|
Bleeding Heartland
It's what plants crave.
|
Kathleen Sebelius
|
|
Tue Mar 12, 2013 at 11:10:00 AM CDT
|
|
Expanding Medicaid in Iowa would add nearly $2.2 billion to the state's economy, create an estimated 2,362 jobs, and save state government about $1.6 billion, according to a new study. For now, Governor Terry Branstad is sticking to his alternative plan for covering some low-income Iowans, but Senator Tom Harkin predicted last week that federal officials will not approve a waiver for Branstad's approach.
Follow me after the jump for details on those stories and more about Medicaid in Iowa. I've also enclosed a moving personal statement State Senator Mary Jo Wilhelm delivered today about Iowans who can't afford health insurance.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 3420 words in story)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mon Dec 17, 2012 at 09:58:10 AM CST
|
|
Last week Iowa Governor Terry Branstad confirmed that Iowa will pursue a "partnership" health insurance exchange next year, rather than setting up its own insurance exchange for implementing the 2010 health care reform law, or letting the federal government set up an exchange for Iowa.
In addition, the governor again signaled that he is against the now-optional Medicaid expansion for states, because he believes it would become too expensive for Iowa in the future.
Links and recent news about health care reform in Iowa are after the jump.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 3913 words in story)
|
|
Mon Sep 17, 2012 at 19:45:00 PM CDT
|
|
U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, a former governor of Kansas, made clear last week that the Obama administration will work with governors who are reluctant to expand Medicaid eligibility in their states.
|
|
There's More...
:: (3
Comments, 804 words in story)
|
|
Tue Mar 30, 2010 at 10:00:41 AM CDT
|
|
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius wrote to the head of the insurance industry's lobbying arm yesterday warning against efforts to continue to deny coverage to children with pre-existing conditions. Excerpt from the letter, which you can download as a pdf file at Greg Sargent's blog:
Health insurance reform is designed to prevent any child from being denied coverage because he or she has a pre-existing condition. Leaders in Congress have reaffirmed this in recent days in the attached statement. To ensure that there is no ambiguity on this point, I am preparing to issue regulations in the weeks ahead ensuring that the term "pre-existing condition exclusion" applies to both a child's access to a plan and to his or her benefits once he or she is in the plan. These regulations will further confirm that beginning in September, 2010:
*Children with pre-existing conditions may not be denied access to their parents' health insurance plan;
*Insurance companies will no longer be allowed to insure a child, but exclude treatments for that child's pre-existing condition.
I urge you to share this information with your members and to help ensure that they cease any attempt to deny coverage to some of the youngest and most vulnerable Americans.
A spokesperson for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sent Sargent the following statement:
The intent of Congress to end discrimination against children was crystal clear, and as the House chairs said last week, the fact that insurance companies would even try to deny children coverage exemplifies why the health reform legislation was so vital. Secretary Sebelius isn't going to let insurance companies discriminate against children, and no one in the industry should think otherwise.
Let's hope this works. I wouldn't be surprised to see insurance companies challenge the new regulations in court. They must have been counting on that loophole to save them money during the next few years.
UPDATE: David Dayen is probably right about the insurance companies' motives here:
You can pretty much figure out AHIP's game here. With no restrictions on cost until 2014, the industry can raise their premium prices almost at will. Even the bad publicity suffered from that 39% rate hike of Anthem Blue Cross [of California] plan has not stopped that scheduled increase from taking effect in May. And when outrage is expressed by families facing double-digit rate hikes, AHIP will clear their throats and blame the pre-existing condition exclusion for children, forcing the poor insurance companies to take on a sicker risk pool and raise prices to survive.
