It’s too easy to categorize people. When somebody says “Ted Stevens” you think of a doddering old senator from Alaska. But there’s so much more. He’s also a cutting edge techno rapper.
As Congress struggles to pass legislation that will keep SCHIP (State Children’s Health Insurance Program) funded, they once again turn to tobacco taxation as the key. Depending on which bill you look at (House or Senate) the proposed federal tax increase on tobacco would be 45 or 61 cents (per pack of cigarettes).
Tobacco taxation, in its msot current incarnation, is touted as a way to reduce the smoking of tobacco by increasing the price of the product. The theory (and it has been proven to a small extent among some smoking populations) is that if the price of tobacco increases fewer people will smoke, or at least those who smoke will smoke less. In this case, tobacco taxation is being used as a tool to change behavior. But you should ask yourself if the government really wants to have fewer smokers around. I submit that they do not, and the constant attempts to increase tobacco taxes to pay for any myriad of government projects should bear out my stance.
For instance, in the case of SCHIP, the federal government decides that in order to fund the program they need to increase tobacco taxes. Yet, under the behavioral modification theory, the fact that they plan to increase taxes on tobacco should lead to fewer packs of cigarettes being sold, meaning that there would be less tax money to fund SCHIP. In that case, where does the remainder come from? In fact, the government hopes that raising tobacco taxes will not affect most smokers, who are in fact addicted to the substance, and they will just keep smoking and paying the taxes. They know this is what will happen, and they count on smokers keeping right on smoking. They WANT smokers to keep smoking.
But SCHIP isn’t the only thing dependent on tobacco taxation. Aside from health related programs (that are dependent primarily, if not solely, on tobacco taxes) governments use tobacco taxes to swell their general funds accounts, thereby using tobacco money for projects unrelated to health care. When the states sued the tobacco companies and settled for multiple billions of dolalrs, they said that those funds were to be dedicated to health care costs for smoking related diseases. But state governments have repeatedly raided those “windfall funds” and used them for anything from roads to environmental impact studies to school building projects and so on. And they rely on smokers to keep those dollars rolling in.
It’s bad enough that tobacco taxation is a regressive tax policy, that is, one that targets those with less overall income disproportionately. But what makes tobacco taxation policies worse, to me, is the fact that it is a hypocritical policy based on saying one thing while depending on the other. Governments claim to want less smoking, but then they turn around and base programs and policies on a dependence to tobacco taxes.
How does this even make sense? It doesn’t, and everyone knows it doesn’t.
And when you consider the fact that government rules and regulations are constantly limiting the places where people can smoke, you have to wonder where all these smokers are going to go to continue to light up so that the governments can continue to collect the taxes that they rely on.
Smoking is a bad health choice. That much has been proven pretty conclusively. But instead of trying to ban smoking (as the government does with much less harmful drugs like marijuana) the government takes a two-faced approach- don’t smoke, but if you do, smoke over there in the street; and please smoke because we want your money to pay for these programs.
One wonders if the government really even cares about the programs they seek to fund with tobacco taxes. If they were indeed intent on taxing tobacco out of existence, they’d surely not tie that revenue to programs that enjoy wide support, like children’s health insurance. Unless they want the program to die a slow, smoker-like death.
How can anyone support the current dichotomy of tobacco taxation? It is a policy riddled with contradiction and hypocrisy. I think legislators simply have too much smoke in their eyes to see the absurdity of their actions. Maybe we should apply a tax to bad governance instead.
From Jurist:
The US Supreme Court on Tuesday granted certiorari in 17 cases for the October Term 2007, among them notable cases dealing with lethal injection, voter ID laws and subsequently seized evidence. In Baze v. Rees, the Court will consider whether lethal injections of death row inmates constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. At issue is the three-drug mixture of an anesthetic, a muscle paralyzer and a substance to stop the heart used in Kentucky and 36 other states. Opponents of the method claim that it does not contain enough anesthetic to relieve pain; however, the Kentucky Supreme Court in upholding the injection last November ruled that the prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment does not ban all pain. Last week, a federal judge in Tennessee held that the state’s execution protocols, which use the same three-drug cocktail, violate the Eighth Amendment because they do not ensure that prisoners are properly anesthetized before they receive a lethal injection. AP has more.
