Group Pushes For Estate Tax Reinstatement
BOSTON, Mass. — A group is pushing for the reinstatement of the federal estate tax which the Senate failed to extended before New Year’s Day 2010.
The consequences of not having the estate tax would place a huge burden on the middle class, according to the United for a Fair Economy (UFE).
“Permanent repeal of the estate tax would increase the federal deficit by $1.3 trillion dollars over 10 years. Those taxes would likely be shifted from multi-millionaire inheritors to the middle class, at a time when middle-class families are already losing their jobs and homes,” said Brian Miller, UFE’s executive director.
“That’s outrageous,” he added.
The estate tax had been a part of the US tax system for nearly 100 years, though it has been cut five times since 2001.
Individuals had paid this tax in 2009 only on a part of their estate was worth over $3.5 million, or $7 million for a couple.
UFE noted that the majority of those who own small business and farms (less than one percent) do not pay the estate tax.
UFE is now supporting Congressional leaders to act soon to reinstate the federal tax retroactive to Jan. 1, 2010 and specifically Rep. Jim McDermott’s Sensible Estate Tax Act, HR 2023,
“[HR 2023] includes an exemption of $4 million for a married couple, with a 45 percent rate on amounts over that, and a 55 percent rate on estates worth over $10 million,” the UFE statement said.
Coal Companies Withdraw Transmission Line Plans
RICHMOND, Calif. — Two coal companies have withdrawn plans to install a transmission line through the Northeast.
Both companies conceeded that the demand for electricity in the East Coast cities was not there any time soon for construction of the Potomac Appalachian Transmission Highline.
“These developments raise questions about the ability of PATH-VA to support the Application now on file with the Commission that is based on the need for the PATH Project in 2014,” said the companies in filings to the Virginia State Corporation Commission.
Conservation groups predicted the companies’ admission and applauded their withdraw plans.
“AEP (American Electric Power) and Allegheny Energy have been crying wolf to boost profits from dirty old coal plants,” said Abigail Dillen, Earthjustice attorney. “It’s no longer possible to take these companies seriously when they say that they need to increase dependence on coal-fired power to keep the lights on.”
The proposed $1.8 billion high-voltage PATH line would have run through West Virginia, Virginia and Maryland.
Experts testified that the proposed line would have not addressed energy efficiency or air pollution concerns in this corner of America.
1976 Law Keeps Secret 17,000 Harmful Chemicals
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A law enacted in 1976 is keeping secret 17,000 possibly harmful chemicals from the public’s view, according to the Washington Post.
Per the Toxic Substances Control Act, manufacturers can ask the Environmental Protection Agency to not disclose the potentially hazardous chemical if such notification “could harm their bottom line,” the Post noted.
Thus, the public — medical professionals, state regulators, or emergency responders — have no idea which chemical is harmful to the general population.
Thus, chemical manufacturers are requesting that their new chemicals be kept secret at a rate of 95 percent a year.
At least 10 of these secret chemicals are found in children’s projects, the report said.
The EPA is just now implementing its power to shed light on these chemicals through the creation of its “Chemicals of Concern” list.
Congress is said to reform the outdated 1976 law this year.
EPA head and mother Lisa Jackson noted, “Chemical safety is an issue of utmost importance, especially for children, and this will remain a top priority for me and our agency going forward,” said Jackson, who is a mother.
President Can Detain Non-Citizens: Court
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The acting U.S. president has the authority to detain non-citizens, according to a new ruling by the Washington, D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The ruling could change depending on a review or overturn by the en banc Circuit Court or the Supreme Court, the SCOTUS blog noted.
The case that brought about the ruling involved a cook for the Taliban who claimed he never shot any soldiers.
In response to Ghaleb Nassar Al Bihani’s claim, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon wrote last year, “After all, as Napoleon himself was fond of pointing out, ‘An army marches on its stomach.”
An analysis at TalkLeft, however, questioned the extent of the ruling:
“What if you cater an affair that is being sponsored by a group that is associated with or supports the goals of one of our enemies and there are firearms at the event? Is that enough to authorize your transport halfway across the world to be held for years in indefinite detention at Gitmo? Using a lesser standard of proof than an American would receive, possibly even ‘reasonable belief’, it just might be.”
In this new ruling, the court blamed “the unconventional nature of our enemy.”
“[T]hey are neither soldiers nor mere criminals, claim no national affiliation, and adopt long-term strategies and asymmetric tactics that exploit the rules of open societies without respect or reciprocity,” the court said.
Leon denied Al Bihani’s 2005 petition for habeas corpus, forcing the Yemen citizen to remain in detention as he has since 2002.
