In case you hadn't noticed, in addition to Paul's newest cartoons for Capitol News and the Oklahoma Gazette, we've been pulling out a few of Paul's best cartoons this week, as the office was getting a bit of a "remodel." That made it a little difficult to follow our normal production workflow, with half the furniture stacked in a corner, on top of itself.
With the remodeling and the colder temperatures in Lincoln and DC, some of our staff members have been thinking that a trade of office spaces with our West Palm Beach location might not be a bad idea, at least for a little while. Truthfully, it's a wonder of the modern age that we can so easily shift duties from one location to another and move parts of our publication workflow around the more scheduled requirements of our other jobs.
It's also true that right now, South Florida - including Ft. Lauderdale, Miami, and our location in West Palm Beach - is considered one of the most miserable places to live in America, by Forbes magazine.
Even though this winter has been surprisingly mild - especially compared to the last few years - we sympathize and empathize with many of those who regularly feel the grip of Old Man Winter. Certainly, the idea of living in warm climates during the winter is appealing to a large number of people. For our staff in our South Florida location, not having to deal with ice IS probably the most enjoyable part of winter.
There is a lot more to life than just the weather, though.
We love the museums, events, history, culture, and of course our friends, in our DC location. And our family, many friends, Husker sports, and favorite places and foods draw us to Lincoln too. At least one member of our staff doesn't even mind the snow and ice (We know - the rest us think that's crazy too).
Thoughts about all the things we love in each of our office locations makes us think that maybe we should trade office spaces with each other, for even just a little while.
Of course, that would also mean packing up many of the things we have in each of our locations that aren't in the others - and that's not really a pleasant thought at all.
Maybe this weekend, we'll simply call each other, or get on Skype so we can see the weather in the other locations. After all - while trading spaces SOUNDS like a good idea, we'd each still have to travel to our other office locations.
Frankly, none of us is in the mood to get groped by the TSA this weekend.
We hope that wherever you are this weekend, you enjoy where you are, and don't wish you were somewhere else.
Friday, February 10, 2012
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Finding The Truth In The Noise
For nearly a week, right wing extremists in both the Catholic Church and the media, have been screaming about a policy that has been discussed in political circles since shortly after the Affordable Care Act - the ACA - was passed last year. In January, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced that the Obama Administration was going to go ahead and implement the policy of equitable insurance coverage, as part of the continuing rollout of the ACA.
The policy had been known about for some time before it began being implemented. Parts of the policy have actually been in place for over a decade, and were put in place during the Bush years. No religious groups or media organizations had made any significant noise about it, even when the Obama Administration rolled out its part of the policy. That would lead most sane, honest people to think there was no real trouble with the issue.
Legally and ethically, there still isn't - though the screams and tantrums coming from the extremist right may have made you think otherwise.
The claims of people from the screaming radio hatemongers to the members of the Council of Catholic Bishops - even some candidates for the President - have been saying that the equitable insurance coverage clause will force Catholic hospitals to pay for birth control and abortions. Some of those setting their hair on fire have even been saying this will be done with taxpayer dollars in Catholic medical institutions.
The truth is much more boring.
Those who've been stirring up trouble on the contraception and insurance issue say the Obama Administration can't make religious organizations include coverage for birth control... but twenty-eight states already do. Most Americans are already paying for birth control, whether they like it or not - though most Americans do actually like it.
In fact, as Steve Benen recently pointed out, most Americans - including most Catholics - believe that all employers should be required to provide their employees with health care that covers contraception and birth control at no cost to the patient.
That's what the equitable insurance coverage clause does.
It says that IF a private employer is going to provide health insurance for their employees, ALL policies - including those at the most basic level - must provide the OPTION of coverage for birth control and other women's health options, in the same way they are already required to provide the OPTION for men's health issues like Erectile Dysfunction.
In short, the insurance policies an employer chooses must give the choice to cover both the little blue pill for him, and the little pink pills for her.
There are those who are saying the Obama administration - through the equitable insurance coverage clause - is taking away the freedom of choice of businesses to choose not to provide insurance, or to provide a less-than-adequate basic level of health insurance. That the ACA, and many states' insurance laws already give states and the Federal government the right to fine an employer if they don't provide certain basic levels of health care insurance seems to escape those who are protesting this decision.
Just like with any law that benefits the greater public good, individuals and businesses alike already have the freedom to violate the law if they choose - so long as they're willing to pay the penalty for doing so.