In two other cases, the Court will hear challenges to the constitutionality of Indiana’s controversial voter identification statute that requires voters to present photo identification as a prerequisite to voting. The cases, Crawford v. Marion City Election Board, and Indiana Democratic Party v. Rokita, pit those who believe the law prevents voter fraud against opponents who believe the legislation makes it difficult for minorities and impoverished voters to participate in elections. In January, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit upheld the law, ruling that it does not put an undue burden on the right to vote and therefore does not violate the US Constitution. The US Supreme Court confronted the issue of voter ID laws last term. In October 2006, the Court ruled in a per curiam opinion that Arizona could enforce its voter ID law, which requires voters to show government-issued voter ID cards at the polls. Last month, a federal judge held that the same Arizona voter ID law did not operate as an illegal poll tax. AP has more.
In Virginia v. Moore, the Court will consider whether a court must suppress evidence seized after an arrest that violated state law. The Virginia Supreme Court ruled that David Lee Moore, who was arrested on a suspended license charge, should have been released and issued a summons, making the subsequent search, which turned up crack cocaine, illegal and all evidence inadmissible. Other state courts have held that subsequently seized evidence does not have to be suppressed. AP has more.
The President continues to threaten a veto of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) should Congress, as expected, pass the measure which expands the program by $35 billion dollars over the next five years. The bottom line for the President centers on his displeasure with the prior rejection of his efforts to expand health care by offering tax cuts to those who will purchase private insurance.
Unfortunately, the President’s plan has already been rejected…primarily because tax deductions do little for those who live in poverty. Giving a tax deduction to those who do not pay taxes is akin to offering fifty percent off on fine jewelry…it sounds like a deal to those who can afford the reduced price but it is meaningless to the customer who can’t even afford to purchase the costume jewelry.
While the GOP frequently attempts to portray liberals as ideological elitists, the truth of the matter is that Republican’s of George Bush’s ilk are often guilty of functional elitism…a mind set that frequently finds its origin in a life of affluence…a mind set which is accompanied by a misguided belief that all that ails Americans can be addressed through tax cuts. Try as he might, the President cannot separate his ideology from the silver spoon that fed him.
With a five-year, $35 billion expansion of the children’s health insurance program due for a final vote in the House today, Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) and White House aides agreed that Bush’s opposition to the legislation stems not from its price tag but from far larger health policy issues. The White House wants to use the issue of uninsured children to resurrect the president’s long-dormant proposals to change the federal tax code to help the uninsured, adults and children alike, Grassley said, calling that a laudable goal but unrealistic politically.
In talks this spring with Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt, White House National Economic Council Director Al Hubbard and Hubbard’s deputy, Keith Hennessey, Grassley discussed linking an extension of the 10-year-old SCHIP program to a more ambitious effort to address the adult uninsured. Grassley encouraged the White House to try to round up Democratic support for that approach, but when White House officials made no such effort, Grassley told them in April that the children’s health program would have to stand alone.
That is why he said he was surprised when Bush brought it back up in a phone call Thursday, just minutes before the president went before microphones at the White House to blast the SCHIP deal.
Asked if Bush was holding the children’s health bill hostage, Grassley said, “Yes.”
Reading between the lines, perhaps the President retains unrealistic visions of passing his preferred health insurance legislation. Notwithstanding, he would be better served to listen to Senator Grassley.
Sadly, the President has shown little interest in consulting his opponents and seeking to forge bipartisan solutions…a hesitance likely born of a philosophy held by George Bush and his surly strategist, Karl Rove…one that places partisan success ahead of pragmatic policy. Frankly, George Bush has rarely met a reasonable bipartisan measure he hasn’t attempted to politicize…and his recent comments on the SCHIP program are in keeping with the well established pattern.
