Here's the lastest revision with no documentation -- no "bullet overlay"-- so we can see if the platform reads well, stand-alone.
The basic idea is to define "the left" operationally.
Whenever anybody claims that any major Democratic candidate is on the left, even a "neo-populist," we can test that candidate for compliance using the 12 Point Platform.
And when people on comment threads talk about "the left," we can say: "You want the left? Here's the left!" and then copy and paste in the platform below:
The 12-Point Platform
1. A Living Wage
2. Medicare for all
3. Tax the Rich
4. Job and Income Guarantee
5. Debt Jubilee
6. Retirement Security
7. Post Office Bank
8. Enforce the Bill of Rights
9. End the Wars
10. Slow Food (Too)
11. Clean Air and Water
12. Carbon Negative Economy
Supporting the 12 Points, and necessary to pass, implement, and sustain them, are 12 Reforms. Herewith, also copy and paste-ready:
The 12 Reforms
1. Net Neutrality
2. Fairness Doctrine
3. Local Ownership of Media
4. Public Campaign Financing
5. Electoral Integrity
6. Self-Organizing Web-Based Citizen Deliberation
7. MMT Macro-economic Policies
8. Preserve and Expand the Commons
9. More Co-operatives, Fewer Corporations
10. Fiat Justitia. Ruat Caelum
11. Strategic Non-Violence
12. Points and Reforms Are Indivisible
Finally, to explain, revise, or extend the 12 Points and 12 Reforms, One value:
The One Value
1. Public Purpose.
So there you have it. Shorn of all the explanations and refinements we've been talking about, and without subheads dividing individual items into buckets, does it all look appealing? How about each individual point?
Is there anybody who can't live with this the way that it is? Read below the fold...
... or, as they are Orwellianly named, "Shared Responsibility Payments."* Bob Laszewski makes a good point:
Even if the administration gets 20%, or 25%, or 30% of the eligible group signed-up by March 31, that is nowhere near enough to create a sustainable pool. The long-time underwriting rule calls for at least 70% of an eligible group to participate in order to get enough healthy people to pay for the sick who will always show up first for coverage.
Supporters will cite the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projections saying a third of the eventual participants will sign up each of the first three years. Why would they? If Obamacare, with all of the attention and promotion it is getting, is not attractive the first year, particularly because of its steep deductibles compared to the after-subsidy premium people must pay, then why would it be attractive in the third year?
The response might be that the fines for not buying coverage will eventually more than double and force these people to finally buy coverage. Think about that. People don't want to buy this and the solution is to fine a family making $60,000 a year $1,500? If the cancelled policies are creating an election-year nightmare for the Democrats, think about how politically problematic big fines for not buying an Obamacare policy that consumers don't want would be in the 2016 presidential election year.
"Think about that." Read below the fold...
ObamaCare Clusterfuck: CORRECTION: “Keep your plan” fix to be prolonged until just before the 2016 Presidential election (!!)
A White House official said Wednesday that it would allow insurers to continue existing policies with renewals as late as Oct. 1, 2016, so individuals and small businesses could have noncompliant coverage well into 2017.
I dunno. Postponing the enforcing a law until after the mid-terms seems a little sketchy. But postponing it 'til after a Presidential election?! That seems a little over the top to me. Read below the fold...
I'll skip the build-up and the ritual (it's Senegalese) and go straight to the conclusion:
He said, “You know, we had a lot of trouble with Western mental health workers who came here immediately after the genocide, and we had to ask some of them to leave.”
I said, “What was the problem?”
And he said, “Their practice did not involve being outside in the sun, like you’re describing, which is, after all, where you begin to feel better. There was no music or drumming to get your blood flowing again when you’re depressed, and you’re low, and you need to have your blood flowing. There was no sense that everyone had taken the day off so that the entire community could come together to try to lift you up and bring you back to joy. There was no acknowledgment that the depression is something invasive and external that could actually be cast out of you again.
“Instead, they would take people one at a time into these dingy little rooms and have them sit around for an hour or so and talk about bad things that had happened to them. We had to get them to leave the country.”
That makes a lot of sense! Read below the fold...
It’s one of the most impressive statistics about the new health care law. The Obama administration says more than 8.9 million people have been, quote “determined eligible” for Medicaid from Oct. 1 through the end of January.