The Bush administration first claimed the power to detain non-citizens.
Classic — Being A ‘Hard Grader’
Well, it’s official. I’m old. It’s not because I celebrated another birthday. It’s not about beginning yet another new year. And get this—it isn’t necessarily a bad thing! If I can manage to find a little wisdom coupled with years, I’ll be happy. After all, I can’t change the passage of time.
Well, it’s official. I’m old. It’s not because I celebrated another birthday. It’s not about beginning yet another new year. And get this—it isn’t necessarily a bad thing! If I can manage to find a little wisdom coupled with years, I’ll be happy. After all, I can’t change the passage of time.
So how did I come to this realization? It’s not what you think. It wasn’t the occasional ache or pain or the few extra pounds. (And I still want that facelift). Oh no, this revelation hit me last night. I’ve been working up to it for a long time, and touched on it before. Zack and I were watching one of his beloved classic movies. (That means “old.” Maybe I should be writing that I’m “classic.” It has a finer ring to it). Anyway, the character, an aged Chinese man, claimed that he no longer went out at night. He said something like this, “I’ve lived long enough to realize that if I don’t go out, I won’t be aware that I missed anything.” I’d add that, in the end, there often isn’t anything important to miss. This realization can only come with experience, age, and possibly retirement.
Not only am I mostly uninterested in nightlife now (never much enjoyed it after New York), but other than the occasional local movie, I’m not dying to swim into a sea of humanity to participate in or watch something less than stellar. It’s the law of diminishing returns. How much trouble will I go to — to experience something of questionable quality? Have I become lazy or just superbly picky? (Even pickier than I was before. Zack and I call this “being a hard grader.” We’ve both always been very hard graders). So thank goodness for books, Dish Network, and Netflix.
My father often told me, “It’s better to be lonely than bored”. And he was so right. That’s part of it. And I may not be the most social person in the world either. Some of us are, and some of us aren’t. I’m always busy, satisfied with my own company — and Zack’s. (And that of my kids when they’re around). At the end of the day, I’m quite happy to be home. The thing that trumps my “going out aversion” is good friends. Good friends can balance a multitude of sins in an otherwise boring evening.
The other tip-off to my “classic wisdom” (see, I didn’t say “age”) is this: I’m becoming even more bored with fashion magazines. When I slid from city life to country life and began my new career as a ranch hand, the transformation was set in motion. My lifestyle and clothing needs changed. But even then, I still enjoyed opening my new fashion magazine each month. So what if I wasn’t going to buy that cute little number and wear it to some Broadway opening? It was still fun to look. I still like to be fashionable and presentable. In New York, I couldn’t wait to get my hands on Vogue or W. In casual Florida, those seemed a bit too mature and serious for me. As my daughter grew into a teenager and then a college student and young woman, my tastes in fashion seemed to become more juvenile (instead of older to match my age). I was still young enough and thin enough to get away with it. I subscribed to Lucky and Style, two little luxuries in a simple life. They were fresher and more innovative (if a little too young for me). After all, I’m an artist, a creative person. I can appreciate a little whimsy. Last year, however, both began to seem particularly irrelevant and silly. Did they change or did I? (Zack says I went from Cartier to Carhart). So I ran back to Vogue, hoping to find an old friend.
Either the world of fashion has completely passed me by or I finally can’t suspend disbelief long enough to get into it. It’s always been about selling new clothing styles to the masses each season, convincing us that we must have the latest fashion. Madison Avenue’s entire raison d’etre is to shake things up. That way everyone won’t keep their old clothes until they wear out (as I often do now). And really, $300 for a piece of costume jewelry? $2,000 for a handbag? Please.
Last night was the final straw. As I looked at an issue of one of these magazines, I told Zack (who really doesn’t care, but acted politely interested for about five seconds), “These styles are ridiculous. Now it’s gotten too crazy even for me.” Zack asked what I meant. “Let me see them,” he demanded. After looking at a few pages of what seemed to be circus costumes coupled with camo and camping, he had to agree. (And then he went gratefully back to his movie). We both decided it’s better to be classic. Not old. But classic.
America’s Medical Insurance Cartel
America’s Medical Insurance Cartel is the reason that America’s healthcare cost is twice that of other industrialized countries while the overall quality is half. The cartel is bankrupting our country.
According to the World Health Organization, the U.S. ranks 15th in infant mortality and 54th overall. Since 1947, when President Harry Truman tried to implement universal healthcare, the AMA and now the Medical Insurance Cartel have selfishly battled any real competition in the medical industry. If the United States is truly a moral and religious country, cost effective and high quality healthcare should be a right for every citizen.
