik refers to Diane Douglass as a “girl” and I question whether the reference is professional or appropriate. Donna Gratehouse then tries to dismiss my point because…I’m pro-life. Because pro life people apparently can’t complain when a reporter refers to the Superintendent of Public instruction as a “girl.”

This attempt to rebut my argument by attacking my character is classic ad hominem. Here’s the exchange.

Espresso Pundit tweet

Read more

Third Circuit latest Court of Appeals to rule in favor of access to contraception

by

In a little reported decision by a panel of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals last week, the court upheld federal rules intended to ensure access to birth control Opinion (.pdf), over a claim by employers who objected to the “tweaked” rule after Hobby Lobby. Obama Administration Is Quietly Racking Up Court Victories For Birth Control, Despite Hobby Lobby:

ProtestorsThe Third Circuit became the fourth federal appeals court to reach a similar conclusion in a challenge brought by an employer who objects to some or all forms of birth control, despite concerns that the Supreme Court’s decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby would impede access to contraceptive care.

The Hobby Lobby opinion permitted an employer to ignore a version of the Obama Administration’s birth control rules, yet it also contained language suggesting that, with a slight tweak to those rules, access to contraceptive care could be restored.

The rule in Hobby Lobby required employers to cover contraception in their employer-provided health plan. The tweaked version of the rule only requires employers with religious objections to birth control to send a form or a letter to the federal government saying that they wish to invoke an exemption to the rule, and informing the government “which company administers their health-insurance plan.” Once this occurs, the employer is freed from its obligation to comply with the law, and the government works separately with the insurance administrator to ensure that the objecting employer’s workers receive contraceptive coverage.

Read more

King v. Burwell is a fraud upon the Court

by

I have posted several times about the Libertarian lawyers who write for the Volokh Conspiracy at the Washington Post will make a Textualism argument in King v. Burwell, arguing that the text of “ObamaCare” limits federal subsidies only to people who buy insurance from state-run exchanges, not from the federal exchange.

The “free market, anti-government regulation” Competitive Enterprise Institute is bankrolling this case. Hillary Clinton was right: there really is “a vast right-wing conspiracy.”

ObamacareWhat these Libertarian lawyers are engaged in, in my opinion, is perpetrating a fraud upon the court, for which the U.S. Supreme Court should impose sanctions and refer these lawyers for bar disciplinary proceedings. I have rarely seen anything as blatant as this. This case should not be in front of the Supreme Court.

Should the Court actually side with the plaintiff’s in this case, in furtherance of their fraud, we will have a serious constitutional crisis on our hands.

The media has finally begun paying attention to the fraud being perpetrated on the court with some belated good reporting in the past couple of weeks.

The Wall Street Journal in two reports by Louise Radnofsky and Brent Kendall, New Questions Swirl on an Affordable Care Act Challenger and Health-Law Challenger’s Standing in Supreme Court Case Is Questioned raised serious doubts whether the named plaintiffs even have standing to sue, a jurisdictional prerequisite. Stephanie Mencimer of Mother Jones also reported on the backgrounds of the plaintiffs Meet the Unusual Plaintiffs Behind the Supreme Court Case That Could Destroy Obamacare, which also raised serious doubts whether the plaintiffs have standing to sue.

Update: Brian Beutler at The New Republic also has a terrific deep dive into the origins of the King challenge. The Conservative Obamacare Challenge Has Become an Absurdist Comedy.

Read more

Cathi Herrod’s CAP abortion bill is back

by

Just hours after Cathi Herrod hosted Governor Dicey Doug Ducey as the guest of honor at her Center for Arizona Policy soiree on Wednesday, her Christian Taliban foot soldiers in the Arizona legislature passed a bill out of the Senate Health Committee to strip women of their right to purchase health insurance coverage through the federal health insurance exchange, including separate abortion riders, and also would require physicians who perform abortions to show proof of admitting privileges at a local hospital (one of the most popular tactics of the forced-birth extremists). State committee approves abortion restrictions:

TalibanLegislation to further regulate abortions in Arizona gained approval from the Senate Health Committee on Wednesday, the same day the influential anti-abortion group Center for Arizona Policy held its day at the Capitol.

SB 1318 (.pdf), introduced by committee chair Sen. Nancy Barto, R-Phoenix, would prohibit abortion coverage for women insured through the federal health-care exchange. It would also require physicians who perform abortions to show proof of admitting privileges at a local hospital.

The bill, which will move to the Senate floor pending a rubber stamp from the rules committee, passed along party lines during the heated hearing.

The legislation would remove an exception in Arizona law that allows women who receive insurance through the health-care exchange from obtaining coverage for abortions under an optional rider with an additional premium. The bill does not have an exception for victims of rape or incest who become pregnant, which opponents speaking at the hearing said was critical.

SB 1318 would also require abortion clinics to submit documentation that their physicians have admitting privileges at a hospital. Current law requires that a physician with admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles be present for all surgical abortions, but some interpret the new bill as saying that all physicians who perform abortions must have admitting privileges.

This is one of the most extreme forced-birth measures in the nation. It comes just hours after Governor Dicey Doug Ducey told Cathi Herrod that “I look forward to working with you on those issues.” Don’t expect a veto.

Read more