Posts for: Progressive One
May 5, 2017 13:49:00 #
(Main)
The GOP wants people poor and sick:
State bid for retirement savings plan is blocked
U.S. Senate stops California-led effort to help low-income workers obtain IRA-type accounts.
By Evan Halper
WASHINGTON — A pioneering, California-led effort to create retirement security for low-income workers has been thrown into jeopardy after the U.S. Senate voted Wednesday to block states from starting programs to automatically enroll millions of people in IRA-type savings plans.
The measure, aimed at stopping the fledgling state retirement programs, now goes to President Trump, who has vowed to sign it.
That leaves lawmakers in California, Illinois and other states, who only months ago were celebrating the success of their long-planned initiative, scrambling to regroup. The Senate voted 50 to 49 to stop the state plans.
The retirement programs, which were about to launch in seven states and are under consideration in many more, were targeted by Wall Street firms and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
The vote reflected the renewed influence of the business lobby in Washington since the 2016 election, with lawmakers defying the 38-million-member AARP, a vocal supporter of the automatic individual retirement account program. The seniors group had warned senators that its members would hold them accountable for their votes.
“Nobody had a problem with this except for the big Wall Street companies who invented in their mind that they would be losing business to these state innovations,” said Sen. Christopher S. Murphy (D-Conn.), whose state was moving to implement an auto-IRA program. “This is a terrible, terrible thing we are doing,” he said of the Senate’s vote to undermine the state programs.
The California Secure Choice program and similar retirement laws generally require employers with no retirement plans to automatically invest a small percentage of each worker’s pay in a state-sponsored retirement account. Employees can opt out of the program if they choose.
The money is managed by private investment firms that partner with the states. The accounts are intended to help build financial security for some 55 million workers nationwide whose employers do not offer a retirement plan.
The push to implement the programs was delayed for years by complicated federal Labor Department rules governing such investment pools. In its final months, the Obama administration gave states the green light to pursue their vision. But Congress has now voted to revoke that authority, leaving the programs in limbo. Opponents of the state programs say they became too risky for consumers after the federal rules were changed.
Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) denounced the regulation permitting the retirement plans as something “that President Obama personally ordered Labor Secretary Tom Perez to draft as a gift to certain blue states.”
Democrats on the Senate floor charged that such arguments were a smokescreen to obscure an effort to protect the profits of big investment houses concerned their business could be eroded if companies moved their employees into state-sponsored plans.
The congressional vote brought to a head an early confrontation between California and the Trump-era Congress. The retirement law is a signature achievement of California Senate leader Kevin de Leon, who worked on it for years.
The House passed the measure to block the programs in March at the urging of De Leon’s fellow Californian and longtime political rival, Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield, the House majority leader.
De Leon has vowed to push ahead with the state’s effort, saying California can redesign its program to avoid federal approval. But such a redesign would make it more vulnerable to legal challenge, and probably delay implementation.
California and other states were moved to address the large share of the workforce not enrolled in any retirement plan after efforts to create a federal automatic IRA program stalled years ago.
Reports by some bipartisan think tanks and policy analysts suggest the programs could ultimately save states billions of dollars by creating a measure of financial security for elderly Americans who otherwise end up on the rolls of Medicaid, food stamps and other safety-net programs.
evan.halper@latimes.com
State bid for retirement savings plan is blocked
U.S. Senate stops California-led effort to help low-income workers obtain IRA-type accounts.
By Evan Halper
WASHINGTON — A pioneering, California-led effort to create retirement security for low-income workers has been thrown into jeopardy after the U.S. Senate voted Wednesday to block states from starting programs to automatically enroll millions of people in IRA-type savings plans.
The measure, aimed at stopping the fledgling state retirement programs, now goes to President Trump, who has vowed to sign it.
That leaves lawmakers in California, Illinois and other states, who only months ago were celebrating the success of their long-planned initiative, scrambling to regroup. The Senate voted 50 to 49 to stop the state plans.