With a veto almost inevitable, both sides are gearing up for the next step. Congress is likely to pass a short-term extension of the existing SCHIP program before it expires Sept. 30, then begin a second legislative effort. Grassley said if he were the Democrats, he would send the SCHIP expansion to a vote every three months, along with campaign advertisements accusing Republicans of abandoning children. That way, pressure would mount either on Bush to sign the bill or on House Republicans to override the veto.
Americans United for Change, a group closely allied with the Democratic leadership, will begin airing television ads this week in Kentucky, accusing Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) of abandoning his state’s children.
The White House is looking increasingly isolated on the issue. America’s Health Insurance Plans, the largest insurance lobbying group, endorsed the measure yesterday, undercutting Bush’s contention that the bill is a step away from private insurance and toward government-run health care.
“It repairs the safety net and is a major movement toward addressing the problems that states and governors have been trying to address, which is how to get access for children,” said Karen Ignagni, the group’s president.
The issue appears to be a winner for the Democrats and I personally find it encouraging to see Americans United For Change adopting the same strategy being used by the GOP to support the President’s failed war in Iraq. Doing so has the added advantage of supporting a policy that actually has the potential to benefit Americans…an outcome not likely to result from the GOP campaign.
As noted by Grassley, a Republican, the President’s stubbornness may well provide the Democrats another club with which to beat the already battered GOP in the run up to the 2008 election. I would expect many Republicans to abandon the President…realizing that George Bush is more concerned with his rigid ideology and his legacy than avoiding a repeat of the 2006 elections.
In the end, historians and a fair share of Republican’s will likely note that George Bush was far more petulant than compassionate. This anticipated veto may simply be the icing on George Bush’s less than edible legacy cake.
Tell me that George W. Bush is the voice of America and you will get an earful from over seventy percent of the population. Tell me that Ahmadinejad is the voice of the Iranian people and you will here this Irish American with his Iranian American friends that will have an earful for you.
On the other hand, we have to listen to Bush with his theory on who is a terrorist. This is America and the man is welcome within the 25 miles of the United Nations because we are a nation of diplomats and peace keepers. We used to be anyway, and I’m sticking with my theory that we are a nation of peace keepers.
Let us just put this visit by the distinguished leader of Iran as what it is. It’s a rock star tour without the music, without the roadies that follow the bands, without the groupies and head bangers. Like Madonna or the Rolling Stones he is out on tour selling his music but the sad fact is that America can’t stand the lyrics. Something about September Eleventh and the chorus just doesn’t work.
What does work for him in his favor is that he has the guts to even come to this nation, a nation at war with world terrorism and speak at one of the greatest institutions our country has. Not just speak, he answered questions from the students. Whether they liked the answers or not was who the man is. Over at the Washington Post they have this great coverage and must read…
Ahmadinejad Met With Protests, Criticism at Columbia University
Iranian President Defends Country’s Human Rights RecordBy Robin Wright and William Branigin
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, September 24, 2007; 5:26 PM
NEW YORK, Sept. 24 — Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was greeted with student protests and withering public criticism during a visit to Columbia University Monday in which he defended his government’s human rights record, denounced Israel and rejected U.S. efforts to restrict Iran’s nuclear program.Speaking to students and faculty at Columbia a day ahead of his scheduled address to the United Nations General Assembly, the hard-line Iranian president also asserted that his people, including women, “enjoy the highest levels of freedom,” and he claimed that homosexuality does not exist in his country. - Washington Post
Okay, this is where I change my opinion of this guy from Iran that says he speaks for all Iranian’s and wants a peaceful world for all men and woman. There are no homosexuals in Iran? Did they move out? I have to wonder if they moved or were just shot? If this guy isn’t in the closet then there is a serious issue with his entire concept of humanity and the percentages of life on this planet. Something does not smell right and it isn’t the dumpster at the back of the United Nations.
