For an HTML version of this please go to www.ThrowTheRascalsOut.org/eNewsletter77.htm
The links will not show up in the text version. If your html is off, you are missing a lot (colors, bolding, links, highlights, etc.). Under every word "HERE" there is a link to the corresponding article, but either HTML must be on or you must go to the above page to see it.

Bimonthly on election and health care reform. Unsubscribe instructions at the bottom.

Unsubscribes: My computer crashed and I reverted to an old database. If you unsubscribed, may I ask your indulgence to do it once more? Sorry.

eNewsletter #77

September 5, 2008

www.ThrowTheRascalsOut.org

Newsletter Archives

Vote your conscience, as I will when I cast mine for Jim Burkee. 30 years of Sensenbrenner is enough.

And wouldn't is be nice to, uh, have airline regulation back?

In this issue:

1) Health Care

2) Campaign Reform

3) Politicians

4) Instant Runoff Voting

5) Tidbits

6) Give me a Break!

7) Book Recommendations

8) Contact Information

9) Unsubscribe Instructions

Health Care

Forget about Canada, we can do better!

By Jack E. Lohman

Yes, Canada’s health care system has wait times, and well it should. They spend just 10% of GDP compared to our 16%. But they cover 100% of Canadians and we only cover 85% of Americans and leave another 15% under-insured.

If Canada took one of every six people out of line, as we effectively do here in the U.S., they’d not have wait times either! But they are, indeed, underserving their people. Shame on them.

But enough about Canada, let’s talk about the U.S.. We have the best doctors and nurses in the world, we just don’t make good use of them. Let’s fix the system we have.

See the complete article HERE

Curb Your Enthusiasm for Obama
By Chris Hedges

01/09/08 "TruthDig" - -- Barack Obama's health care plan coddles the corporations that profit from the misery and illnesses of tens of millions of Americans. The plan is naive, at best, and probably disingenuous when it insists that we can coax these corporations, which are listed on the stock exchange and exist to maximize profit, to transform themselves into social service agencies that will provide adequate health care for all Americans. I wish we lived in such a rosy world. I know, and I suspect Obama knows, that we do not.

"Obama offers a false hope," said Dr. John Geyman, the former chair of family medicine at the University of Washington and author of "Do Not Resuscitate: Why the Health Insurance Industry Is Dying, and How We Must Replace It." "We cannot build on or tweak the present system. Different states have tried this. The problem is the private insurance industry itself. It is not as efficient as a publicly financed system. It fragments risk pools, skimming off the healthier part of the population and leaving the rest uninsured or underinsured. Its administrative and overhead costs are five to eight times higher than public financing through Medicare. It cares more about its shareholders than its enrollees or patients. A family of four now pays about $12,000 a year just in premiums, which have gone up by 87 percent from 2000 to 2006. The insurance industry is pricing itself out of the market for an ever larger part of the population. The industry resists regulation. It is unsustainable by present trends."

See the rest of the article HERE

Cure the Health Care Crisis in Wisconsin and in the USA:

By Clyde Winter (independent candidate for state senator, district 20)

All people, of all ages, need health care to achieve, maintain, and (if necessary) restore health.

Health insurance is not health care. The problems with the current health care system (high cost, and gatekeepers that deny treatment, restrict choice, and discourage proper care) and the tragedies that result cannot be corrected with the current health insurance apparatus, which has a stranglehold on our health care.

More than a thousand different insurance policies (with different coverage, changing coverage, limited coverage, or no coverage) does not save us money. It costs us all money – and it harms our health and our economy. Health care costs in the USA are much higher than in any other industrialized country, and our health care outcomes are worse, and falling. Americans now know that the way our health care system is administered is making us play Russian roulette with our family’s health and our future. Health care should have nothing to do with where you are employed or what an employer chooses to provide. Your health care should be based on your medical condition, not on your financial condition, and not by the fine print in a policy.

Universal comprehensive single-payer health care provides better health care to all, at lower cost to all.

It’s about values - marketplace values and the value of certain investments,

versus - human values, family values, moral values, and the value of life itself.

