Daily Archives: October 8, 2008

Grenafege is in the game to win it!

Middletown Democratic Candidate for Township Committee, Jim Grenafege, spoke at a press conference at Middletown Township, Town Hall this past Monday Oct. 6th.

Jim Grenafege addressed his concerns over the current economic crisis that is gripping the Nation and Middletown. Mr. Grenafege also talked about the legal billing practices of Middletown Township Attorney, Bernard Reilly.

Leave a comment

Filed under Bernard Reilly, Jim Grenafege, Mayor Scharfenberger, Middletown Democrats, press conference

Grenafege is in the game to win it!

Middletown Democratic Candidate for Township Committee, Jim Grenafege, spoke at a press conference at Middletown Township, Town Hall this past Monday Oct. 6th.

Jim Grenafege addressed his concerns over the current economic crisis that is gripping the Nation and Middletown. Mr. Grenafege also talked about the legal billing practices of Middletown Township Attorney, Bernard Reilly.

Leave a comment

Filed under Bernard Reilly, Jim Grenafege, Mayor Scharfenberger, Middletown Democrats, press conference

>Health Care Destruction

>since some of last nights debate was about health care i found the following article by NY Times columnist Paul Krugman timely. It also spells out how disastrous John McCain’s heath plan would be.

PAUL KRUGMAN – NY Times
Sarah Palin ended her debate performance last Thursday with a slightly garbled quote from Ronald Reagan about how, if we aren’t vigilant, we’ll end up “telling our children and our children’s children” about the days when America was free. It was a revealing choice.

You see, when Reagan said this he wasn’t warning about Soviet aggression. He was warning against legislation that would guarantee health care for older Americans — the program now known as Medicare.

Conservative Republicans still hate Medicare, and would kill it if they could — in fact, they tried to gut it during the Clinton years (that’s what the 1995 shutdown of the government was all about). But so far they haven’t been able to pull that off.

So John McCain wants to destroy the health insurance of nonelderly Americans instead.

Most Americans under 65 currently get health insurance through their employers. That’s largely because the tax code favors such insurance: your employer’s contribution to insurance premiums isn’t considered taxable income, as long as the employer’s health plan follows certain rules. In particular, the same plan has to be available to all employees, regardless of the size of their paycheck or the state of their health.

This system does a fairly effective job of protecting those it reaches, but it leaves many Americans out in the cold. Workers whose employers don’t offer coverage are forced to seek individual health insurance, often in vain. For one thing, insurance companies offering “nongroup” coverage generally refuse to cover anyone with a pre-existing medical condition. And individual insurance is very expensive, because insurers spend large sums weeding out “high-risk” applicants — that is, anyone who seems likely to actually need the insurance.

So what should be done? Barack Obama offers incremental reform: regulation of insurers to prevent discrimination against the less healthy, subsidies to help lower-income families buy insurance, and public insurance plans that compete with the private sector. His plan falls short of universal coverage, but it would sharply reduce the number of uninsured.

Mr. McCain, on the other hand, wants to blow up the current system, by eliminating the tax break for employer-provided insurance. And he doesn’t offer a workable alternative.

Without the tax break, many employers would drop their current health plans. Several recent nonpartisan studies estimate that under the McCain plan around 20 million Americans currently covered by their employers would lose their health insurance.

As compensation, the McCain plan would give people a tax credit — $2,500 for an individual, $5,000 for a family — that could be used to buy health insurance in the individual market. At the same time, Mr. McCain would deregulate insurance, leaving insurance companies free to deny coverage to those with health problems — and his proposal for a “high-risk pool” for hard cases would provide little help.

So what would happen?

The good news, such as it is, is that more people would buy individual insurance. Indeed, the total number of uninsured Americans might decline marginally under the McCain plan — although many more Americans would be without insurance than under the Obama plan.

But the people gaining insurance would be those who need it least: relatively healthy Americans with high incomes. Why? Because insurance companies want to cover only healthy people, and even among the healthy only those able to pay a lot in addition to their tax credit would be able to afford coverage (remember, it’s a $5,000 credit, but the average family policy actually costs more than $12,000).

Meanwhile, the people losing insurance would be those who need it most: lower-income workers who wouldn’t be able to afford individual insurance even with the tax credit, and Americans with health problems whom insurance companies won’t cover.

And in the process of comforting the comfortable while afflicting the afflicted, the McCain plan would also lead to a huge, expensive increase in bureaucracy: insurers selling individual health plans spend 29 percent of the premiums they receive on administration, largely because they employ so many people to screen applicants. This compares with costs of 12 percent for group plans and just 3 percent for Medicare.

In short, the McCain plan makes no sense at all, unless you have faith that the magic of the marketplace can solve all problems. And Mr. McCain does: a much-quoted article published under his name declares that “Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation.”

I agree: the McCain plan would do for health care what deregulation has done for banking. And I’m terrified.

Leave a comment

Filed under Barack Obama, Health Care, John McCain, NY Times, Paul Krugman

Health Care Destruction

since some of last nights debate was about health care i found the following article by NY Times columnist Paul Krugman timely. It also spells out how disastrous John McCain’s heath plan would be.

PAUL KRUGMAN – NY Times
Sarah Palin ended her debate performance last Thursday with a slightly garbled quote from Ronald Reagan about how, if we aren’t vigilant, we’ll end up “telling our children and our children’s children” about the days when America was free. It was a revealing choice.

You see, when Reagan said this he wasn’t warning about Soviet aggression. He was warning against legislation that would guarantee health care for older Americans — the program now known as Medicare.