The decision to roll out the equitable insurance coverage clause was not a decision the White House made lightly - and our sources say the Administration is NOT likely to change this policy in any serious way, no matter how much trouble the Catholic Church stirs up. That the administration has said in public it will try and "resolve the controversy" and "ease the ire" regarding this issue, even if they don't change the policy, isn't hypocrisy - it's politics.
In this case, it's the politics of the Obama Administration attempting to explain the new rules, while applying the "General Welfare" clause of the Constitution.
The policy had been known about for some time before it began being implemented. Parts of the policy have actually been in place for over a decade, and were put in place during the Bush years. No religious groups or media organizations had made any significant noise about it, even when the Obama Administration rolled out its part of the policy. That would lead most sane, honest people to think there was no real trouble with the issue.
Legally and ethically, there still isn't - though the screams and tantrums coming from the extremist right may have made you think otherwise.
The claims of people from the screaming radio hatemongers to the members of the Council of Catholic Bishops - even some candidates for the President - have been saying that the equitable insurance coverage clause will force Catholic hospitals to pay for birth control and abortions. Some of those setting their hair on fire have even been saying this will be done with taxpayer dollars in Catholic medical institutions.
The truth is much more boring.
Those who've been stirring up trouble on the contraception and insurance issue say the Obama Administration can't make religious organizations include coverage for birth control... but twenty-eight states already do. Most Americans are already paying for birth control, whether they like it or not - though most Americans do actually like it.
In fact, as Steve Benen recently pointed out, most Americans - including most Catholics - believe that all employers should be required to provide their employees with health care that covers contraception and birth control at no cost to the patient.
That's what the equitable insurance coverage clause does.
It says that IF a private employer is going to provide health insurance for their employees, ALL policies - including those at the most basic level - must provide the OPTION of coverage for birth control and other women's health options, in the same way they are already required to provide the OPTION for men's health issues like Erectile Dysfunction.
In short, the insurance policies an employer chooses must give the choice to cover both the little blue pill for him, and the little pink pills for her.
There are those who are saying the Obama administration - through the equitable insurance coverage clause - is taking away the freedom of choice of businesses to choose not to provide insurance, or to provide a less-than-adequate basic level of health insurance. That the ACA, and many states' insurance laws already give states and the Federal government the right to fine an employer if they don't provide certain basic levels of health care insurance seems to escape those who are protesting this decision.
Just like with any law that benefits the greater public good, individuals and businesses alike already have the freedom to violate the law if they choose - so long as they're willing to pay the penalty for doing so.
The decision to roll out the equitable insurance coverage clause was not a decision the White House made lightly - and our sources say the Administration is NOT likely to change this policy in any serious way, no matter how much trouble the Catholic Church stirs up. That the administration has said in public it will try and "resolve the controversy" and "ease the ire" regarding this issue, even if they don't change the policy, isn't hypocrisy - it's politics.
In this case, it's the politics of the Obama Administration attempting to explain the new rules, while applying the "General Welfare" clause of the Constitution.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Overreaction + Underplanning = Total Failure
Just after we published on Tuesday, former U.S. Senator from Nebraska Bob Kerrey announced a decision we were fairly sure of for some time now: that he would not seek the U.S. Senate seat he once held.
Kerrey's decision was compounded by the announcement earlier Tuesday that former Lieutenant Governor Kim Robak also declined to run for the U.S. Senate seat currently occupied by her former gubernatorial partner, Ben Nelson.
Unsurprisingly, there were all kinds of ridiculous overreactions and feigned surprise, both locally and nationally. These overreactions came from both Democratic and Republican politicians and pundits, and even national media outlets. On the left, Democrats seem to be left headless in a political contest with a filing deadline just a week away. On the right, Republicans are patting themselves on the back, for absolutely no reason. This was a decision by Bob Kerry, who likely could have defeated any of the clownish candidates the Nebraska GOP looks to put up.
Frankly, we're not surprised at any of this. We also won't be surprised at the likely outcome this fall, or in the years to come. This is what allowing nearly unlimited campaign finance donations, few real campaign finance regulations, and years of no real political competition brings.
For more than a few years now, neither major political party has done much real work at building their ranks for the future. As the number of truly competitive races has shrunk in every category from Mayor and Councilperson all the way to Congress, and in every city, state, and legislative district, neither party has had much need or desire to build a decent farm team.
