COVID-19 & Healthcare

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Thomas Mann and Norm Ornstein recently wrote at Salon, Brighter future for politics and policy requires a different Republican Party:

First, today’s sharply polarized and strategically focused political
parties fit poorly with a constitutional system that anticipates
collaboration as well as competition within and across separated
institutions. As we initially wrote, parliamentary-style parties in a
separation-of-powers government are a formula for willful obstruction
and policy irresolution. The continuation of divided party government
and the promiscuous use of the filibuster after the 2012 election have
largely frustrated the policy direction affirmed by majority electorates
and supported in polls of voters taken since the election.

Second,
the Republican Party continues to demonstrate that it is an insurgent
force in our politics, one that aspires to rewrite the social contract
and role of government developed and affirmed over a century by both
major political parties. The old conservative GOP has been transformed
into a party beholden to ideological zealots, one that sees little need
to balance individualism with community, freedom with equality, markets
with regulation, state with national power, or policy commitments with
respect for facts, evidence, science, and a willingness to compromise.

These
two factors—asymmetric polarization and the mismatch between our
parties and governing institutions—continue to account for the major
share of our governing problems. But the media continues, for the most
part, to miss this story.

by David Safier

A little venting about a few items in the Sunday Star, in print and online.

First, the big news of the day is that the U.S. and Russia have reached a deal to rid Syria of its chemical weapons. It's still a work in progress and no one knows how all this will work out, but it's big news, no? So the Star decides to put a decent, factual story about the deal from the Washington Post on page 5: "Deal reached to seize Syria's chemical arms." What the Star put on the front page is an AP analysis which readers see before they come to the story: "Chemical-arms deal puts Russia back at Mideast table." Before readers know the details in the page 5 story, they learn on the front page that Obama has given away the political farm to Putin. The deal, according to the analysis, means Obama gets some cover for the "White House waffling" on the airstrikes while it "restore[s] Moscow to its place as a pivotal Mideast player."

Man, the U.S. lost big on this by deciding not to bomb Syria — a move that wouldn't get rid of Syria's chemical weapons — and working together with Russia to try and destroy Syria's chemical arsenal. At least that's the AP take on the story — a take the Star thinks is more important than the facts of the story itself.

About that AP analysis: Like lots of what comes out of the AP, it has a strong anti-Obama slant. It backs up its assertions by quoting two experts. One is Jonathan Adelman, professor at the University of Denver Korbel School of International Studies. You can also find him listed as part of the speakers bureau for the Jewish National Fund. Nothing wrong with that, of course, except that it means Adelman views the Mideast through the lens of what's best for Israel, not through a more objective, global perspective. The other expert is R. Nicholas Burns, professor of international relations at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. Not mentioned is that Burns was appointed by George W. Bush to serve as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs under Condoleezza Rice. So we have an ardent supporter of Israel and someone from the previous Republican administration to serve as the only experts in the article on the Mideast and the U.S./Russia balance of power. Not exactly a balance of "expert opinions."

Second is the Star's choices on coverage of Obamacare.

By Craig McDermott, cross-posted from Random Musings The meeting schedule from the publicity flyer:   AHCCCS Community Forums General – Sessions for Families, Advocates, and Community Partners Tuesday, October 8, 2013 1 – 3 p.m. Casino del Sol Conference Center 5655 West Valencia Road Tucson, AZ 85757 RSVP: ForwardTucson@AZAHCCCS.gov   Friday, October 11, 2013 1 … Read more

by David Safier I hope and expect to see more stories like this one on the healthcare.gov website in the coming weeks and months.   Malik is 23, which means he may be able to stay on his parents' plan until he's 26, and if not, he can choose from a number of health care … Read more

by David Safier As BlueMeanie noted, the [Fools]Goldwater Institute is launching a suit against Brewer's Medicaid (AHCCCS) restoration plan, mainly because Team Antenori failed to gather enough signatures for its referendum drive to block the legislation. Antenori, meanwhile, is crowing about his victory, saying he's got the signatures of 80,000 people who will work to … Read more