After almost a month of correspondence and petition signing, Congressman Stupak finally got around to having one of his aides respond to me. In fairness, this letter is fairly well tailored based on what I actually wrote, and yet, it is ridiculously condescending, and predictably skirting of anything that I said. Thanks for that.

It should also be noted, that my Congressman hates me. Yes. Me, specifically. He hates me as a Native Woman. There is no place for people like me in his world, because my health care needs won’t matter to him. Lest he forget, also, that there is a whole bunch of Michigan yet above the Mitten. “Northern Michigan” isn’t “above Traverse City”. There is a whole Peninsula left. It’s on the quarter and everything. HA!

So, Thanks for nothing, Mr. Stupak. Thanks for mansplaining that one. I’ll be sure to include this as the intro to your new Broadway show “Fuck You!: The Musical.

Letter after the jump.

Dear [OYD]:

 

Thank you for contacting me regarding health care reform. I appreciated hearing from you on this important issue.

 

After months of negotiations, Congress has moved a step closer than ever before to passing legislation that will provide access to quality, affordable health care for all Americans. The U.S. House of Representatives passed the Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962) by a vote of 220 to 215 on November 7, 2009. I voted in support of this critical legislation.

 

I have long advocated for health care reform. In my role as Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee’s Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, I have held numerous hearings over the past three years to highlight the need to reform our nation’s health insurance industry and health care system. My hearings exposed abusive insurance industry practices like purging small business from insurance coverage by raising rates so high businesses can no longer afford insurance. The Subcommittee heard from individuals who, due to no fault of their own, had their insurance canceled after they became seriously ill, a practice known as rescission. We heard from seniors who were tricked into purchasing Medicare Advantage plans that provided less coverage than they had through traditional Medicare. And we exposed nursing homes that put profits above patient care.

 

Almost 50 million people are living in the United States without health care coverage. Approximately 82 percent of these uninsured individuals have a full or part-time job. Unfortunately, it is becoming more difficult for employers to offer affordable health insurance to their employees. Coverage is becoming more expensive and less comprehensive, with high deductibles, high co-pays and coverage limits.

 

In my travels and town hall meetings around Northern Michigan, I have witnessed the struggles our families and employers face with our health care system. In Michigan, from 2000 to 2007, employer sponsored annual health insurance premiums rose from $6,817 to $12,151, an increase of 78.2 percent. Over the same period, the median earnings of Michigan’s workers increased from $25,910 to $27,096, an increase of only 4.6 percent. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan customers are seeing their health insurance premiums increase 22 to 40 percent this year even as inflation remains flat. Clearly these skyrocketing health care costs are unsustainable for families, businesses and our government.

 

Health care is not a privilege it is a basic right that should be afforded to all Americans. In reforming health care, Congress is building on the existing framework by making it easier for employers to provide health insurance through government-sponsored programs.

 

The health care bill went through the committee I sit on, Energy and Commerce. On July 31, 2009, I voted against the committee “mark” of the bill. Although the bill included positive reforms that would ensure health care coverage for 97 percent of Americans and would fully pay for health care reform without increasing the federal budget deficit, I still had concerns that were not addressed during committee consideration. These concerns included the bill; did not effectively control rising health care costs, did not do enough to encourage true competition in the health insurance market, and built on a system that rewards ineffectiveness instead of quality and value. I was also concerned that the bill opened the door for public funding to pay for abortion.

 

After the committee work, I continued working to improve the legislation. For the next five months, I worked as part of a small group of Members to change the way the federal government reimburses health care providers by focusing on quality health outcomes rather than the quantity of procedures performed. Because of our work, health care reimbursements will now transition from a traditional fee-for-service system that rewards health providers for the number of procedures they perform to a system based on quality health outcomes. This approach is widely seen as an effective way to lower health care costs and ensure that patients in all regions of the country are treated equally. The quality care proposal is included in H.R. 3962.

 

An agreement was also reached with the Speaker to include a provision to strip the health insurance industry of its anti-trust exemption. With anti-trust protection, the federal government is powerless to protect consumers from collusion, price fixing and other abusive practices engaged in by our nation’s health insurers. Health insurance is one of the few industries not subject to federal anti-trust laws and it is consumers who pay the price. For six years I have offered amendments to repeal the anti-trust exemption and I am pleased the Speaker included a repeal of the anti-trust exemption in H.R. 3962.

