Evidence!?

Internationally famed Ersatz Doctor Xavier Becerra, Health and Human Services Secretary, is being called on by Senator Jim Risch (R, ID) to produce the evidence that supports “Dr.” Becerra’s and his HHS’ encouragement for actual doctors to perform “gender affirming care”—like hormone therapies and sex-change surgeries—on minors with gender dysphoria.

In a letter to HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, Risch and nine of his Republican colleagues from the House and Senate said “HHS has a moral responsibility to ensure its recommendations are evidence-based and not driven by a contentious ideology,” and alleged that HHS is encouraging medical providers to perform “gender affirming care.”
“We are increasingly alarmed that HHS’ advocacy has led health professionals to prescribe dangerous and experimental drugs and surgeries to troubled children—in many cases covered with taxpayer dollars,” the lawmakers wrote.
“‘Gender affirming care’ is far from proper health care given the treatments include experimental hormonal and surgical interventions on children’s bodies that cause permanent damage,” they wrote.

Apart from the medical disasters this sort of child abuse inflicts, there is the intrinsic contradiction in the meaning of “minor,” a contradiction that even Becerra must know: the idea that adolescents—and younger(!)—are capable of consenting to their own major medical and other significant life decisions when they are not capable of consenting, for instance, to having sex (see: statutory rape). Never mind the question of whether or how well an adolescent’s troubled mind can give consent, informed or other.

My prediction of Becerra’s response, should he deign make one: weasel words to the effect of “We ain’t got no evidence. We don’t need no stinking evidence.”

It Takes the State

The Progressive-Democrat Hillary Clinton’s claim concerning a village’s role in raising our children was an understatement. What the Progressive-Democrats actually mean, is that it takes the State to raise our children and that we parents have only the role the State chooses to grant us from time to time.

A [Washington State] Senate bill on the cusp of a House floor vote would allow homeless youth shelters to avoid notifying parents of runaway children if the juvenile is seeking “gender affirming treatment” or “reproductive health services.”
Senate Bill 5599 sponsored by Senator Marko Liias, D-Mukilteo, would also allow “host homes” to keep runaway children from their parents or legal guardians for the purpose of helping them access “gender affirmation” surgery or medical procedures. The bill cleared the Senate in a 27-19 vote on March 1.

Because Progressive-Democrat Government knows better than us parents how to raise our children, Progressive-Democrats in Washington’s government actively are looking to sanction child mutilation, and to conceal that abuse from the child’s parents.

[D]espite strong public testimony in opposition, the legislation is moving apace through that State’s government. Because the Progressive-Democrat Government even knows better than their employer, the citizens of Washington at large.

The arrogance is what makes that State-sanctioned child abuse possible.

Because Shut Up

The Progressive-Democratic Party majority in the Colorado House of Representatives is tired of hearing from recalcitrant Republicans demurring from having our 2nd Amendment rights curtailed.

Democrats in the Colorado House of Representatives invoked a rule to limit debate on gun control legislation over the weekend and passed three bills on the matter.
The Democratic-controlled chamber invoked Rule 14 to limit debate on Saturday. The rule allows for debate to be stopped an hour after a motion to end debate is made and after an affirmative vote of a majority of members.

A whole hour.

When we want your opinion, we’ll give it to you. This is the tyranny of the Progressive-Democratic Party.

The Purpose of Medicaid

State Medicaid programs were created for the explicit purpose of providing health insurance coverage for State citizens on the lower rungs of that State’s economic ladder. The Federal government transfers Federal funds—the tax remittances of all of us citizens regardless of the State of which we might also be citizens—to support those Medicaid programs.

In California’s case, Federal transfers in support of Medi-Cal, that State’s Medicaid program, comprise more than 69% of the program. That amounts to 71.4 billion of our tax dollars.

Now the Progressive-Democrat governor of California, Gavin Newsom, wants Medi-Cal to pay the rent for the State’s homeless.

Newsom has proposed using federal healthcare funds to cover at least six months of rent for homeless California residents and those close to losing their homes.

The foolishness is spreading; California is not the only State pulling this stunt.

California is modeling the program off of similar programs in Oregon and Arizona that have been previously approved by the federal government.

Oregon gets 76%—$8.5 billion—of its Medicaid program covered by the Feds, and Arizona gets more than 80%—$14.3 billion—of its Medicaid funding from the Feds.

Newsom argues—and he’s actually serious—that this will save money in the long run because the State (as JtN cited him)

will not have to pay as much for these people’s expenses in hospitals, nursing homes and prisons.

This is a cynical non sequitur. Nursing homes and prisons aren’t centered on medical care, for all that medical care is a small part of those…services. Those services’ costs also are already factored into their budgets. Too, hospitals aren’t residences—and their medical service costs also are already factored into their budgets, including in part from California’s existing Medi-Cal.

Maybe it’s time to stop sending the Medicaid-related tax remittances of citizens of other States to these States.

Yellen and Law

The Wall Street Journal editors wrote Thursday about Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen’s…flip-flopping…on making whole, or not, nominally uninsured depositors in the wake of SVB’s failure and the government takeover of Signature Bank. Their subheadline accurately summarized the matter.

Are all deposits insured or not? Only [Yellen] seems to know.

The editors’ lede was this:

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on Thursday walked back her comments from the day before that walked back her remarks the day before about providing a de facto guarantee on all US bank deposits.

The editors then asked the question: Who’s on first?

An especially a propos followup came just a bit later in that routine: “Q: When you pay off…who gets the money? A: Every dollar of it.”

Legally, in answer to the subheadline question is no; only deposits of $250k or less are insured. But what’s a law to a Progressive-Democrat? Only a suggestion, to be ignored at convenience.