U.S. healthcare is a $2 trillion industry lead by for-profit companies, an exception to the global norm. Americans say that they are worried about socialized medicine yet over 50 percent of healthcare is provided or subsidized by the U.S. government. A leading cost driver is America’s medical insurance cartel.
The medical insurance cartel is not unlike the oil industry cartel, OPEC. Exemption from anti-trust laws has allowed medical insurers to slice, price, and dice the healthcare marketplace to the advantage of corporate officers and stockholders but to the disadvantage of consumers. U.S. antitrust laws were minimized in mid-1980, under influence of the University Of Chicago School Of Economics and are blamed for the U.S. loss of economic supremacy in the world, according to Revitalizing Antitrust in Its Second Century.
The concept of supply and demand does not exist in American healthcare. The greater the supply of physicians produces a greater demand on services. It is the physician that drives and produces the demand, not the consumer. This is referred to as fee-for-service medicine. The financial incentive is to be paid for all services while having control of the demand for those services. An alternative to fee-for-service is a capitation payment. This is where medical providers are paid a specific amount per patient/consumer and are rewarded if they keep the patient healthy and satisfied.
In 1929, teachers in Dallas were one of the first to organize their healthcare around a non-profit consumer benefit organization which evolved into Blue Cross and Blue Shield. But, today over 70 percent of U.S. healthcare is for-profit. The glut of inefficiently managed technology, for-profit insurance companies, and a fee-for-service financial incentive has propelled U.S. medical costs to over 16 percent of America’s GDP. With the U.S. government paying half of the medical bill, America is heading for bankruptcy.
Consumerism in U.S. healthcare is dead. The AMA, the Medical Insurance Cartel lobbyist, and their public relations have sold Americans the “Iodine Theory” that the higher the cost, the higher the quality. Advertisers have done a good job to promote this theory. If it burns your wallet, it must be high quality healthcare. Just like a selling point for the medicine Iodine: “burns to prove that it kills germs.” In reality, lower quality medicine produces higher cost. A cardiologist doing just a few heart procedures per year is much less efficient with much lower quality outcomes at a greater cost.
Money drives healthcare policy and politics. Political contributions to our legislators are the reason why America’s healthcare is a for-profit and unregulated cartel. According to OpenSecret.org, over half a billion dollars have flowed to political candidates in the past decade. Medical cartel lobbyist, insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and millionaire medical insurance and hospital executives donate hundreds of millions of dollars each year. United Health Group, Aetna, and Wellpoint (formerly Blue Cross) are the largest for-profit medical insurers. Executive salaries range from $10 million to over $40 million with bonuses doubling the number. The top recipient in the U.S. Congress of the cartel’s monies is Sen. Blanche Lincoln, Conservative Democrat from Arkansas.
In the industrialized world, there are non-socialized and market-driven approaches that are working successfully. A recent issue of the Wall Street Journal analyzed the new Dutch universal healthcare program that was implemented in 2006. In only a year, healthcare costs have gone down and quality measurements have gone up. The Dutch concept incorporates private insurer competition but mandates insurance for all. The Dutch government negotiated with drug makers to cut prices by 40 percent. The fee-for-service incentive has been eliminated.
In 2007, a Washington, D.C. based health think-tank, “Committee for Economic Development,” recommended scraping the present U.S. fee-for-service medicine — the more services, the more fees, in favor of a fixed-dollar credit for every American. Competition would drive price, satisfaction, and quality.
America’s medical insurance cartel has implemented a political smokescreen to protect their profitability. Eliminating the “Public Option” would be a financial windfall for the medical cartel. The “public option” debate should be a non-issue in that many States already successfully offer a “public option” in workers’ compensation insurance. The medical cartel offers many diversions to segment public opinion. For example, the issue of “abortion” should be taken off the table because the courts and science agree that the “Terri Schiavo Case” legally defined human life based upon a functioning brain. Another smoke screen is the issue of mandating “100-percent coverage.” This is just good medical economics to provide a level playing field and eliminate the “gaming.” Administrative costs for healthcare run by the U.S. government is two to three percent while the for-profits costs run 20-30 percent.
Current debate on implementing universal healthcare in the United States hinges on how effective the medical insurance cartel will be to overcome the consumer demand for universal quality healthcare at an affordable price. If America is truly a religious and moral country, universal high quality and affordable healthcare is simply the right thing to do.
(William Dodge has worked in the U.S. healthcare industry for 25 years. He has written for several healthcare publications. He can be reached via email at WiDodge@comcast.net.)