The retirement programs, which were about to launch in seven states and are under consideration in many more, were targeted by Wall Street firms and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
The vote reflected the renewed influence of the business lobby in Washington since the 2016 election, with lawmakers defying the 38-million-member AARP, a vocal supporter of the automatic individual retirement account program. The seniors group had warned senators that its members would hold them accountable for their votes.
“Nobody had a problem with this except for the big Wall Street companies who invented in their mind that they would be losing business to these state innovations,” said Sen. Christopher S. Murphy (D-Conn.), whose state was moving to implement an auto-IRA program. “This is a terrible, terrible thing we are doing,” he said of the Senate’s vote to undermine the state programs.
The California Secure Choice program and similar retirement laws generally require employers with no retirement plans to automatically invest a small percentage of each worker’s pay in a state-sponsored retirement account. Employees can opt out of the program if they choose.
The money is managed by private investment firms that partner with the states. The accounts are intended to help build financial security for some 55 million workers nationwide whose employers do not offer a retirement plan.
The push to implement the programs was delayed for years by complicated federal Labor Department rules governing such investment pools. In its final months, the Obama administration gave states the green light to pursue their vision. But Congress has now voted to revoke that authority, leaving the programs in limbo. Opponents of the state programs say they became too risky for consumers after the federal rules were changed.
Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) denounced the regulation permitting the retirement plans as something “that President Obama personally ordered Labor Secretary Tom Perez to draft as a gift to certain blue states.”
Democrats on the Senate floor charged that such arguments were a smokescreen to obscure an effort to protect the profits of big investment houses concerned their business could be eroded if companies moved their employees into state-sponsored plans.
The congressional vote brought to a head an early confrontation between California and the Trump-era Congress. The retirement law is a signature achievement of California Senate leader Kevin de Leon, who worked on it for years.
The House passed the measure to block the programs in March at the urging of De Leon’s fellow Californian and longtime political rival, Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield, the House majority leader.
De Leon has vowed to push ahead with the state’s effort, saying California can redesign its program to avoid federal approval. But such a redesign would make it more vulnerable to legal challenge, and probably delay implementation.
California and other states were moved to address the large share of the workforce not enrolled in any retirement plan after efforts to create a federal automatic IRA program stalled years ago.
Reports by some bipartisan think tanks and policy analysts suggest the programs could ultimately save states billions of dollars by creating a measure of financial security for elderly Americans who otherwise end up on the rolls of Medicaid, food stamps and other safety-net programs.
evan.halper@latimes.com
May 5, 2017 13:40:24 #
(Main)
Cool Breeze wrote:
No one with half a brain is gonna tolerate your bull! Your ridiculous drivel will be challenged.
These people talk so stupid to each other...Big Ass...keeps saying the same shit over and over despite me telling his dumb ass a hundred times it is about philosophy and not race. That is a curse when one makes themselves believe what they want to despite evidence to the contrary...whuzup CB?
May 5, 2017 13:36:02 #
(Main)
Ve'hoe wrote:
the white man didnt want us extinct,,,, otherwise he had us, and could have done it........
The white man doesnt need to kill you blacks,,, you are doing it for him.........
The white man doesnt need to kill you blacks,,, you are doing it for him.........
you're right dumb ass ...the white man really really loved Native Americans and the Black race are the only people who kill their own kind....you're one stupid ass psychologically afflicted motherfker......
May 5, 2017 13:33:04 #
(Main)
Big Bass wrote:
He also hates black folks. One that I thought was most evil, was when Dr. Ben's name came up. He said that all blacks like Dr. Ben, who vote republican are "Uncle toms." In other words, any black who doesn't think like him is a low-life.