Except covering kids is fairly cheap to begin with. And the universe of kids with a pre-existing condition who aren't covered through SCHIP, Medicaid, or an employer plan is extremely small. So by making a big issue of this, AHIP potentially sets up large rate hikes in the 2010-2014 period that aren't at all justified.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Thu Jan 07, 2010 at 14:56:38 PM CST
|
|
Following up on the diary I posted this morning, this post compiles links to Bleeding Heartland's coverage of national politics from July through December 2009. Health care reform was again the number one topic. I wish there had been a happy ending.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 3389 words in story)
|
|
Thu Jan 07, 2010 at 07:52:32 AM CST
|
|
It took me a week longer than I anticipated, but I finally finished compiling links to Bleeding Heartland's coverage from last year. This post and part 2, coming later today, include stories on national politics, mostly relating to Congress and Barack Obama's administration. Diaries reviewing Iowa politics in 2009 will come soon.
One thing struck me while compiling this post: on all of the House bills I covered here during 2009, Democrats Leonard Boswell, Bruce Braley and Dave Loebsack voted the same way. That was a big change from 2007 and 2008, when Blue Dog Boswell voted with Republicans and against the majority of the Democratic caucus on many key bills.
No federal policy issue inspired more posts last year than health care reform. Rereading my earlier, guardedly hopeful pieces was depressing in light of the mess the health care reform bill has become. I was never optimistic about getting a strong public health insurance option through Congress, but I thought we had a chance to pass a very good bill. If I had anticipated the magnitude of the Democratic sellout on so many aspects of reform in addition to the public option, I wouldn't have spent so many hours writing about this issue. I can't say I wasn't warned (and warned), though.
Links to stories from January through June 2009 are after the jump. Any thoughts about last year's political events are welcome in this thread.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 3702 words in story)
|
|
Sun Aug 16, 2009 at 18:00:00 PM CDT
|
|
UPDATE: Some White House officials told Marc Ambinder that Sebelius misspoke, or the media misinterpreted her remarks. I would prefer a clear statement from the president.
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius waved the white flag on Sunday:
Sebelius said the White House would be open to co-ops instead of a government-run public option, a sign Democrats want a compromise so they can declare a victory on the must-win showdown.
"I think there will be a competitor to private insurers," she said. "That's really the essential part, is you don't turn over the whole new marketplace to private insurance companies and trust them to do the right thing. We need some choices, we need some competition."
Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., said co-ops might be a politically acceptable alternative as "a step away from the government takeover of the health care system" that the GOP has assailed.
(continues after the jump)
|
|
There's More...
:: (2
Comments, 282 words in story)
|
|
Sat Jun 27, 2009 at 17:20:42 PM CDT
|
|
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius issued reports on Friday detailing the problems with the "health care status quo" across the country. You can find the reports at HealthReform.gov. The report for Iowa is here, and I've also posted it after the jump. Among other things, it shows the percent increase in family health insurance premiums since 2000 and the percentage of uninsured Iowans.
A couple of points jumped out at me:
• Choice of health insurance is limited in Iowa. Wellmark BC and BS alone constitutes 71 percent of the health insurance market share in Iowa, with the top two insurance providers accounting for 80 percent.11
Iowa is not unusual in this regard. Most insurance markets in the United States are dominated by one or two companies. My family's Wellmark premiums went up 10 percent this year alone. Speaking of which, the annual salary of Wellmark's CEO has "nearly doubled" in the past five years to about $2.5 million.
• Choice is even more limited for people with pre-existing conditions. In Iowa, premiums can vary, within limits, based on demographic factors and health status, and coverage can exclude pre-existing conditions or even be denied completely.
I know a family in Des Moines who were unable to purchase health insurance at any price because the mother has a thyroid condition. They are now covered through the father's employer, but if he loses his job they will have no health insurance options.
Two more reasons why we cannot settle for health care reform without a public option, or with a fake public option. I was glad to see several House Democratic caucuses affirm that they will fight any health care bill lacking "a real and robust public option that lives up to our criteria".
Click "there's more" to read the whole report, with supporting footnotes.
|
|
There's More...
:: (4
Comments, 908 words in story)
|
|
Thu Jun 18, 2009 at 19:31:37 PM CDT
|
|
The White House and key Democratic senators, including Iowa's Tom Harkin, appear to be walking into a trap for the sake of bipartisan agreement on health care in the Senate.
