State of the Biden

I thought President Biden's State of the Union address was going to be a rote recitation of his accomplishments and his wish list for the new Congress, and for the most part it was.  Then it became a riot - and I don't mean on like the one that took place in the Capitol two years ago this past January 6. 

Biden referred to a plan proposed by Republican Senator Rick Scott of Florida, a man Mitch McConnell despises.  The plan that seeks to have all federal legislation, including Medicare and Social Security, sunset after five years so Congress can decide whether to renew it as a way of reforming "entitlements" (they're called entitlements because we pay into it and so we're entitled to them!).  When Biden noted in his speech that only a handful of Republicans, not all of them, support Scott's plan, a gaggle of MAGAs - including the insufferable Marjorie Taylor Greene - booed and heckled the President, much to the chagrin of House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who tried unsuccessfully to silence them. 

And with that, the President showed just how vicious Republicans can be when they're confronted with the evidence of how callous and uncaring they can be . . .  when they're confronted with the truth.  He may have ended Scott's political career, a political career that should never have made it past the 2010 Florida gubernatorial election.  And he boxed the GOP into trying to find ways to cut the budget and approve a debt ceiling increase without cutting Medicare or Social Security - all while Speaker McCarthy sat silently without applauding Biden Administration initiatives that poll well with the voters.  

Well played, Mr. President, well played.

Alas, Biden's age will still be a factor in the 2024 election.  If the 2024 Republican presidential nominee is younger than even Hunter Biden (like Florida governor Ron DeSantis, who turns 45 in 2024), the President is likely to face a grueling campaign with an opponent with much more energy then either he or Hunter has.  Which is precisely why Democrats are still a little skittish about renomainting Biden.  

Well, Democrats, you might not have had to worry about having to go with Biden without any obvious Democratic presidential possibility for him to pass the torch to after you let so many Democratic rising stars flare out and burn out or you ignored up-and-coming Democrats promising new leadership (*cough cough. Martin O'Malley, *cough cough*).   Just remember, you offered up 26 presidential candidates for 2020 and Biden was the only one who had any chance of defeating Trump.  You gotta dance with he what brung ya.

One Step Forward, One Step Back

Kathy Hochul's victory in the special election for House of Representatives in New York's 26th Congressional District Tuesday could do for Democrats what Scott Brown's victory in the 2010 Massachusetts special U.S. Senate election did for Republicans - galvanize the party and reverse their electoral fortunes. Hochul was elected due to the fears of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan's plan to turn Medicare into a worthless voucher system, a plan endorsed by all but four house Republicans. Ryan (R-WI) accused Democrats of scare tactics by making his plan seem catastrophic, but for people who have been working for thirty-five years and are now just below the age threshold for qualifying for Medicare, it is scary. People between 50 and 64 start to get sick more often, they're in greater danger of getting laid off these days, and their medical insurance becomes more expensive. Maybe Ryan's plan won't affect Americans 65 or older, but the ones coming up behind them are in danger of being left behind.

PBS's David Chalian doesn't see a clear advantage for the Democrats, though. Yes, they have a better shot at taking back the House in 2012 despite GOP-friendly redistricting, but he thinks the new advantage given to the Democrats in the Medicare debate may be temporary. After all, they still have to come up with solutions to reduce the debt and fix the economy - two issues the Republicans are still very much able to exploit.

While the progressive movement gained an advantage, they lost a spokesman, at least for a week. After right-wing blonde talk radio host Laura Ingraham bashed President Obama for traveling to Europe while devastating tornadoes blew through Missouri and Oklahoma - even though the President's official trip was scheduled before anyone could have predicted the weather in those two states and he could not just drop everything and return home - Ed Schultz called her a slut on his radio show. Schultz apologized with great regret and empathy - just before starting a one-week suspension from his MSNBC show. Ingraham - no stranger to shooting the wounded - said that she was unaware that Schultz has a radio show, and that it must be an Internet show. A nasty comment, to be sure, as was her commentary about Obama, but thanks to Schultz's hot-headed, misogynistic rhetoric, she's getting away with it even as Schultz pays.