He also hates black folks. One that I thought was most evil, was when Dr. Ben's name came up. He said that all blacks like Dr. Ben, who vote republican are "Uncle toms." In other words, any black who doesn't think like him is a low-life.No I dislike toadies you dishonest piece of shit...I don't hate anything...too damn emotionally extreme trump...so stop the fking exaggerating...any black who works with others to destroy what they benefitted from so other blacks cannot benefit the way they did is a piece of shit. Especially since they are doing it for self-gain. Stop looking at life in such simplistic ways. It makes you appear stupid....my dislike of anyone has nothing to do with race so stop repeating that same tired ass stupid mantra......especially when someone tells you over and over....unless you do have a learning disability.....and if you do, I apologize, otherwise quit being stupid just because it is convenient.
May 4, 2017 21:03:37 #
(Main)
Ve'hoe wrote:
You embarrass everyone decent in your race, by claiming you are an elevated member of your race, then acting like a ghetto jumping loser, similar to coolbreeze and other lower primates,,,,,,,,,, does that clear it up for you???
Your racism is on display for everyone, to see, except you the worst offender,,,,,,,,,,
Your racism is on display for everyone, to see, except you the worst offender,,,,,,,,,,
is that like coming from a race of proud warriors then licking the very ass of those who wanted your apple ass extinct?
May 4, 2017 20:35:21 #
(Main)
Health bill puts people at risk
House Republicans want to weaken a safeguard for Americans with preexisting conditions.
A bout half of American adults under age 65 have at least one preexisting medical condition, by the federal government’s count . According to a Kaiser Family Foundation analysis , more than half of those adults could have been denied coverage by health insurers in the days before Obamacare if they weren’t included in a large employer’s plan.
That’s why one of the most popular and humane features of the 2010 Affordable Care Act is the provision barring insurers from discriminating against Americans with preexisting conditions. This provision not only saved many Americans from being bankrupted by medical bills, but it also relieved the anxiety that trapped people in jobs they would not leave for fear of losing coverage.
But now, House Republicans are proposing to punch a gaping hole in that safeguard through a bill to repeal and replace the ACA.
GOP leaders insist that their bill would continue to bar insurers from denying coverage to anyone, and that it would prevent them from jacking up the premiums for anyone who’d maintained continuous coverage. Consumers using the state insurance exchanges who did not maintain coverage would be eligible for subsidized state “high-risk pools,” where high premiums would be offset by billions of dollars in federal aid.
But far more people would be likely to face huge premium increases than the bill’s supporters acknowledge. Millions of people enter and leave the state insurance exchanges annually — the turnover at Covered California is 40% to 50% — which means there may be millions of people going briefly uninsured and then confronting enormous premium surcharges. According to one estimate , those surcharges could range from $4,000 per year for asthmatics to $17,000 for women seeking maternity coverage to $143,000 for those with a history of metastatic cancer.
The bill’s sponsors ponied up more aid Wednesday to make insurance affordable for all those Americans, but the measure’s funding would still fall far short of the amount needed to do so — almost $200 billion short over 10 years, even if only 5% of those in the state exchanges fell into the high-risk pool, the Center for American Progress has projected. No surprise there — exorbitant costs sunk the high-risk pools that states used before the ACA, even though they excluded many applicants and denied coverage for some costly conditions.
This is the history that we left behind when the ACA was adopted, and rightly so. It would be foolish to go back now.
House Republicans want to weaken a safeguard for Americans with preexisting conditions.
A bout half of American adults under age 65 have at least one preexisting medical condition, by the federal government’s count . According to a Kaiser Family Foundation analysis , more than half of those adults could have been denied coverage by health insurers in the days before Obamacare if they weren’t included in a large employer’s plan.
That’s why one of the most popular and humane features of the 2010 Affordable Care Act is the provision barring insurers from discriminating against Americans with preexisting conditions. This provision not only saved many Americans from being bankrupted by medical bills, but it also relieved the anxiety that trapped people in jobs they would not leave for fear of losing coverage.
But now, House Republicans are proposing to punch a gaping hole in that safeguard through a bill to repeal and replace the ACA.
GOP leaders insist that their bill would continue to bar insurers from denying coverage to anyone, and that it would prevent them from jacking up the premiums for anyone who’d maintained continuous coverage. Consumers using the state insurance exchanges who did not maintain coverage would be eligible for subsidized state “high-risk pools,” where high premiums would be offset by billions of dollars in federal aid.
