The Left has, for quite a number of years, quietly harbored contempt for those who disagree with them, believing those on the center-right and points further to be stupid, narrow, and venal, constantly voting as those unfortunates do, against their self-interest (which is to so not voting for those things the Left deems appropriate).
This mad-as-hell view has been galvanized by reports that many Trump voters may lose their health insurance if the House version of ObamaCare repeal passes. The liberal gloaters say it serves them right.
Yesterday, the membership of the House Freedom Caucus of No forced the American Health Care Act, the first stage of a three-stage Obamacare repeal and replace program offered by the majority of the House Republican Conference, to be withdrawn from the day’s backup vote (recall that these No-ers already had forced a delay from Thursday’s vote over their demand to have their way or there could be no Act), and so there will be no AHCA.
The House Republicans were forced to cancel yesterday’s scheduled American Health Care Act vote. The Freedom Caucus, the Caucus of No, couldn’t be satisfied. Congressmen like Jim Jordan (R, OH) and Caucus of No Chairman Mark Meadows (R, NC) refused late compromises, all the while insisting by implication from their refusals that constituents of other Congressmen, for instance Tom Cole (R, OK), worked for them and not that Cole worked for his Oklahoma constituents—and that those Oklahoma constituents might have different imperatives than those Congressmen of the Caucus. So, no compromise from the No-ers.
One aspect of the plan on offer in the House is this:
…whether it includes enough reform to arrest the current death spiral in the individual insurance market.
Notably, the bill includes a new 10-year $100 billion “stability fund” that allows states to start to repair their individual insurance markets. Before ObamaCare, it wasn’t inevitable that costs would increase by 25% on average this year, or that nearly a third of US counties would become single-insurer monopolies. With better policy choices, states can make coverage cheaper and more attractive for consumers and coax insurers back into the market, and the stability fund is a powerful tool.
The irrationality of some Federal District judges is being made palpable by their rulings against the latest Executive Order involving a temporary moratorium on folks from six terrorist- and terrorism-supporting countries. Here’s one example, from US District Judge Derrick Watson in Hawaii:
The illogic of the Government’s contentions is palpable. The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed.
Yet he chose not to explain his own logic, nor did he deign explain the limiting principle he holds underlying this claim. Indeed, he explicitly refused to explain himself:
France’s soon-to-be-ex-President François Hollande is on the wrong track, and not just because of that soon-to-be part. He’s now saying
My ultimate duty is to make sure that France is not won over by such a program [French Presidential candidate Marine Le Pen and her program], and that France does not bear such a heavy responsibility[.]
His ultimate duty, he says, is to prevent Le Pen’s election.
No. Duty is to the safety and prosperity of the nation. National level political goals should not be aimed at defeating a politician, a person. Goals, to be durable after their achievement, need to be for something—policies good for the nation—not against something; that’s the fulfillment of duty.
A snowshoe racer from India whose entry into the US to compete was made possible by Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer was being held Friday in a New York jail on a sex charge.
It seems that after Indian snowshoe competitor, Tanveer Hussain, was denied a visa to come to the US to compete in the World Snowshoe Championship in upstate New York, Senators Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand (D, NY) intervened with the US embassy in India and got Hussain his entry visa.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions is being accused of having lied to the Senate during his confirmation hearing about whether he’d had any campaign-related conversations with Russian government officials during the campaign. Sessions said no, nothing related to the campaign, and then it came out that he had had a couple of conversations with the Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in Sessions’ capacity as Senator from Alabama. Must be a lie. Never mind that he answered truthfully.
Then we get Senator Claire McCaskill (D, MO) tweeting out
In light of whose DoJ it’s been doing this most recently, it’s easy to say it was nefarious. But the whole thing could be eliminated with either of a couple of steps and a change in underlying procedure.
What is “it?” It’s a secret (or merely secretive) slush fund fed by settlement proceeds from DoJ civil suits against large banks.
When big banks are sued by the government for discrimination or mortgage abuse, they can settle the cases by donating to third-party non-victims. The settlements do not specify how these third-party groups could use the windfall.