There is growing support for a fake "public option," as opposed to a government health insurance plan that would compete directly with private insurance companies.
If Congress passes this kind of deal and President Barack Obama signs it, we will get a enormously expensive non-solution to an enormous problem, and Democrats will pay the political price.
After the jump I'll explain why political hacks as well as policy wonks should refuse the latest efforts to derail the public option.
|
|
There's More...
:: (3
Comments, 1356 words in story)
|
|
Thu Jun 18, 2009 at 08:05:37 AM CDT
|
Iowa State Senator Jack Hatch was in Washington yesterday to chair the first meeting of a working group on health care. According to a White House press release,
State Legislators for Health Reform includes leaders from across the country who will educate their communities on the need for health reform this year. The legislators will host public events, author opinion pieces in local publications, and use their established networks to organize constituents in support of health reform.
The Iowa Senate Democrats issued a statement from Hatch, who said the state legislators told Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius that "state-level health care reforms can only go so far." He added that Sebelius
"stressed the need to expand choices in the health insurance market is essential. Increased competition will lower costs and improve patient care.
"That's why we all agreed that Americans must have a public health insurance option and now is the time to speak up."
A public option that makes health insurance more accessible and affordable for adults is also likely to improve the health of children. Kevin Concannon of the Iowa Department of Human Services explained why in his contribution to the Reforming States Group's May 2009 Healthy States/Healthy Nation report:
Ultimately, to achieve better health care access and better health status for children, the United States needs to cover parents as an essential, linked strategy for children. If parents have health insurance, they will better utilize the health care systems available to their children.
If you believe that real health care reform requires a public option for health insurance, you have two new and easy ways to do something about it. Neither will take more than a minute or two of your time.
Details are after the jump.
|
|
There's More...
:: (4
Comments, 809 words in story)
|
|
Sun May 31, 2009 at 14:42:59 PM CDT
|
|
An assailant shot and killed Dr. George Tiller at a church in Wichita, Kansas this morning. Tiller has long been demonized by the anti-choice movement because he performs late-term abortions. He was shot in 1993 and has faced numerous threats, and his clinic has been bombed and vandalized. The Wichita Eagle has background here and is updating the story. (Note: police arrested a 51-year-old male suspect about three hours after the shooting.)
Daily Kos user wiscmass discusses other violent attacks against abortion providers here. As wiscmass notes, every murder or assault is a deterrent to medical professionals considering whether to provide abortion services. By intimidating doctors, anti-choice activists can restrict access to abortion where legal and political methods have failed. I would add that even non-violent methods of intimidation can be effective. For instance, the Sioux City medical community has made clear hospital privileges will be denied to any local doctor who performs abortions at Planned Parenthood of Greater Iowa's clinic there.
Tiller was not only serving women in Kansas. Many states, including Iowa, lack any clinic where women with a compelling medical reason can get a late-term abortion. (Contrary to propaganda you may have heard, healthy women with healthy pregnancies can't just walk into Tiller's clinic and get an abortion in the third trimester.) I have no idea where these women will go now.
Incidentally, Tiller's donations to Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius and her political action committee prompted 31 Senate Republicans to vote against confirming Sebelius as Health and Human Services secretary in April.
Cecile Richards, leader of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, told a story about Sebelius during a recent speech at Planned Parenthood of Greater Iowa's 75th anniversary celebration. Richards recalled a noisy group of protesters with graphic signs outside a Planned Parenthood event in Kansas. Everyone who attended the event, including then-Governor Sebelius, had to walk through the group of protesters. During her speech that night, Sebelius said she was glad everyone had to face those protesters, because it gave them a sense of what women in Kansas go through every day just trying to access reproductive health care.
Unfortunately, Tiller's murder reminds us that standing up for reproductive rights in this country sometimes means putting your life in danger. I echo wiscmass in urging pro-choice Americans to support the organizations that are on the front lines in this battle.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Tue Apr 28, 2009 at 19:20:40 PM CDT
|
|
President Barack Obama's cabinet is complete just in time for his 100th day in office, now that the Senate has confirmed Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius for Health and Human Services secretary by a vote of 65 to 31. Senator Chuck Grassley joined most of his Republican colleagues in voting no, citing her ties to George Tiller, a Kansas doctor who performs late-term abortions.