But a new study Monday from Avalere Health estimates the actual number of new sign-ups could be much lower, between 2.4 million and 3.5 million.
The administration’s statistic also includes many people renewing existing coverage.
ObamaCare Clusterfuck: SEIU launches another "Look! Over there! Anything Other Than Single Payer!" effort in California
SACRAMENTO - A California health care workers’ union is collecting signatures to get two measures onto the ballot that it says would lower health care costs.
United Health Care Workers West, or SEIU-UHW, wants to cap what hospitals can charge to 25 percent above the actual cost of services. SEIU-UHW says on average, hospitals charge 320 percent above the cost of care.Read below the fold...
As early as this week, according to two sources, the White House will announce a new directive allowing insurers to continue offering health plans that do not meet ObamaCare’s minimum coverage requirements. ...
Prolonging the “keep your plan” fix will avoid another wave of health policy cancellations otherwise expected this fall.
The cancellations would have created a firestorm for Democratic candidates in the last, crucial weeks before Election Day.
So my question is this: Read below the fold...
Frustrated with the sluggish speed and high cost of their Internet service providers, the residents of Wilson, N.C., decided a few years ago to take matters into their own hands – they would simply build their own connection.
The city council unanimously voted in 2006 to create a fiber-to-home network that today provides affordable high-speed Internet to homes and businesses, connects schools, and even supplies downtown Wilson with free Wi-Fi.
Incumbent companies Time Warner Cable and CenturyLink were forced to lower their prices and upgrade their service to remain competitive.
Four other communities in the state also launched municipal broadband. Such enterprises irked big-time providers enough that, after years of lobbying and a million dollars in campaign cash, North Carolina in 2011 passed a cable industry-backed law that makes it nearly impossible for any other municipality to do the same. (Time Warner Cable and CenturyLink did not return requests for comment.)
Two weeks ago, the Federal Communications Commission announced that it intends to take a close look at overruling such state laws, which restrict the ability of cities and towns to build their own broadband networks in 20 states across the country.
Good, I guess, or at least a little better. Read below the fold...
ObamaCare Clusterfuck: Facing March 31 deadline, Enroll America's Anne Filipic catapults the propaganda
If career "progressives" were worthy of my hatred, I'd hate them with the white hot intensity of a thousand suns. Fortunately for us all, they aren't. This story shows so much that's wrong with the good NPR-listening -- and very well-funded -- Lord and Lady Bountifuls who carry out Obama's policies. The press coverage is pretty soft-ball, too. Even McClatchy:
WASHINGTON — After an horrendous start and months of playing catch-up against a barrage of political attacks, Affordable Care Act supporters have hit the homestretch in their six-month effort to educate and enroll millions of Americans in health insurance.
"Supporters" implies that this "effort to educate and enroll" -- that is, close insurance sales -- is a grassroots effort. It's a well-funded effort that provides a shit ton of walking around money to Democratic operatives. Read below the fold...
We've recently seen the results of a settlement in the Ukraine, and a live debate has been proposed for Thailand. Below is a discussion of a similar proposal in Venezuela. While "to jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war," it's not clear that such events can resolve what are, in the end, crises of legitimacy. "All dreaded it, all sought to avert it…. And the war came." I'd welcome counter-examples.
Paul Jay of the Real News Network interviews Miguel Tinker-Salas, professor of History and Latin American studies at Pomona College in Claremont, California, and Alexander Main of CEPR:
Right now it reads:
II. Election Reform
4. Public Campaign Financing
5. Paper Ballots Counted in Public
6. Compulsory Voting
I'm wondering if I've got the wrong level of abstraction, here. Maybe something more like this: Read below the fold...
WaPo grabs some tidbits from the Clinton Library document dump:
1) Hillary Clinton said an individual mandate would be too risky
Clinton said in a 1993 meeting with Democratic lawmakers that an individual health insurance mandate would send "shock waves" through the American public.
That, I assume, was what the incredibly slow -- and lethal -- implementation of ObamaCare was designed to avoid. Read below the fold...
Here's the existing wording:
I. Stop the Bleeding
- A living wage
- Medicare for all
- Tax the rich
I wonder if we might toughen up compliance by adding some numbers in there. Something like: Read below the fold...