References:

Hearts and Minds - http://clydewinter.wordpress.com/category/health-care-crisis/

Physicians for a National Health Program - www.pnhp.org

Health Care – Now - www.healthcare-now.org

Wisconsin Health Security Act - www.wisconsinhealth.org/wiplan.html

Healthy Wisconsin - www.healthywisconsin.net

The Business Coalition - www.businesscoalition.net

Campaign Reform

Court: US can block mad cow testing

The Bush administration can prohibit meat packers from testing their animals for mad cow disease, a federal appeals court said Friday.

The dispute pits the Agriculture Department, which tests about 1 percent of cows for the potentially deadly disease, against a Kansas meat packer that wants to test all its animals.

Larger meat packers opposed such testing. If Creekstone Farms Premium Beef began advertising that its cows have all been tested, other companies fear they too will have to conduct the expensive tests.

The Bush administration says the low level of testing reflects the rareness of the disease. Mad cow disease has been linked to more than 150 human deaths worldwide, mostly in Great Britain. Only three cases have been reported in the U.S., all involving cows, not humans.

A federal judge ruled last year that Creekstone must be allowed to conduct the test because the Agriculture Department can only regulate disease "treatment." Since there is no cure for mad cow disease and the test is performed on dead animals, the judge ruled, the test is not a treatment.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit overturned that ruling, saying diagnosis can be considered part of treatment.

"And we owe USDA a considerable degree of deference in its interpretation of the term," Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson wrote.

The case was sent back to the district court, where Creekstone can make other arguments.

Source: http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2008/08/29/1801712-court-us-can-block-mad-cow-testing?email=html

This is the bottom-line effects of campaign cash in the political system. This not only removed 100% of food safety provisions, it also removes the so-called free market that conservatives love. Bush likes the free market when it benefits his contributors, but he opposes it when it works against them. If the people are willing to pay the extra costs for food safety, the free market should dictate that they can!

The meat producers don't really want free market, they want a controlled market.

Is Cash Warming Doyle to Nuclear Option?
New owners of Point Beach plant made big donations to governor
shortly before Doyle shifted his position on nuclear energy

Madison - Executives of a Florida utility with large stakes in nuclear and wind power contributed nearly $24,000 to Democratic Governor Jim Doyle a little more than a month before Doyle announced he was willing to consider new nuclear plants as a future energy option, the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign has found.

See the complete WDC report HERE

Wouldn’t it be nice to know that when decisions on nuclear power are made – actually, any government decisions – that special interest money didn’t change hands in the process? Actually, I support expanding nuclear power. What I don't support is the bribery that seems ready to make it happen in Wisconsin. Doyle should be held fully accountable.

Politicians

That McCain has picked an inexperienced female as VP, simply to sway Clinton's women voters rather than because she is experienced and qualified to be president, is disappointing and an insult to women. And though I really like her and support the team, it may indeed backfire. He also cannot now complain that Obama is inexperienced (though in both cases "inexperience" may be a virtue).

See these excellent Time articles on John McCain and Barack Obama

Political conflicts of interest take another turn

By Jack E. Lohman

You’ve heard this part before, but here’s another twist to it. You are a CEO with 100 employees, and one is a purchasing agent in charge of all corporate purchases. You hired that manager to buy the most effective and cost-efficient services to benefit your company profits and shareholder wealth. That’s his job. That’s what you pay him for.

But wait. This manager also happens to have a heavy investment in a cleaning service that always seems to get the company’s contract! Something is fishy here. Your manager is paying these favored contractors more than their competitors, perhaps twice as much, all to help build his own personal wealth. That’s not good.

Now multiply that by 535 members of congress controlling billions of taxpayer dollars, and 132 members of the state legislature that control millions of dollars in state contracts. This doesn’t just give the appearance of a conflict of interest, it reeks of corruption.

Why do we allow this payola in our political system?

Picture House Speaker Nancy Pelosi with a major financial investment in T. Boone Pickens‘ alternative energy projects, all while 80% of the public is supporting offshore drilling, and we expect her to make the right decisions. But she doesn’t want offshore drilling. She wants taxpayer cash going to researching renewable energy!*
Or picture U.S. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner – with a $5 million personal investment in drug companies — voting in favor of the Medicare drug program. You know, the $780 billion giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry that additionally prohibits Medicare from negotiating for the 50% discount the VA medical system gets. Or his $5 million investment in the defense industry and his pro-war Congressional votes, and his vote for the bankers on this nation’s worst bankruptcy bill in history (which trashed millions of Americans in debt).

