Vladimir Putin lied for years about Russia’s practice of doping Olympic athletes and covering it up. He also says that Russia did not interfere in the United States’ election process, despite large amounts of evidence showing that Russia did. Why should anyone believe what Putin says?
When the horrific alt-right rallies and violence came down in Charlottesville, there were a lot of interviews with various alt-right leaders.
They were difficult to comprehend.
As anyone who has visited my about page knows, I am white. I am also an American. But I don’t understand terms that the alt-right uses, such as “white culture.”
I know that I belong to American civic culture, but that includes people of all races, ethnicities, faiths (or not, because atheists and agnostics are included, too), philosophies, etc. Everyone who embraces the rights and responsibilities outlined in our Constitution and laws. We all join together in working for the common good.
I don’t know what “white culture” is meant to mean. When my grandparents came from Italy and my great-grandparents came from Ireland, they were not seen as part of an American “white culture.” They were seen as “other”; their children and grandchildren were able to join in the American civic culture into which they were born. That still, though, does not define a “white culture” in the United States, as we participate in that culture with a diverse group of millions.
I also heard alt-right people speaking about “white genocide.” Genocide means the killing of large numbers of people because of the group that they belong to. Rwanda had a horrible genocide between the Hutu and Tutsi, with many men, women, and children slaughtered. Sadly, there are numerous other examples of genocide, but there is certainly no mass killing of white people in the United States for being white.
I did hear one alt-right leader explain “white genocide” as whites no longer being the majority of Americans, ostensibly due to immigration and interracial relationships. To be clear, this is not genocide. Genocide is about hate and death. Children being born is about love and life. My granddaughter is not part of any “genocide”; she is a beautiful expression of love.
Okay. Time to get this published before we have another power bump or internet outage. (So no one is concerned, we are just having some system problems locally. We are far away from the Hurricane Harvey area, to which we send our thoughts and prayers as they brace for up to 40 inches (1 meter) of rain over the next several days.)
Linda’s prompt this week for Stream of Consciousness Saturday is to being with the word “When.” Join us! Find out how here: https://lindaghill.com/2017/08/25/the-friday-reminder-and-prompt-for-socs-aug-2617/
Overnight, the Senate defeated the Affordable Care Act repeal bills. It wasn’t pretty, with 49 Senators willing to take health insurance away from millions of Americans, but 51 Senators stood up for us.
Now, we need Congressmembers from across the spectrum to engage with each other to craft legislation that improves and expands the Affordable Care Act so that everyone has access to affordable, quality health care. There are already some bill drafts that do that available as a starting point.
Dear Republican Members of Congress,
During the Independence Day recess, please reflect on the the Preamble to the Constitution.
How well do you think you are carrying out the tasks that “We the People” have set before you?
You are in Congress to represent all of us, from my newborn granddaughter to the 108-year-old neighbor of my parents.
You do not just represent other Republicans.
Or people who voted for you.
Or your party apparatus.
Or your political donors.
“…in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity…”
Other than the common defense, these goals are mired in either inaction or regression.
Exhibit A is your attempt to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act which would increase the number of uninsured, decrease coverage, raise premiums and deductibles dramatically for older adults, force small rural hospitals and hospitals and nursing homes that treat large numbers of lower income folks into bankruptcy, and squeeze spending on Medicaid which pays for health care for those living in poverty, people with disabling conditions, and long-term care for the elderly and ill.
It does not “promote the general Welfare.”
It is opposed by a large majority of “We the People of the United States” whom you are supposed to be representing.
Even worse, you are trying to pass it under budgetary rules, making spending cuts that will hurt millions of Americans in order to give a large tax break to the wealthiest taxpayers. And, by the way, precluding the possibility of a filibuster in the Senate.
You have also used a totally anomalous process to create this legislation, forgoing the usual months of committee hearings, expert testimony, public discussion, revision, and amendments. And you seem to have forgotten that the Affordable Care Act followed that regular order process and that the final bill included Republican amendments and met the threshold of sixty votes in the Senate.
Your excuse that you have to adjust to being a governing majority party is disturbing. You have been in the majority in Congress for years, but instead of crafting legislation that would serve the American people, pass in both the House and Senate, and be signed by the President, you chose partisanship over actual governing, eschewing the tradition of other Congresses where the majority party was not the party of the president.
You have proved in the last few months that you can’t even govern with a president from your own party, albeit a president, who, as a candidate, campaigned against much of the Congressional Washington agenda, and who, as president, sends mixed signals of his priorities and opinions.
We the People deserve better.
During your Independence Day recess, I call on you to reflect on your duty to the American people and return to Washington ready to serve all the people in a way that really does “promote the general Welfare.”