It gets better or it gets worse depending on your political philosophy. You know how history has recorded the deaths at the hands of the Nazi’s. It did not happen that way according to this President of Iran. Nope, never happened. No wait, he’s changing his story. But you have to look at Palestine to prove it! HUH?
Ahmadinejad, who in the past has argued that Israel should be “wiped off the map,” repeated his assertions that the Holocaust should be researched “from different perspectives” and said Palestinians should not be “paying the price for an event they had nothing to do with.” - Washington Post
Rather than thinking that all Iranian people back this man one hundred percent we should look at him as not a man of the world stage that he is performing on. Reality, facts, and the facts of history are obviously not in the hallowed halls that is the Iranian Government if this man is the voice of Iran.
One of my closest friends that came from Iran and became an American who is also Jewish told me of the non stop persecution of people for any reason if you did not follow the set down by the religious government. That is why his family came to America. Same scenario was happening in the 1600’s here on our shores and the same thing will continue here as long as freedom is our beacon to the world. Religious persecution and personal sexual orientation is not in Iran because they force you out. Welcome to America.
One last thought. While this son of a bitch Ahmadinejad is preaching there are no homosexuals in Iran, how many other facets of human kind are not allowed in Iran. In the same breath you have to wonder how much of his personal philosophy is just right in line with our own President?
America used to be about diplomacy and talking to people and settling our differences. Even Ronald Regan talked with the Evil Empire! Bush talks to no one, and not one person listens in turn.
If our nation has no diplomacy or reaction to settle our differences around the world then America is no better than the administration that was Nazi Germany before World War II in Berlin.
Last night I had the opportunity to hang out with folks who think like me. The difference was, this was face time. All my politicking is cyber. I write, comment and chat all the time, but I rarely actually talk to people. Part of that is because I live in a red county, and my mother raised me not to pick fights with strangers. A larger part is that I hadn’t bothered to seek them out. My bad.
The first myth busted, for me anyway, is that people involved in local politics are plugged in, smarter and far too savvy to hang with a newbie like me. Nope. Everybody I talked to was a lot like me, knows some stuff about the local and national scene, but wants to learn more. They ask questions, and listen. It was an information exchange, not a snob fest of know-it-alls. It was a lot of fun.
I attended to help out my candidate for District 8, Alan Grayson. He was mentioned in a recent Rolling Stone article (the one with Maroon 5 on the cover) four times. I put a Rolling Stone on every chair in the dining room, then I hung by the door and handed out flyers, which turned out to be pretty fun. I got into several nice conversations. I met the new juvenile prosecutor for my county, several folks who’d lived in my country all their lives (considering how red it is, that’s pretty cool) and a fired up member of team Obama.
Our table had two candidates for the FL District 8 seat, an organizer for Gravel, three regular folks and me. I’m rarely regular, but I behaved myself. I made one glass of wine last 3 hours. (Can somebody pick Tom Baker off the floor, please? Smartass.) We had a good group, and the conversation was stimulating. I felt I held my own, and brought up some insights from my recent posts that had my table nodding along.
Edwards was the candidate most liked, although I give the Gravel guy props, he worked our table like the election was hinged on our conversion. The Hillary can’t lose meme was in full force, and the Gravel guy and I both made inroads on dispelling that. The consensus was that Edwards would get the veep nod again. Eh, maybe. Depends who wins the nomination. Not everybody needs him.
The Obama folks were out in force, and had bought a whole table. They are really nice, and boy, are they fired up for their candidate. That’s kind of a deal for me. The Hillary people are nice, professional, but they come off like they’re there to do a job. The Obama people are inspired. They make you want to climb right up on the wagon of idealism and ride, baby. Thundercats Ho! There’s definitely a hunger for doing the right thing for the country, and the Obama campaign is tapping that.
Four candidates from District 8 attended, and each got to speak. It was cool how many people came up to my candidate to share how happy they were he’s running again. The inner circle, so to speak, was rallied. All to the good. I plan to continue helping Grayson, and I think getting more involved in my local political scene is in the cards too. My red county is growing purple, and that’s a good thing.