Conservative Republicans still hate Medicare, and would kill it if they could — in fact, they tried to gut it during the Clinton years (that’s what the 1995 shutdown of the government was all about). But so far they haven’t been able to pull that off.

So John McCain wants to destroy the health insurance of nonelderly Americans instead.

Most Americans under 65 currently get health insurance through their employers. That’s largely because the tax code favors such insurance: your employer’s contribution to insurance premiums isn’t considered taxable income, as long as the employer’s health plan follows certain rules. In particular, the same plan has to be available to all employees, regardless of the size of their paycheck or the state of their health.

This system does a fairly effective job of protecting those it reaches, but it leaves many Americans out in the cold. Workers whose employers don’t offer coverage are forced to seek individual health insurance, often in vain. For one thing, insurance companies offering “nongroup” coverage generally refuse to cover anyone with a pre-existing medical condition. And individual insurance is very expensive, because insurers spend large sums weeding out “high-risk” applicants — that is, anyone who seems likely to actually need the insurance.

So what should be done? Barack Obama offers incremental reform: regulation of insurers to prevent discrimination against the less healthy, subsidies to help lower-income families buy insurance, and public insurance plans that compete with the private sector. His plan falls short of universal coverage, but it would sharply reduce the number of uninsured.

Mr. McCain, on the other hand, wants to blow up the current system, by eliminating the tax break for employer-provided insurance. And he doesn’t offer a workable alternative.

Without the tax break, many employers would drop their current health plans. Several recent nonpartisan studies estimate that under the McCain plan around 20 million Americans currently covered by their employers would lose their health insurance.

As compensation, the McCain plan would give people a tax credit — $2,500 for an individual, $5,000 for a family — that could be used to buy health insurance in the individual market. At the same time, Mr. McCain would deregulate insurance, leaving insurance companies free to deny coverage to those with health problems — and his proposal for a “high-risk pool” for hard cases would provide little help.

So what would happen?

The good news, such as it is, is that more people would buy individual insurance. Indeed, the total number of uninsured Americans might decline marginally under the McCain plan — although many more Americans would be without insurance than under the Obama plan.

But the people gaining insurance would be those who need it least: relatively healthy Americans with high incomes. Why? Because insurance companies want to cover only healthy people, and even among the healthy only those able to pay a lot in addition to their tax credit would be able to afford coverage (remember, it’s a $5,000 credit, but the average family policy actually costs more than $12,000).

Meanwhile, the people losing insurance would be those who need it most: lower-income workers who wouldn’t be able to afford individual insurance even with the tax credit, and Americans with health problems whom insurance companies won’t cover.

And in the process of comforting the comfortable while afflicting the afflicted, the McCain plan would also lead to a huge, expensive increase in bureaucracy: insurers selling individual health plans spend 29 percent of the premiums they receive on administration, largely because they employ so many people to screen applicants. This compares with costs of 12 percent for group plans and just 3 percent for Medicare.

In short, the McCain plan makes no sense at all, unless you have faith that the magic of the marketplace can solve all problems. And Mr. McCain does: a much-quoted article published under his name declares that “Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation.”

I agree: the McCain plan would do for health care what deregulation has done for banking. And I’m terrified.

Leave a comment

Filed under Barack Obama, Health Care, John McCain, NY Times, Paul Krugman

>CNN Poll: Obama won the night

>CNN) — A national poll of debate watchers suggests that Barack Obama won the second presidential debate.

Fifty-four percent of those questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released 30 minutes after the end of the debate say that Obama did the best job Tuesday night, with 30 percent saying McCain performed better.

According to the poll, 64 percent had a favorable opinion of Obama after the debate, an an increase of four points from his pre-debate showing. McCain’s approval rating remains unchanged: 51 percent of those polled had a favorable opinion of McCain after the debate.

The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll was conducted by telephone with 675 adult Americans who watched the debate. All interviews were taken after the end of the debate. The survey’s sampling error is plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Leave a comment

Filed under 2008 Presidential Campaign, Barack Obama, CNN, Joe McCain, national poll

CNN Poll: Obama won the night

CNN) — A national poll of debate watchers suggests that Barack Obama won the second presidential debate.

Fifty-four percent of those questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released 30 minutes after the end of the debate say that Obama did the best job Tuesday night, with 30 percent saying McCain performed better.

According to the poll, 64 percent had a favorable opinion of Obama after the debate, an an increase of four points from his pre-debate showing. McCain’s approval rating remains unchanged: 51 percent of those polled had a favorable opinion of McCain after the debate.

The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll was conducted by telephone with 675 adult Americans who watched the debate. All interviews were taken after the end of the debate. The survey’s sampling error is plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Leave a comment

Filed under 2008 Presidential Campaign, Barack Obama, CNN, Joe McCain, national poll

>Overseas Markets in trouble this morning: Nikkei dives 9.4 percent, biggest 1-day fall since ’87

>The Nikkei average plunged 9.4 percent on Wednesday, its biggest drop since the 1987 stock market crash, as growing fears of a global recession led investors to wipe $250 billion off the value of Tokyo shares…

…Panic over the fast-spreading financial crisis dragged down markets across Asia, with Japanese steelmakers such as Nippon Steel Corp (5401.T) sliding, as the Nikkei set another five-year closing low. It has lost 19 percent in the past five days.

Leave a comment

Filed under Financial crisis, stock markets, the Nikki, Yahoo News