Is it any wonder, then, that Sensenbrenner (and most other congressmen) refused to support a House bill by Bernie Sanders (I-VT) that would require congressmen to put their personal wealth into blind trusts operated by independent financial experts (who have the same, limited knowledge of upcoming laws as the rest of the public)?

Of course our political leaders prefer retaining the ability to initiate and vote on bills that impact their investments. We all would like that. The only thing that approaches this is the ability to initiate and vote on bills that affect the investments of their campaign contributors, or to pass taxpayer-funded subsidies on to those who fund their elections.

The interesting thing about all this is, we keep re-electing these jerks.

Link: WASHINGTON - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that expanded oil drilling in federal waters could be included in a broader energy bill if advocates can prove its effectiveness as a solution to America’s energy problems. Gee, Thanks Nancy. Of course, no similar proof is needed from T. Boone.

* I happen to support renewable energy, but I’d rather see it come about without cash changing hands. I don’t like bribes, even on issues I support.

Source: http://moneyedpoliticians.wordpress.com/2008/08/26/political-conflicts-of-interest-take-another-turn/

GOP Convention Spin, September 3, 2008

Lieberman and Thompson make misleading claims about Obama on Day Two of the party in St. Paul.

Summary

Joe Lieberman and his former Senate colleague Fred Thompson both made misleading claims about Obama in their prime time GOP convention speeches on Tuesday. We've heard two of them before – many times.

Lieberman said Obama hadn't "reached across party lines" to accomplish "anything significant," though Obama has teamed with GOP Sens. Tom Coburn and Richard Lugar to pass laws enhancing government transparency and curtailing the proliferation of nuclear and conventional weapons.
Thompson repeated misleading claims about Obama's tax program, saying it would bring "one of the largest tax increases in American history." But as increases go, Obama's package is hardly a history-maker. It would raise taxes for families with incomes above $250,000. Most people would see a cut.
Lieberman also accused Obama of "voting to cut off funding for our American troops on the battlefield." But Obama's only vote against a war-funding bill came after Bush vetoed a version of the bill Obama had supported – and McCain urged the veto.

See the complete report HERE

Mitt Romney urged voters to “throw out the big government liberals and elect John McCain” in a fiery call for rejection of Democrat Barack Obama and “the party of Big Brother.”

View article...

Uh, wasn't it George Bush that grew the government by 10% since 2000?
Look, let's call a spade a spade. I plan to vote for McCain because of his reform agenda, but this crap of "reducing taxes" (for the rich) is BS. It isn't going to get past Congress. And Obama's promise to increase taxes on those over $250K and reduce taxes for those under $250K is not exactly what I'd call a "Big Brother" tax increase.
As well, okay, Michelle Obama stuck her foot in her mouth with her "proud to be American" remark. But isn't it time to write off stupid comments and move forward on the issues that matter to this country?

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/maverick_misleads.html

This is a non-partisan group. Also, when McCain says that Obama doesn’t have the executive experience that Palin has, he omits that neither does McCain!

McCain Claims about Obama Tax Policy: just plain wrong

Citizens for Tax Justice has a new release on the McCain campaigns continuing assertions that Obama's tax proposals will lead to tax increases for most American families.

Obama has said that he would not make the Bush cuts permanent for those earning more than $250,000 (a figure considerably too high, in my book). But the McCain campaign has asserted that Obama will increase taxes for ordinary Americans (simply unfounded), while of course saying that they intend to make all of the "temporary" Bush cuts permanent AND continue increasing spending on the military AND keep up the costly war spending in the Iraq occupation (which is costing us somewhere upwards of $3 trillion already, all costs considered).

See the complete article HERE

Instant Runoff Voting

Instant Runoff Voting (IRV)

Preferential voting seen as crucial voter reform

By Jack E. Lohman

Our winner-take-all electoral system contributed to the Florida fiasco in 2000 and promises to plague us many times over. We should switch to a voting system called Instant Runoff Voting, or preferential voting, as proposed by www.FairVote.org.

Australia has used the system for years, and several U.S. cities are now switching to IRV, which is also called “majority voting” because the winner must get a majority.

Each ballot contains check boxes for your first, second, third and subsequent choices. It is simple, fair and easy to administer with optical card reading systems, which have proven to be the most reliable and easily accommodate both computer counting and hand counting verification.