 

By working with my Pro-Life colleagues and with Speaker Pelosi, I was able to secure an up or down vote on my amendment with regards to federal funding of abortion. My amendment does one very simple thing: It applies current law (the Hyde Amendment), which bars federal funding for abortion except in the case of rape, incest or life of the mother, to the health care reform bill. The Hyde Amendment has been the law of the land on federal funding of abortion since 1977 and applies to all other federally-funded health care programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, the VA and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). My amendment is not new federal abortion policy but continues current law.

 

My amendment has no impact on those individuals with private insurance who do not receive affordability credits and in no way prohibits any individual from purchasing a supplemental abortion coverage policy. Health insurance companies can still offer policies that cover abortion; insurance companies just can’t sell those policies to individuals using affordability credits to pay for the policy. My amendment was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives by a vote of 240 to 194 on November 7, 2009 and was included in H.R. 3962. Without the votes of 41 Democratic Pro-Life supporters of my amendment, health care reform never would have passed the U.S. House of Representatives.

 

In addition to these changes, the bill already included many important provisions that benefit Northern Michigan. The health care legislation would result in key improvements to Medicare for seniors including improved prescription drug coverage beginning with an additional $500 in benefits next year and fully closing the “donut hole” in 2016. Seniors on Medicare will also, for the first time ever, have preventative care, such as check-ups, routine exams and screenings such as mammograms, prostate exams and diabetes tests, covered at 100 percent cost.

 

The Veterans Administration (VA) would be exempt from any changes under the legislation, ensuring that care is unchanged for veterans.

 

Most importantly, the health care legislation is paid for and will not add to deficit spending or the national debt. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) agrees that the bill does not add to the federal budget deficit.

 

The bill includes three separate provisions to prohibit illegal immigrants from receiving taxpayer assistance for health care coverage. Section 347 of the bill prohibits illegal immigrants from receiving federal subsidies to purchase health insurance. Section 1786 of the bill, also known as the Space Amendment that I supported during Committee consideration, prohibits Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) coverage for illegal immigrants. The manager’s amendment to H.R. 3962 included additional strong requirements for verification of citizenship or proof of being lawfully in the country before receiving any benefits.

 

H.R. 3962 is supported by numerous organizations including AARP, the American Medical Association (AMA), the AFL-CIO, AFSCME, American Cancer Society, American Nurses Association, Communications Workers of America (CWA), UAW and the United Steel Workers.

 

The health care debate now moves to the U.S. Senate. The Senate proposal contains insurance regulatory reforms similar to those in H.R. 3962, such as preventing health insurance companies from discriminating against individuals on the basis of pre-existing conditions and eliminating lifetime caps on coverage.

 

One key difference between the House and Senate bills is that the Senate bill includes a state “opt-out” provision for the public option. Once the House and Senate pass their respective bills, negotiations will begin to craft one final health care bill in a conference committee.

 

Every day I hear the stories of my constituents – the insured, the uninsured and the underinsured – about how the current health care system has left them helpless, bankrupt and disillusioned. By passing H.R. 3962, Congress has moved the first step toward ensuring that the cost of health care in America never results in our citizens having to file bankruptcy because of illness, disease or injury.

 

A great deal of confusion exists regarding the House health care reform proposal. To help clear up some of the myths surrounding the legislation, I have prepared answers to some of the most commonly asked questions about the bill. I have enclosed a copy with this letter and the document can be viewed on my web site at www.house.gov/stupak.

 

Again, thank you for contacting me. Please feel free to contact me again if my staff or I can be of any assistance.

 

Sincerely,

 

BART STUPAK

Member of Congress

You betcha, buddy. We’ll be in touch.

Paint the Room, What Color?, originally uploaded by Ru Tover.

In light of the new equal rights movements that have been gaining steam in the last few years, a friend of mine has recently adopted and developed a musical that has been near and dear to his heart for over a decade.

Michael Levine, a passionate, determined producer and performer ignited the flame on “BARE- A Pop Opera” in Los Angeles just over a month ago and the response was overwhelming.

Set in a catholic high school, BARE explores the struggle and shame that is often times accompanied with teens coming to terms with their sexuality and how influences from not only religion but the media play a huge role in this self deprecation.

With epic power house ballads, it’s reminiscent of shows like RENT or Spring Awakening- but the harsh reality it portrays is not one you normally see in musicals.

At a time when this issue could not be more important, I urge everyone to take a minute and check out what I believe will become the next huge thing: BARE- A Pop Opera.

www.bare-la.com

From http://www.reuters.com:

The UA Board of Regents are meeting on the UAA campus this week to discuss budgetary matters with students. In addition, a group of students from Fairbanks plan to attend in support of amending the non-discrimination clause to include sexual orientation. And, so, of course, Jim Minnery of the Alaska Family Council has once again gone into hate-heat like it’s spring in Texas. The irony here is that the board of regents are not comparable to elected officials who tend to squirm when facing reelection in the wake of the Tea Party insurgency. The Board consists of appointments that tend to last as long as the board members wish them to, are not up for a vote, and only result in termination or resignation if the board decides so.