July 4, 2017
While we have been dealing with our own family health issues, I have also been keeping my eye on the sorry spectacle unfolding in Congress.
Last week, the Senate Republicans made public their version of a health care bill to replace the Affordable Care Act. It was drafted by a small group of the most conservative male red-state Republican Senators, without hearings, public debate, the input of health care experts, and contributions of the other 87 Senators, who are Democrats, Republicans, and Independents.
The bill would cut Medicaid over time, raise deductibles, decrease the comprehensive nature of insurance, increase premiums, make insurance unaffordable for millions of people, and give massive tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans. It faces major opposition from doctors, nurses, hospitals, insurers, public health organizations and advocates, and the general public.
Still, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell plans a vote on the bill this week. It seems that the main reason is to have the first major piece of legislation enacted in the new administration, not to actually improve medical care access or affordability for the American people.
One of the things that has been most annoying is the Republican members of Congress and some pundits and reporters who equate the current process on this healthcare bill to the process that produced the Affordable Care Act. The Affordable Care Act was passed after almost a year of public discussion, numerous Congressional committee hearings, expert testimony, amendments from both Democrats and Republicans, Congressional debate, floor votes, the creation of a bill to reconcile differences between the House and Senate versions, and a final round of voting with met the 60 vote total in the Senate to avoid filibuster.
Contrast this with the current Republican bill, which was written behind closed doors by a small group of Republicans. There are no hearings, plans for only limited debate, and the invocation of budget bill rules which make it impossible to filibuster.
There are two Republican Senators who are opposing the bill because it will hurt their constituents and other Americans. Four other Senators oppose it as not conservative enough. After the Congressional Budget Office analysis came out yesterday, with projections of 22 million people losing coverage and costs skyrocketing especially for those with low incomes and those who are in their late fifties to mid-sixties. there is hope that Senator McConnell will pull the bill or, at least, slow down the process to allow for more debate and revision and to put the bill under regular order instead of trying to reform healthcare through the budget process.
Many of us are inundating our Senators with pleas to protect and improve our healthcare. We’ll see if they listen.
Whether you live in a city or a town or more rural area, weather always seems to be a topic of conversation.
For example, at my recent college reunion (which – shameless plug – you can read about here and here and here), we talked a lot about rain. Our commencement thirty-five years ago had had to be moved indoors due to rain, which limited attendance to only two people per graduate and caused all manner of disruption. (This was before the construction of the spacious indoor track and tennis facility that would now be used if weather forced a move indoors.) We have also had some remarkably rainy reunions. This year, we had lots of rain on Thursday and Friday, but Saturday was lovely for our parade, outdoor meeting, and evening illumination of campus.
Some people still confuse weather and climate, though, which is very frustrating. Yesterday, I posted about the US and the Paris climate agreement. I have written a lot about climate over the years, which grew out of being a New York fracktivist. I and millions of other US climate activists will continue to do our part in accomplishing our country’s climate commitments and supporting other countries as they implement their own goals.
We need to protect our planet and people from the worst ravages of climate change and from one of its components, an increase in severe weather.
Linda’s prompt for Stream of Consciousness Saturday this week is “whether/weather.” Join us! Find out how here: https://lindaghill.com/2017/06/02/the-friday-reminder-and-prompt-for-socs-june-317/
I did not want to have to write this post.
I listened with dismay to DT’s Rose Garden address yesterday, astonished at the level of misunderstanding of climate science, domestic and international economics, and the Paris climate agreement in evidence.
While the president made it seem that the United States is immediately leaving the Paris accord, that is not the case. There is a three year period starting in November, 2016 during which no signatory may exit the agreement. The one-year period in which the separation would occur can’t start until then, so the earliest date that the United States could officially leave would be Nov. 4, 2020, the day after our next presidential election. A lot can happen in three and a half years and my hope is that the United States will never officially withdraw from the Paris agreement.
Even without the federal government’s leadership, many of the states, cities, companies, and individuals in the US will be continuing reductions in carbon emissions and promotion of renewable energy and energy efficiency. Over sixty mayors of large cities declared their intention to follow the climate agreement. The governors of New York, California, and Washington have started an initiative for states to continue working on their clean energy goals. Many companies, large and small, are committed to renewable energy sources for their operations. Many families, like mine, are weatherizing their homes, using energy efficient appliances and lighting, buying solar panels, and driving hybrid or all-electric vehicles like our Chevy Bolt.
The majority of the people of the United States believe in the Paris accord and will continue to work alongside the nations of the world to combat climate change. I hope we will soon return to official federal-level participation. It would not be the first time that the administration has had to backpedal after an unwise decision.