So am I going to apologize to Ingraham for calling her someone who shoots the wounded? Hell, no! Right-wingers have been saying that about liberals for decades, and so it's time to counterattack. I won't call her a slut - I'm sure her personal life is beyond reproach - but I will attack her for her attacks.

In other news, Florida governor Rick Scott has a 29 percent approval rating. Good. That's as may be, though, Florida Democrats won't likely be giving Alex Sink another shot at the office. Democrats, like Laura Ingraham, shoot the wounded - their own.

An Option to The Public Option?

The recent deal on the public health insurance option is making my head spin.

According to Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, a tentative agreement among Senate Democrats would sideline but not kill the public option supported by liberal Democrats in Congress as a way to create competition for the private insurance companies and drive down costs.

Under this agreement, people ages 55 to 64 could “buy in” to the Medicare program that is currently the only single-payer health care system available to Americans. A federal agency, the Office of Personnel Management, would negotiate with insurance companies to offer national health benefit plans that resemble plans offered to federal employees, including members of Congress. Should these private plans fail to meet "certain goals" for making affordable coverage available to all Americans, Senate Democratic aides said, then the government itself would offer a new insurance plan similar to the public option.

So the public option is itself an option now.

Many liberals, along with a majority of Americans who want and would likely use the public option, probably won't like this idea, as it only expands the scope of private insurance companies and makes it no less complicated to buy health insurance than it already is. One skeptic is Senator Russell Feingold. “I do not support proposals that would replace the public option in the bill with a purely private approach,” the Wisconsin Democrat said. “We need to have some competition for the insurance industry to keep rates down and save taxpayer dollars.”

This deal, however, is likely the bet we can expect in these United States. For the U.S. remains a country guided by the principles of private enterprise. To the politicians, lobbyists, and moneyed interests who actually run the country, anything "public" smacks as an impingement on personal freedom, be it public broadcasting, public transportation, or public medical insurance. Lost on these people are the popularity of such programs (in the case of public medical insurance, I refer to Medicare), and the recent polls supporting a public option bear that out. Some Republicans are aware of the popularity of such proposals, and do their best to quash them, lest the Democrats gain an upper hand by actually passing them. Opponents of progress are very good at this. They've talked Americans out of health care reform before, and they are likely to find a way to stop even this modest (very modest) Senate deal from advancing.

Will i support this? I suppose I'll have to. Something has to get through. But bear this in mind: The bill approved last month by the House of Representatives calls for a government-run health plan. This won't be the last we hear of it.

The American Meddling Association

The American Medical Association recently came out against any form of public medical insurance out of fear that government health mandates would adversely the private practices of their doctors, not to mention their ability to make a buck. Although the AMA represents only about a quarter of the nation's doctors, they are a powerful lobbying group, and President Obama has acknowledged their clout by taking them on in a speech to an AMA convention this coming Monday.

Interestingly, the AMA fought - and delayed - the implementation of Medicare and Medicaid in the sixties, yet despite their bigger membership and formidable clout, they failed because the public wanted those programs. A public insurance option is still in doubt with regards to today's health care proposals, and a single-payer program itself is off the table, but Obama has support from the public for reform - especially from us uninsured Americans - just as President Kennedy and President Johnson had for Medicare and Medicaid.

Obama is willing to give up some of his own ideas to make health care reform a reality today, and he's willing to meet the AMA halfway. Maybe the AMA should heed the maxim Obama has already chosen to follow: You can't get everything you want.

Unless, of course, you're Madonna, who just won the right to adopt a second child from Malawi in spite of the obvious case against her after the Malawian government tried to block her. :-O

A Birthday Supreme

Diana Ross turns 65 today, officially making her an old lady.

Work that Medicare card, girl! :-O