Thus, if hellfire, damnation, and demonic possession through fashion sense are the topics left in the board members’ inboxes, one might suspect that rather than the “quaking in the boots” effect intended, Minnery’s minions might just end up supremely pissing them off. We should all voice our support, but probably not by blunt force stupid to the head, as is usually the case with the Alaska Family Council. We should all let our support be known. Just… Respectuflly, calmly, and in the pursuit of equality.

Here’s the latest from Minnery’s super fun hate camp:

“We have learned that activists in the homosexual movement are attempting to convince the University of Alaska Board of Regents to change the university non-discrimination policy so as to give special recognition to homosexuals. If successful, individuals engaging in homosexual behavior will be afforded the same recognition as members of racial and ethnic minorities.”

Oh, the horror. And, really? We’re riding the “special” train again?

“This is just another attempt by homosexual extremists to demand public affirmation for their lifestyle. It is also the same tactic used this past summer in the Municipality of Anchorage to force AO-64 on the citizens of Anchorage. We prevented our freedoms from being infringed then by standing together. Let’s do it again.

The University of Alaska is a state institution that is supposed to serve all Alaskans”

Equally?

“Therefore, it should be subject to the same laws that apply to ALL state agencies with respect to discrimination. The university’s anti-discrimination policy should mirror the policy that the Legislature sets for ALL state entities. Nothing more, nothing less. If they wanted, the Alaska Legislature could prohibit discrimination based on ’sexual orientation.’ The legislature has wisely chosen not to do so, for good reason — because homosexuality has to do with behavioral choices, rather than a characteristic such as race that is in-born.”

Apparently sociology isn’t Minnery’s thing. Looking past the I’ve-been-locked-in-a-bomb-shelter-for-thirty-years use of the term “in-born”, the actual concept of “Race” is largely a social construct. You might be thinking of “ethnicity,” or you may just be dreaming about jogging again. And behavioral choice? Do you wake up in the morning and thinking about sleeping with men twenty times before making the choice not to? Sexual orientation and identity isn’t religion; it isn’t a choice.

“Many colleges and universities across the country have adopted policies on ’sexual orientation.’ These policies are advocated in the name of creating an open, tolerant, and ‘welcoming’ environment on campus. In reality, these policies are often used to muzzle free speech and discriminate against Christian student groups who may want to speak against homosexuality. Any speech or advocacy AGAINST homosexual behavior is deemed to be ‘hate speech’ and therefore it is branded as ‘discrimination’ against persons based on sexual orientation. It is a back-door attempt to crush freedom of speech.”

No. Unless you’re referring to cases where there is physical violence, threat of physical violence, or attempt to incite violence. That actually is hate speech and should be muzzled. Have you been to UAA Jim? The right-to-life club hands out fliers with a revolver aimed at a fetus. We’re not in any danger zone that threatens the suppression of free speech, nor is anyone impeding the free exercise of religion… Unless it’s hate speech. You’re the one asking people who are otherwise in no way affiliated with UAA to flood board member inboxes and voicemail, and if that doesn’t work, barge into a board meeting and scream bloody murder. Again.

“NOW is the time you can make a difference by contacting each member of the Board of Regents and ask them to not consider such a significant and harmful change to university policy. Remember, the University of Alaska is the property of the People of Alaska. The Regents are ultimately accountable to the very same… People of Alaska… YOU!

Make your voice heard. Make a difference. It only takes eleven phone calls and/or eleven e-mails. If you don’t have time for that…contact as many as you can. Please click HERE for contact information for the UA Board of Regents.

The Board of Regents will be meeting in Anchorage, November 30th through December 1st, at the campus of UAA, so there is no time to waste. If this issue is not considered then it will be considered at the next meeting in February but the Board of Regents needs to hear from you NOW.

Thanks again for your support. Your involvement in our culture makes this organization possible.”

And what culture is that, exactly?

The bottom of the mailer contains this link which takes you to a recruitment page for a faux-college video called “Indoctrinate U; Our Education, They’re Politics,” and finally ends in uniformity with this humble plea:

“Standing firm for your religious liberties is an effort we take seriously and is an undertaking that simply put – requires resources. If you are in a position to do so… please consider financially partnering with our ministry by making a secure on-line contribution today.