This isn’t exactly breaking news since it happened on September 15th. But I just found out about it and I have to rant. Somebody told me about this and I was sure he was either exaggerating or had misunderstood something.
Nope. It’s all here. (At the bottom of the page there’s a comment section; hope you’ll leave one.) I already spend too much time online, surfing through blogs and “alternate” news sources. How the fuck did I miss this???
Carlos Arredondo is a 47-year-old father whose son Alex, a Marine, was killed in Iraq in 2004. Carlos was taking part in the September 15th anti-war demonstration in Washington DC. He had a memorial which he was pulling along in the parade: a casket with several large photos of Alex.
As the demonstrators marched past some members of the Cowering of the Terrified Gathering of Eagles, Carlos was attacked and stomped by five of these lowlife shitbags. Click here for photos.
Not much to say, is there? How do you express that feeling that’s equal parts horror and fury? Sure you can say nasty things about these cowardly shitlicking pusbags, but what’s the use? Any names you could possibly call them would be an understatement; it would be like saying International Falls, MN gets a little chilly in the winter.
This is one of the lowest things I’ve ever heard of. Here are the results of a Technorati search for Carlos Arredondo. A lot of bloggers have covered it; can’t believe I didn’t see any of them.
And now, in the spirit of the Fairness Doctrine (RIP) — equal time for the cerebrally challenged knuckledragging community………[searching]………well, so much for that. I couldn’t find a single site that either defended the five perverts or gave a different version of events. Anybody know of one?
From Jurist:
A US Department of Justice lawyer has informed lawyers representing some 40 detainees at Guantanamo Bay that they will no longer be able to visit with or send written communications to their clients. DOJ lawyer Andrew I. Warden sent an e-mail to the detainees’ counsel Friday, referencing a court ruling issued by US District Judge Ricardo Urbina last week. Urbina dismissed 16 habeas corpus challenges brought on behalf of at least 40 detainees and in doing so also rendered invalid protocols that had been established governing lawyers’ access to detainees. The DOJ has put in place a series of steps attorneys wishing to resume contact with detainees, but one detainee lawyer, Wells Dixon, called the measures “the latest example of the government’s efforts to frustrate counsel access to detainees.”
Earlier this year, the DOJ sought to restrict lawyer visits, but Guantanamo commander Rear Adm. Harry Harris later backed away from the proposal. AP has more.
Tags: Due Process, Habeas Corpus, Guantanamo
but not allowing an organization that actually fights wars so that the University can have academic freedom?
When you’re Columbia University. That’s right. Columbia University has envited the world’s best known holocaust denier — who also happens to throw “World without Israel” parties for the worlds leading anti-semites and genocidal-mass-murdering-wannabes, promises to wipe Israel off the world map, hangs gays for their sexual preferences and stones girls for being rape victims and not being able to scare up four male witnesses to testify that it was rape and not a consensual foray into rough sex, is the President of a state that sponsors terrorist organizations, Hamas and Hizbollah — to speak in the name of free speech, academic freedom and the free exchange of ideas but it won’t allow recruiters from our nation’s military services on campus because of the whole “Don’t ask; Don’t tell” policy. Apparently if you force openly gay soldiers out of military service, that disqualifies you from campus but if you merely hang them, hey…it’s open mic night.
Next up at Columbia’s mic? Thomas Robb, national director of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. The topic? “A Return to Slavery in the United States”.
Okay I made that part up. You KNOW that THAT would never happen. So why is the president of a nation that hangs gays, stones young rape victims, denies the Holocaust, arms, funds and trains terrorists and defies the world on nuclear issues speaking at Columbia? “Columbia is simply fulfilling its mission as a place of learning.”
and, if so, who do you think it will be?
P. S.: For any that care, all of my comments at all of the posts today have been swallowed up into, apparently, “moderation hell”. I’ve abandoned all hope, to wax Danteesqe, of seing my comments this side of eternity. If anyone’s reading that can access moderated comments, please, as a favor, release my comments for publication. Thanks a lot.