It has been over a week since I posted anything and a great deal has happened. So I will try to catch up with a series of posts in the next few days. For today here are a few the big issues:
This is such a tough issue. The current polls say Americans for the most part now approve of gay marriage by a slim margin (49% to 46%). Three years ago the numbers were very different with about 63% against gay marriage. So what has changed? I think a number of things. First and foremost is all the main stream media attention on gay marriage. Hell it is hard to find a current sitcom that does not have a gay couple or relationship. Even sexual situations among gays are pretty popular on TV these days. Then there is the main stream news media coverage of gays and their rights etc. We can't barely watch a news show where something about gays is not mentioned. Finally there are the gay folks themselves. They have been protected and encouraged and now are comfortable in public and proud. Heck there is talk that we will soon hear of our first openly gay NFL player. In short what has changed - we have become desensitized about gay issues.
But lets look at the issue of marriage. There are two ways to look at this issue. First is to say we want all marriages to be the same and that whether gay or straight they are treated the same by the law. Sounds simple enough but it would then violate nearly every religious doctrine in the world, pitting folks moral beliefs against their religious ones. This is a not a good idea from my perspective.
The better solution is to address gay marriage from a purely legal perspective and call it something else. After all it is something else isn't it? The union between and man and woman is different from the union between two men or two women. Not better or worse just different so lets call it something different but give it all the same legal rights as a heterosexual marriage. This way we avoid the whole religious aspect, we give the gay folks exactly what they want and we reconcile the equality issue. if we do this churches can still marry heterosexual folks and leave "gay unions" (my temporary name for a gay marriage) to progressive preachers, judges or other state licensed officials. Under the law gay unions would have all the same rights and horrors of a normal marriage and the two camps could walk away neither winners or losers.
I understand that on a religious level this is not acceptable. Most religions do not recognize or endorse homosexuality. I doubt that the Supremes ruling, whatever it is, will change any religious beliefs. So the issue here is really purely legal. My solution addresses this. With this legal solution they won't be sheltered from loosing half their stuff when their unions fail; they will have all the tax and other penalties that go along with heterosexual marriage and they won't be deprived of the insane family laws that attack heterosexual couples raising kids. I say on this score we give them the legal rights they are asking for - trust me over time they will wish they did not do it.
I don't agree with homosexuality and I don't believe that one is born that way. I understand if a person for whatever reason is more attracted to their own sex rather than the opposite but to me that is a private sexual matter. I have no issues with people doing as they wish behind closed doors but I still believe that for kids having a mother and a father is the best environment. I have family members that are gay and I love them as much as I do my straight family. I think they should have legal rights to marry/unite but I am not sure about raising kids. (we will leave that for another Blog).
So it will be interesting to see what the Supremes do. I suspect they will send it back to the states as I think each state should decide this matter for their citizens. The only thing I will leave gay folks with is that PDA is tough for us straight folks. Not because it is wrong but just because it is not what we believe or more importantly feel. I guess that opposite argument applies as I am sure some gays hate to see heterosexual PDA too. Since heterosexuals came first and we provide procreation in the traditional sense I think we win this one.
Lastly, just because you are minority does not mean that you must flaunt your cause. Take me for example. I am Jamaican probably one of the smallest minorities in the US but you don't see me acting like a Jamaican, speaking my dialect or trying to convince others to be a Jamaican. (actually I laugh when I see these pretty little white kids growing dreadlocks and trying to act like Rastas. For the record kids that do this - you look stupid and Jamaicans all laugh at you). Actually this applies to all minorities. The way to get acceptance and to strengthen your group is to work within the system and show that you are special but not because you are a minority but because you are unique, talented and intelligent.
I think this is clearly buying votes and should be outlawed everywhere. No political party should be allowed to register folks to vote through any government program - period. I don't care whether it is a Democrat or Republican program. We are a true democracy and we don't influence votes or registration. This is the issue the Supremes should be addressing today.
So in short if the CBO is correct and we expand Medicare and Medicaid by about 30 million folks then we will straighten the ranks of the Democratic party considerably and really seal the outcome of all national elections? I am not big on anger because it accomplishes nothing really but this makes me very angry. How can the Republicans, Libertarians or any other party have a fighting chance if we allow this. I know it has been going on for years between redistricting, motor voter registration and more but this is pretty blatant and with a massive federal program we are all paying dearly for. Let's raise some hell on this one!