When Obama picked Sebelius I didn't expect her confirmation to become controversial, since she is a popular Democratic governor in a conservative state. (Both of the Republican senators representing Kansas voted to confirm Sebelius.) However, anti-abortion groups have been fighting the nomination because when asked how much money Dr. Tiller had donated to her, Sebelius initially reported only his contributions to her campaign funds and not his contributions to her political action committee.
For a time Republicans threatened to filibuster Sebelius's nomination, but they never appeared to have the votes to support a filibuster. Grassley indicated last week that although he opposed Sebelius, he would not have backed a filibuster of her nomination.
Republicans did manage to hold up her confirmation vote for a while. The silver lining behind that obstructionist cloud was that Sebelius remained governor long enough to veto a bill that would have paved the way for two huge coal-burning power plants in Kansas.
Sebelius's 31 no votes in the Senate make her the second most-controversial Obama cabinet member. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was opposed by 34 senators, including both Grassley and Tom Harkin.
Earlier this year it seemed that Republican opposition would be strongest to Obama's choice for attorney general, but Eric Holder drew only 21 no votes in the Senate. Grassley voted to confirm Holder despite some doubts, saying he was influenced by his (then Republican) colleague Arlen Specter.
Grassley also voted for the fourth most controversial Obama nominee, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis. Seventeen Republican senators voted against her confirmation.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Thu Apr 23, 2009 at 22:13:30 PM CDT
|
(Typical Republican hypocrisy on filibusters. - promoted by desmoinesdem)
March 14, 2005 - The New Yorker publishes an article, NUKE ‘EM in which Senator Chuck Grassley is quoted, discussing the purpose of the filibuster:
“Filibusters are designed so that the minority can bring about compromise on legislation,” Senator Charles Grassley, an Iowa Republican, told Toobin. “But you can’t compromise a Presidential nomination. It’s yes or no. So filibusters on nominations are an abuse of our function under the Constitution to advise and consent.”
My husband called Grassley's office today - he read this quote to the aide and asked, "Does Senator Grassley stand by this statement?"
|
|
There's More...
:: (8
Comments, 591 words in story)
|
|
|
|
Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 18:09:47 PM CST
|
|
Senate Republicans finally gave up on obstructing Hilda Solis' nomination as Secretary of Labor today, and the Senate easily confirmed her by an 80 to 17 vote. Chuck Grassley was among the 24 Republicans who voted to confirm Solis. Tom Harkin did not vote but clearly would have voted yes, along with all the other Democrats, had he been in the chamber.
Solis' confirmation was tied up for weeks in committee after Senator Mike Enzi of Wyoming put an anonymous hold on her nomination. Today even he voted yes, indicating that he had no solid grounds for blocking her from serving in the cabinet. I suspect Enzi was just trying to see whether he could trick Barack Obama into withdrawing her nomination as a gesture to Republicans.
Solis's staunch longtime support for organized labor will make her a target for the right-wing noise machine, but who cares?
For more on why Solis is one of Obama's best appointments so far, read this piece by Meteor Blades and this one by Paul Rosenberg, who notes,
People just loved talking about what a great political leader Hilda Solis is. I didn't have nearly enough room to include all the good stuff that was said.
Calitics takes a first stab at handicapping the special election in California's 32nd district, which Solis is vacating. It's a safe Democratic seat but will have a competitive primary.
Obama has two cabinet positions left to fill. Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius appears to be the leading candidate for Health and Human Services now, and former Washington Governor Gary Locke is reportedly Obama's pick for Commerce.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Tue Dec 09, 2008 at 10:17:41 AM CST
|
|
The big news of the day is that the FBI arrested Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich on federal corruption charges. Apparently he has been under investigation for some time, and he was caught on tape talking about trying to get something of value in exchange for appointing someone to fill Barack Obama's Senate seat. Click the link for more details.