Suppose there are three candidates, Satan, Saint, and Angel. Most people (60%) prefer Angel or Saint over Satan, but their votes are split — 35% for Angel and 25% for Saint. Nonetheless, Satan wins with 40%, well short of a majority, and proceeds to advance the cause of evil over the period of his term. That’s the current system!

Instant runoff voting solves this “spoiler” dilemma by eliminating the person with the least votes (Saint), and holding an immediate, second computerized round in the election, dividing Saint’s votes amongst their 2nd choices so that voters elect a candidate that the majority (>51%) prefers over the loser. In this case, assuming all of Saint’s supporters would prefer Angel over Satan, Angel would win with 60% to Satan’s 40%.

This is easily done with a simple matrix ballot and immediate computerized totaling. If the voter is confused about the ballot and makes an error, it is automatically rejected and he can immediately recast his vote (you can only have one “first choice,” one “second choice” and so on).

Only one election is held, which reduces taxpayer costs as well.

Example:

Vote for Saint, but if Saint fails to get 51%, your vote is automatically applied to Angel, and Angel wins on the 2nd count.

Candidates	1st Choice	2nd Choice	3rd Choice	1st Count	2nd and Final Count
Angel		X		35%	60%
Saint	X			25%	0
Satan			X	40%	40%

Too confusing? Then vote for one person the old fashioned way. You are not obligated to mark a second choice, but those who have a second choice may mark that candidate too. See an online sample HERE.

The advantage to incumbents and challengers alike is that they only need to run one campaign, the general election. Primaries would no longer be needed. And because challengers will not want to alienate voters who may give them their “second choice” on the card, they are not as likely to sling mud and incumbents are not as likely to have their reputations trashed (deserving as that sometimes may be).

Third-party candidates:

This system gives third-party candidates a chance to demonstrate their real support, and we’d really know where Democrat and Republican support is lacking. But that’s also why the current duopoly will oppose it. They’d rather keep third-party support to its absolute minimum, and the current system forces the Green, Reform and Libertarian voters to cast their precious vote for the lesser of the two evils. (If they vote their conscience they in effect throw their vote away completely. I’ve done that too many times.)

Under the current system the two parties appear to be the most popular by the public, even though there are many independents with more popular positions. But since the R’s and D’s are calling the shots, our only chance to change the current system will require extreme public pressure (or a totally new regime in November).

Other electoral approaches that should be considered are the parliamentary system and proportional representation, but when you have congressmen who currently enjoy a 90% reelection advantage fostered by our moneyed political system, their priorities are naturally aimed more at self interest than public interest.

IRV makes total sense and will benefit the public, but perhaps nothing will change until we have a complete turnover in our elected officials. (Now, there’s a thought!)

This system is fair, and that may be its biggest downfall. The last thing in the world today’s politicians want is “fair.” They like their 90% reelection advantage just as it is, and they like the two-party see-saw to themselves and don’t want to share.

For an online demo go to http://www.DemoChoice.org

Tidbits

State weighs tearing down Hoan Bridge

Wisconsin Department of Transportation officials are studying the feasibility of tearing down the Daniel Hoan Memorial Bridge, rebuilding most of the Interstate 794 connection at street level and building smaller lift bridges over the Milwaukee and Kinnickinnic rivers to connect the Lake Parkway to downtown.

See the complete article HERE

This is the stupidest thing that our politicians could do, but campaign contributions from the road builders helps make it an easy decision. Pay 'em to put it up, pay 'em to tear it down, pay 'em again to build the replacement.

Right Wing Announces It Opposes Tax Cuts... For the Poor and Middle-Class

Some anti-tax commentators and right-wing blogs have apparently given up trying to paint Barack Obama's tax plan as a tax increase on the middle-class (since that would be untrue in any interpretation humanly possible). Instead, they have settled on a novel argument: The Obama tax plan would unacceptably raise marginal tax rates on low- and middle-income people, as argued by Alex Brill and Allen Viard of the American Enterprise Institute.

Outlandish Executive Compensation: are we subsidizing it with taxpayer dollars?

There is a new study on executive compensation sponsored by United for a Fair Economy and the Institute for Policy Studies, Executive Excess 2008: How Average Taxpayers Subsidize Runaway Pay.