While the impact will vary widely by state the overall increase will be significant. This is now thrown against the promise by the President that healthcare premiums will decrease with his new landmark legislation. Premiums have already risen over $2500 per family of four since the law was enacted. Now estimates are that we will see double digit increases in 2014 -2016. The administration countered saying group insurance cost have fallen in the last year. While this is true because utilization (claims) is down but that is only because the unemployment numbers are high and disposable spending is down thanks to the recession. This downward swing is not permanent and certainly is not a factor of anything in the law. The truth is premiums are up for the many mandates in the law but overshadowed temporarily by the big drop in utilization.
The administration further argues that the SOA study did not factor in the subsidies in the new law or the payments to insurance carriers who take on higher than normal percentages of high risk folks. To me this is like saying the cost of a Ford truck went from $30,000 to $40,000 but we are offering $3000 cash back or 0% financing. The truck is still much more expensive.
The reality is that health premiums are going to rise sharply over the next 3 years. The biggest increases will be in individual premiums (as per SOA study) but they will also rise in employer group plans as well. Americans will also face new taxes, penalties and other burdens as the law takes hold in 2014. Just remember the program is $1 trillion over its original estimate and that money has to come from somewhere. We have a very tough road ahead.
Gay Marriage
Yesterday and today the Supreme Court heard oral arguments for about 80 minutes on two cases -Prop 8 from California and DOMA - the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996. Being a Cali resident (for now) I know a bit about Prop 8. The citizens passed it denouncing gay marriage then an Appellate Court over turned it. Now it is in front of the Supremes.This is such a tough issue. The current polls say Americans for the most part now approve of gay marriage by a slim margin (49% to 46%). Three years ago the numbers were very different with about 63% against gay marriage. So what has changed? I think a number of things. First and foremost is all the main stream media attention on gay marriage. Hell it is hard to find a current sitcom that does not have a gay couple or relationship. Even sexual situations among gays are pretty popular on TV these days. Then there is the main stream news media coverage of gays and their rights etc. We can't barely watch a news show where something about gays is not mentioned. Finally there are the gay folks themselves. They have been protected and encouraged and now are comfortable in public and proud. Heck there is talk that we will soon hear of our first openly gay NFL player. In short what has changed - we have become desensitized about gay issues.
But lets look at the issue of marriage. There are two ways to look at this issue. First is to say we want all marriages to be the same and that whether gay or straight they are treated the same by the law. Sounds simple enough but it would then violate nearly every religious doctrine in the world, pitting folks moral beliefs against their religious ones. This is a not a good idea from my perspective.
The better solution is to address gay marriage from a purely legal perspective and call it something else. After all it is something else isn't it? The union between and man and woman is different from the union between two men or two women. Not better or worse just different so lets call it something different but give it all the same legal rights as a heterosexual marriage. This way we avoid the whole religious aspect, we give the gay folks exactly what they want and we reconcile the equality issue. if we do this churches can still marry heterosexual folks and leave "gay unions" (my temporary name for a gay marriage) to progressive preachers, judges or other state licensed officials. Under the law gay unions would have all the same rights and horrors of a normal marriage and the two camps could walk away neither winners or losers.
I understand that on a religious level this is not acceptable. Most religions do not recognize or endorse homosexuality. I doubt that the Supremes ruling, whatever it is, will change any religious beliefs. So the issue here is really purely legal. My solution addresses this. With this legal solution they won't be sheltered from loosing half their stuff when their unions fail; they will have all the tax and other penalties that go along with heterosexual marriage and they won't be deprived of the insane family laws that attack heterosexual couples raising kids. I say on this score we give them the legal rights they are asking for - trust me over time they will wish they did not do it.
I don't agree with homosexuality and I don't believe that one is born that way. I understand if a person for whatever reason is more attracted to their own sex rather than the opposite but to me that is a private sexual matter. I have no issues with people doing as they wish behind closed doors but I still believe that for kids having a mother and a father is the best environment. I have family members that are gay and I love them as much as I do my straight family. I think they should have legal rights to marry/unite but I am not sure about raising kids. (we will leave that for another Blog).