If the allegations are true, Blagojevich needs not just to resign, but to go to jail. Also, way to hand the Republicans another great talking point against "corrupt" Illinois Democrats and the Chicago machine. That is sure to be used against Obama and whoever succeeds him in the Senate.
The possibility that New York Governor David Paterson will appoint Caroline Kennedy to replace Hillary Clinton in the Senate has divided the blogosphere, with more and more heavyweights speaking out against the move. Jane Hamsher of FireDogLake explains why this would be a "truly terrible idea":
Her leadership could have been really helpful when the rest of us were trying to keep the progressive lights on and getting the stuffing beaten out of us by a very well-financed right wing for the past eight years. But when things were tough, she was nowhere to be found.
Now that the Democrats are in power, she'd like to come in at the top. We have absolutely no idea if she's qualified, or whether she can take the heat of being a Kennedy in public life. She's certainly shown no appetite for it in the past. She'll have a target on her back and if she can't take it, if she crumbles, she will become a rallying point that the right will easily organize around.
The woman has never run for office in her life. We have no idea how she'd fare on the campaign trail, or how well she could stand up to the electoral process. She simply picks up the phone and lets it be known that she just might be up for having one of the highest offices in the land handed to her because -- well, because why? Because her uncle once held the seat? Because she's a Kennedy? Because she took part as a child in the public's romantic dreams of Camelot? I'm not quite sure.
And the guy with the biggest megaphone, Markos, piles on:
I hate political dynasties. Hate them. But Jane is right, in this case, the idea is particularly egregious -- Caroline has done nothing to help beat back the right-wing machine. But now, she's supposed to be handed by fiat what others fight their whole lives to attain?
I would like to see Paterson appoint one of New York's 26 Democratic members of Congress. It would benefit the state to have someone with legislative experience replace Hillary. Daily Kos diarist Laura Stein made a strong case for Representative Carolyn Maloney.
Moving on to the cabinet, on Sunday Obama named retired General Eric Shinseki to run the Department of Veterans Affairs. Everyone seems to think this is a great idea. From the Boston Globe:
In the Bush administration, General Eric K. Shinseki committed the crime of truth-telling: He told the Senate in early 2003 that maintaining order in Iraq would take far more US troops than Donald Rumsfeld planned for. It cost him his job as Army chief of staff. That same virtue, honesty, should stand him in good stead now that President-elect Barack Obama has nominated him to be secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs.
The choice is a stinging rebuke not just of Rumsfeld and President Bush for failing to take Shinseki's advice on the Iraq war, but also of the administration's weak effort to solve the medical, educational, emotional, and employment problems that veterans are having in returning to civilian life. Just as the Bush administration thought it could oust Saddam Hussein and create a peaceful, democratic Iraq with a bare-bones force, it has tried to skimp on veterans services.
Daily Kos user Homer J wrote this interesting reflection on an afternoon he spent with Shinseki.
Al Gore is going to Chicago today to meet with Obama, leading to speculation that he may be asked to head the Environmental Protection Agency or the Department of Energy. I think it's more likely Obama is seeking Gore's input on other possible choice. I'd be surprised if Gore would consider a cabinet position now. Some people have suggested Obama might create an environment/climate "czar" position, which could go to someone with stature like Gore.
Interior is emerging as a major battleground, with more than 130 environmental groups signing a letter backing Congressman Raul Grijalva of Arizona for the position, even though he is rumored to have fallen off Obama's short list.
Meanwhile, environmentalists are upset that Blue Dog Congressman Mike Thompson of California appears to be the leading candidate for Scretary of the Interior. The environmental blog Grist has some highlights of Thompson's voting record:
In 2003, he voted for Bush's controversial Healthy Forests Restoration Act, which enviros saw as a massive gift to the timber industry.