The report notes that for 2007, the S&P 500 CEOs averaged $10.5 million in take-home pay--344 times the pay of the ordinary US worker. Hedge fund managers at the top 50 hedge funds, who benefit from a number of loopholes that have grown up around partnerships and interpretation of profits interests, averaged an astounding $588 million--19,000 times the pay of the average US worker.

See the balance of this blog article HERE

Executive Excess 2008

How Average Taxpayers Subsidize Runaway Pay

15th Annual CEO Compensation Survey

See this excellent report by Institute for Policy Studies and United for a Fair Economy HERE

Why Obama Shouldn't Cave on Trade

Roger Bybee | August 29, 2008

Excerpt:

"Most Americans, according to considerable polling data, don't indicate that Obama would win votes if he were to swallow the pundits' advice on trade:

Outsourcing: More than three-fourths of Americans "felt that increased outsourcing has hurt American workers," according to a 2006 Pew Research poll.
Labor standards: "The U.S. public is nearly unanimous in its support of requiring that both labor (93%) and environmental standards (91%) be included in trade agreements," according to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs/World Opinion, which released a poll on this topic in 2007.
Even the wealthy are questioning trade's benefits: A poll carried out by the University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) in 2004 found that that support for active promotion of more free trade agreements had plummeted from 57% to 28% over the previous five years among Americans earning at least $100,000, and that this decline was sharpest for the rich. No doubt the fast-growing phenomenon of outsourcing professional jobs helps to explain this shift.
Republican support weak: An AP-Yahoo poll conducted mainly this past April found that Republicans were evenly divided on the wisdom of creating new trade agreements, and that two-thirds of Americans felt that the increase in trade had hurt the U.S. economy. "John McCain is bullish on free trade. The country isn't," an Associated Press article about the poll pointed out. "

See the the complete article HERE

Money For Nothing

By Mike McCabe

Mike Ivey wrote an excellent piece this week about how Wisconsin is handing out hundreds of millions of dollars in business subsidies every year without bothering to check if they pay off. A 2005 Democracy Campaign review of over 5,100 state Commerce Department grants and subsidized loans found the same problem.

See the complete WDC article HERE

Give me a Break!

This is what Sad looks like

Husband of the year awards

Thanks to eNewsletter reader Arnold Benardette for exposing the link I sent regarding the modern prison was improperly named. See Snopes for the complete story. Why do people lie when the truth would have been as effective?

7 Online Blunders That Threaten Your Identity

There are many ways to invite identity theft, and certain online blunders can render your computer an inoperable mess. Here are the top 7 most common mistakes you don’t want to make: Go HERE (they may ask for your email address, but it is a free and excellent newsletter)

Awesome six-year-old singer

Clip 1: http://www.tagtele.com/videos/voir/7383/1/

Clip 2: http://www.tagtele.com/videos/voir/19214/1/

Book Recommendations

See other reviews on Amazon.com

8
Contact information

Lohman is a retired business owner that volunteers’ time on the issues of Election reform and Universal health care -

Contact: Jack E. Lohman
jelohman@gmail.com or jelohman@charter.net
Phone 414-477-8686 (cell)

http://MoneyedPoliticians.net
www.ThrowTheRascalsOut.org
www.WiCleanElections.org
www.BusinessCoalition.net

www.MoneyedPoliticians.com (my book: Politicians - Owned and Operated by Corporate America)

www.SmokeFreeDining.net (A searchable restaurant database)

Wisconsin State Assembly pages: http://www.legis.state.wi.us/leginfo/contact/legislatorslist.aspx?house=assembly

Wisconsin State Senator pages: http://www.legis.state.wi.us/leginfo/contact/legislatorslist.aspx?house=senate

9
Unsubscribe Instructions

To leave the list, send a blank email to jelohman@gmail.com with “Remove eNewsletter” in the subject line

To subscribe, send a blank email to jelohman@gmail.com with “Subscribe eNewsletter” in the subject line

The system is automatic and you must send from the email address you want added or removed.

If either fails please notify me directly at jelohman@gmail.com. Thanks.

Disclosure: I am a center-right Republican that (regrettably) voted for Bush twice. But the Republicans look worse here because they (are/were) in power and the party blocking reform. Next year it may be the Democrats taking center stage. Were I to have a political choice it would be for a strong third-party reform candidate in all seats. I do not like our very costly and ineffective duopoly. Jack Lohman

See Lohman's complete disclosure HERE.