That need diminished even further with the Citizens United ruling. Now both sides can simply bring out of the back rooms the habits they've been publicly denying for many years now, that only those who can beg, borrow, steal, or inherit a small fortune will be able to buy their way into politics in America.
In real terms, the outlook for Nebraskans is sad and bleak for the near future. It's now fairly likely that one of the many incompetent Republican candidates vying for U.S. Senate will pander, lie, and buy their way into Federal office, That is, though, with fewer TV, radio, and newspaper commercials than they might otherwise have purchased had Bob Kerrey decided to enter the contest.
After this fall, those Nebraskans who are not right-wing political extremists will have little real representation in their Federal government. Sadly, all that will be left in Nebraska's national political delegation are politicians who do not agree with, and will not fight for, anything other than extreme conservative points of view. We honestly recommend any politically displaced Nebraskan forward any appeals for Federal assistance to Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa - though they may only be able to do so for another couple of years. By then, the cannibals may have run him out of Washington, as well.
For those who want to curse out Kerrey or Robak, we think you should stop now. Who can blame them for not wanting to get back into the fray with the political landscape the way it now is?
For those on both sides of the common political divide who are decrying the dearth of worthwhile candidates, ask yourselves: would you want to do the pandering, the begging, the glad-handing, and even maybe some groveling just to get the money required to run for office? Would you rather become an incredibly high-priced plaything for a multi-billionaire, like Newt Gingrich seems to be? Would you want to put your family, your friends, your former co-workers - virtually anyone you've ever known - through the insane magnifying glass of a major political/slime campaign today?
We certainly wouldn't.
Kerrey's decision was compounded by the announcement earlier Tuesday that former Lieutenant Governor Kim Robak also declined to run for the U.S. Senate seat currently occupied by her former gubernatorial partner, Ben Nelson.
Unsurprisingly, there were all kinds of ridiculous overreactions and feigned surprise, both locally and nationally. These overreactions came from both Democratic and Republican politicians and pundits, and even national media outlets. On the left, Democrats seem to be left headless in a political contest with a filing deadline just a week away. On the right, Republicans are patting themselves on the back, for absolutely no reason. This was a decision by Bob Kerry, who likely could have defeated any of the clownish candidates the Nebraska GOP looks to put up.
Frankly, we're not surprised at any of this. We also won't be surprised at the likely outcome this fall, or in the years to come. This is what allowing nearly unlimited campaign finance donations, few real campaign finance regulations, and years of no real political competition brings.
For more than a few years now, neither major political party has done much real work at building their ranks for the future. As the number of truly competitive races has shrunk in every category from Mayor and Councilperson all the way to Congress, and in every city, state, and legislative district, neither party has had much need or desire to build a decent farm team.
That need diminished even further with the Citizens United ruling. Now both sides can simply bring out of the back rooms the habits they've been publicly denying for many years now, that only those who can beg, borrow, steal, or inherit a small fortune will be able to buy their way into politics in America.
In real terms, the outlook for Nebraskans is sad and bleak for the near future. It's now fairly likely that one of the many incompetent Republican candidates vying for U.S. Senate will pander, lie, and buy their way into Federal office, That is, though, with fewer TV, radio, and newspaper commercials than they might otherwise have purchased had Bob Kerrey decided to enter the contest.
After this fall, those Nebraskans who are not right-wing political extremists will have little real representation in their Federal government. Sadly, all that will be left in Nebraska's national political delegation are politicians who do not agree with, and will not fight for, anything other than extreme conservative points of view. We honestly recommend any politically displaced Nebraskan forward any appeals for Federal assistance to Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa - though they may only be able to do so for another couple of years. By then, the cannibals may have run him out of Washington, as well.
For those who want to curse out Kerrey or Robak, we think you should stop now. Who can blame them for not wanting to get back into the fray with the political landscape the way it now is?
For those on both sides of the common political divide who are decrying the dearth of worthwhile candidates, ask yourselves: would you want to do the pandering, the begging, the glad-handing, and even maybe some groveling just to get the money required to run for office? Would you rather become an incredibly high-priced plaything for a multi-billionaire, like Newt Gingrich seems to be? Would you want to put your family, your friends, your former co-workers - virtually anyone you've ever known - through the insane magnifying glass of a major political/slime campaign today?
We certainly wouldn't.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)