Standing for families… in His name !

Jim Minnery – President

Alaska Family Council”

*Sigh*

Finals week just got a whole lot dumber.

“The existence of bigotry, fear, distrust, suspicion, hatred, and even discrimination against atheists in America is undeniable after any sincere appraisal of the evidence — and that evidence is probably just a small piece of the real picture, given how many atheists tend to remain in the closet about their real feelings.”

Source: http://www.atheistrev.com/2009/11/words-of-wisdom-austin-cline.html

More: http://atheism.about.com/od/excusingantiatheistbigotry/a/CryingWolf.htm

I found this image while surfing the net. This of course is a paraphrasing of the actual indicated passage but the meaning is accurately captured.

i want to show this to all the conservatives whining about the sexism against sarah palin. to hear stuff like that from wealthy white men who’ve never used the word “sexism” before last week’s Newsweek cover is really ridiculous. (i agree it was sexist, but i believe the editors fell back on sexism in their effort to avoid putting her on the cover in a manner that looked as if they were taking her seriously; using a photo of her in a sexist manner is easier than trying to find a photo that shows how ridiculous her ideology is.) but it’s funny that these conservative men are crying foul for that, then turning around and calling palin a “chick” and saying she should go shoot a bear and make some stew cuz they’re hungry. ugh. (literally, Beck did.) the video’s after the jump. (and let’s not forget how Beck and Hannity cawed about Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu being a “prostitute” for getting  millions of dollars for Medicare in her state. sexism is universal, not just for you to exploit to make cheap political points, ass-clowns.)

Posted November 27th, 2009 by Michael Airhart

Amid growing public criticism of federal funding for antigay violence in Africa, Eric Goosby (1) — chief coordinator for the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) — has finally spoken out regarding U.S. taxpayers’ support for the pogrom in Uganda (2) .

Goosby defends the violent status quo,(3) saying it’s not his job to stop gross misuse of the funds under his control:

My role is to be supportive and helpful to the patients who need these services. It is not to tell a country how to put forward their legislation. But I will engage them in conversation around my concern and knowledge of what this is going to do to that population, and our ability to stop the movement of the virus into the general population.

Goosby appears to be both ignorant of HIV/AIDS in Uganda, and determined to use taxpayer dollars to undermine the very same education programs that PEPFAR was created to support:

1.  HIV/AIDS in Uganda is primarily a heterosexual phenomenon; Goosby falsely contends that it is a homosexual phenomenon that threatens the “general population.”

2.  The Anti-Homosexuality Bill would criminalize key aspects of comprehensive HIV/AIDS prevention education and imprison health-care workers who refuse to report sexually active gay patients to the police.

Goosby’s use of federal funds to subsidize the punishment of HIV/AIDS education and health-care workers, and to push LGBT Ugandans deep underground, is inexcusable.

And the silence of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton regarding her subordinates’ support for violence in Uganda is unacceptable.

Please write letters to Clinton demanding a hold on all PEPFAR funding until strict human-rights and free-speech controls are imposed upon all PEPFAR aid.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
(202) 647-4000

Please THANK Rep. Tammy Baldwin for her support and urge her office to continue fighting against The Anti-Homosexuality Bill 2009 by e-mailing Amber Shipley:

Amber.Shipley@mail.house.gov

Please THANK Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen for her support via phone call or letter and urge her to continue using her position in the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs to hold Uganda accountable.

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
2470 Rayburn H.O.B.
Washington, DC 20515-0918
Telephone: 202-225-3931

Notes:

1.  http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/28/health/policy/28aids.html

2.  http://www.truthwinsout.org/tag/Uganda

3.  http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thehumancondition/archive/2009/11/27/eric-goosby-no-hold-on-pepfar-funds-for-uganda.aspx

More: http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2009/11/5092/

Rep. Barney Frank talks on the floor of the House about discrimination against our LGBT community. Politics is supposed to be about policy, and is supposed to be a coat-check platform, where emotion and personal ties are left at the door. But I honestly don’t believe we live in that reality any longer.

He tried, but his true self showed through. And, according to me, good on him.

The republicans had control of all branches of the federal government for 6 years, and the presidency for the last 8, and they couldn’t have cared less about equal pay for women.

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 finally ensures that women earn equal pay for equal work.

It was enacted by the 111th United States Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama on January 29, 2009.

The bill amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 stating that the 180-day statute of limitations for filing an equal-pay lawsuit regarding pay discrimination resets with each new discriminatory paycheck.

Read more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilly_Ledbetter_Fair_Pay_Act_of_2009