So it will be interesting to see what the Supremes do. I suspect they will send it back to the states as I think each state should decide this matter for their citizens. The only thing I will leave gay folks with is that PDA is tough for us straight folks. Not because it is wrong but just because it is not what we believe or more importantly feel. I guess that opposite argument applies as I am sure some gays hate to see heterosexual PDA too. Since heterosexuals came first and we provide procreation in the traditional sense I think we win this one.
Lastly, just because you are minority does not mean that you must flaunt your cause. Take me for example. I am Jamaican probably one of the smallest minorities in the US but you don't see me acting like a Jamaican, speaking my dialect or trying to convince others to be a Jamaican. (actually I laugh when I see these pretty little white kids growing dreadlocks and trying to act like Rastas. For the record kids that do this - you look stupid and Jamaicans all laugh at you). Actually this applies to all minorities. The way to get acceptance and to strengthen your group is to work within the system and show that you are special but not because you are a minority but because you are unique, talented and intelligent.
Voter Registration in PPACA
Well I sort of knew this was coming but it sure stings. Today it was widely publicized that all those enrolling in the Obamacare programs will be asked to register to vote right there on the enrollment form. It is absolutely logical but sure is annoying. I would not expect the Obama administration to pass up an opportunity like this to enroll more Democrats. After all as they give you free or heavily subsidized healthcare they expect you will register as a Democrat - that is all they ask till the next election.I think this is clearly buying votes and should be outlawed everywhere. No political party should be allowed to register folks to vote through any government program - period. I don't care whether it is a Democrat or Republican program. We are a true democracy and we don't influence votes or registration. This is the issue the Supremes should be addressing today.
So in short if the CBO is correct and we expand Medicare and Medicaid by about 30 million folks then we will straighten the ranks of the Democratic party considerably and really seal the outcome of all national elections? I am not big on anger because it accomplishes nothing really but this makes me very angry. How can the Republicans, Libertarians or any other party have a fighting chance if we allow this. I know it has been going on for years between redistricting, motor voter registration and more but this is pretty blatant and with a massive federal program we are all paying dearly for. Let's raise some hell on this one!
PPACA News
So I have been preaching about the real truth behind this massive law and now some of the realities are being admitted while others are being uncovered in the main stream media. I have been saying from the start that this law will increase healthcare costs significantly. Now we see new evidence. First we hear from our own Secretary of Health and Human Services that people will have to pay more for some insurance in 2014. This was in response to a new study by the Society of Actuaries (SOA) that says premiums will jump by 32% for individual policies. This is driven by an increase in claim costs that will come from the addition of some 30 million uninsured Americans. Many of these folks and those in the High Risk Pools will use exchanges or go through the Medicaid expansion to get coverage. The net effect will a big spike in claims which account for 85-90% of premium costs.While the impact will vary widely by state the overall increase will be significant. This is now thrown against the promise by the President that healthcare premiums will decrease with his new landmark legislation. Premiums have already risen over $2500 per family of four since the law was enacted. Now estimates are that we will see double digit increases in 2014 -2016. The administration countered saying group insurance cost have fallen in the last year. While this is true because utilization (claims) is down but that is only because the unemployment numbers are high and disposable spending is down thanks to the recession. This downward swing is not permanent and certainly is not a factor of anything in the law. The truth is premiums are up for the many mandates in the law but overshadowed temporarily by the big drop in utilization.
The administration further argues that the SOA study did not factor in the subsidies in the new law or the payments to insurance carriers who take on higher than normal percentages of high risk folks. To me this is like saying the cost of a Ford truck went from $30,000 to $40,000 but we are offering $3000 cash back or 0% financing. The truck is still much more expensive.
The reality is that health premiums are going to rise sharply over the next 3 years. The biggest increases will be in individual premiums (as per SOA study) but they will also rise in employer group plans as well. Americans will also face new taxes, penalties and other burdens as the law takes hold in 2014. Just remember the program is $1 trillion over its original estimate and that money has to come from somewhere. We have a very tough road ahead.