In 2004, he voted against an amendment to an Interior appropriations bill intended to protect wildlife and old growth trees in Alaska's Tongass National Forest by stopping taxpayer-subsidized logging road construction. The measure passed by a vote of 222-205, and he was the only California Democrat to vote against it. He also opposed an amendment to ban the act of bear-baiting in national forests and Bureau of Land Management lands.
He was also one of only 30 Democrats in 2006 to vote against an amendment to the Forest Emergency Recovery and Research Act that would maintain areas of the national forests protected under the Roadless Rule. He also voted against another amendment that would have required the Forest Service to comply with environmental protection, endangered species, and historic preservation laws when conducting "salvage logging" operations in national forests. The amendment failed.
Anyone who supported Bush's policies on "healthy forests" and road-building is by definition not "change we can believe in." I sincerely hope Obama will do better than this. Another top-tier candidate for Interior is said to be Kevin Gover, who would be the first Native-American cabinet secretary if appointed.
Here's a list of people rumored to be in the running for secretary of education.
Over the weekend, Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius took herself out of the running for any cabinet position, saying she needs to finish her term and deal with budget and economic challenges in Kansas. She had been mentioned for several possible cabinet positions. Some believe she withdrew her name to save face, having gotten the word that she was being passed over. It seems just as likely to me that she has decided to run for Senate in 2010. Scout Finch has more on that possibility.
UPDATE: Maine Senator Olympia Snowe wants Obama to elevate the head of the Small Business Administration to a cabinet-level position. I fully agree with Jonathan Singer that the best move for Obama here would be to elevate the SBA and appoint Snowe to head that cabinet department. She's a moderate Republican, and it would free up a Senate seat in a blue state.
|
|
Discuss
:: (2
Comments)
|
|
Fri Dec 05, 2008 at 00:08:07 AM CST
|
Prominent advocates of sustainable agriculture, local foods, and more environmentally-friendly farming have sent an open letter to Barack Obama urging him to appoint a "sustainable choice for the next U.S. Secretary of Agriculture." Omnivore's Dilemma author Michael Pollan and poet Wendell Berry were among the 88 people who signed the letter. They suggested six good choices to head the USDA, including two Iowans:
1. Gus Schumacher, former Under Secretary of Agriculture for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services and former Massachusetts Commissioner of Agriculture.
2. Chuck Hassebrook, executive director, Center for Rural Affairs, Lyons, Neb.
3. Sarah Vogel, former Commissioner of Agriculture for North Dakota, lawyer, Bismarck, N.D.
4. Fred Kirschenmann, organic farmer, distinguished fellow at the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture in Ames, Iowa, and president of the Stone Barns Center for Food and Agriculture, Pocantico Hills, NY.
5. Mark Ritchie, Minnesota Secretary of State, former policy analyst in Minnesota's Department of Agriculture under Governor Rudy Perpich, co-founder of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy.
6. Neil Hamilton, Dwight D. Opperman Chair of Law and director of the Agricultural Law Center, Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa.
Incidentally, Hamilton published an op-ed column in the Des Moines Register on Monday urging Obama to establish a "New Farmer Corps."
Anyway, the people who signed the open letter are likely to be disappointed by Obama's decision, because the reported short list for the post doesn't include any advocate of sustainable agriculture. OrangeClouds115/Jill Richardson argues here that Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius would be the least-bad option among the people Obama is considering to run the USDA. Pennsylvania Secretary of Agriculture Dennis Wolff would be a particularly bad choice.
On a related note, Ed Fallon wrote Obama a letter applying for the job of "White House Farmer." Michael Pollan advocated the creation of this position in an article for the New York Times Sunday Magazine on October 12. Obama read Pollan's piece (he even paraphrased points from it in an interview with Time magazine), but it is not known whether the president-elect supports setting aside a few acres of the White House lawn to be cultivated organically by a White House Farmer.
Fallon campaigned for John Edwards before the Iowa caucuses but endorsed Obama immediately after Edwards dropped out of the presidential race. His letter to Obama is after the jump.
|
|
There's More...
:: (0
Comments, 498 words in story)
|
|
|
|
|
|