But far more people would be likely to face huge premium increases than the bill’s supporters acknowledge. Millions of people enter and leave the state insurance exchanges annually — the turnover at Covered California is 40% to 50% — which means there may be millions of people going briefly uninsured and then confronting enormous premium surcharges. According to one estimate , those surcharges could range from $4,000 per year for asthmatics to $17,000 for women seeking maternity coverage to $143,000 for those with a history of metastatic cancer.
The bill’s sponsors ponied up more aid Wednesday to make insurance affordable for all those Americans, but the measure’s funding would still fall far short of the amount needed to do so — almost $200 billion short over 10 years, even if only 5% of those in the state exchanges fell into the high-risk pool, the Center for American Progress has projected. No surprise there — exorbitant costs sunk the high-risk pools that states used before the ACA, even though they excluded many applicants and denied coverage for some costly conditions.
This is the history that we left behind when the ACA was adopted, and rightly so. It would be foolish to go back now.
May 4, 2017 20:31:29 #
(Main)
tdsrnest wrote:
A hell of a lot more than you do. You sit on you're fat ass and watch the freak in the White House lie to you.
Man, poor conservatives are idiots...let them get what they wished for....too bad many good people will go under with them............
May 4, 2017 19:56:49 #
(Main)
Ve'hoe wrote:
because, filthy animal, you are incompetent,,, and phoney,,, you would likely miss,,, and I would not,,,,,
why do you afflict the decent people of your race, like a lying parasite?
why do you afflict the decent people of your race, like a lying parasite?
you should test that "miss" theory......
May 4, 2017 19:56:01 #
(Main)
Ve'hoe wrote:
because, filthy animal, you are incompetent,,, and phoney,,, you would likely miss,,, and I would not,,,,,
why do you afflict the decent people of your race, like a lying parasite?
why do you afflict the decent people of your race, like a lying parasite?
How do I afflict others lf MY race appleboy? Is that because you lump people in groups when you stereotype? Do you see one black act certain way and then conclude that is how others are based on the behavior of that one person as you are trying to do with me? If THAT is not racist, what is?
May 4, 2017 19:39:00 #
(Main)
Ve'hoe wrote:
Thats racist, you filthy lying animal,,,,, why dont you shoot yourself??? Save some decent cop the trouble??
Why don't you let me shoot you and get a miserable ass-licking apple out of their hellish, self-imposed faggot ass misery?
May 4, 2017 19:36:13 #
(Main)
wuzblynd wrote:
I can write anything I want too, I might not have been to prison,I might be a banker, a lawyer, I can Google what is required to be either and copy it. Someone showed u a real certificate earlyer, where's yours?
Nah...they have my picture and I don't want them to know the schools because many have expressed the sentiment that they would do some stupid shit that I'd have to straighten out...but feel free to think it is all a lie......my parents and employers have been convinced that they are real.........
May 4, 2017 19:25:05 #
(Main)
vernon wrote:
THe pres should just force a vote on every bill.Then publish the names of those blocking action the we will do the rest.maybe even clean all the communist out of our schools from first grade to masters degree.
yep...just be sure to replace them with people with the same technical know-how since their philosophy does not play a part in many instances...........
May 4, 2017 19:23:27 #
(Main)
wuzblynd wrote:
I can write anything I want too, I might not have been to prison,I might be a banker, a lawyer, I can Google what is required to be either and copy it. Someone showed u a real certificate earlyer, where's yours?
you should do that...maybe it'll change your outlook on life and your resultant opportunities.........give it a shot........I have certificates for on the job classes....I have degrees from my studies....the two are different....certificates do not mean shit after a period of time....degrees maintain their value for life.....research it........
May 4, 2017 19:20:07 #
(Main)
Ve'hoe wrote:
who cares, since you dont exhibit the education,,,,,,,,filthy racist animal!!!!
It doesn't matter who cares....it is an response to motherfkers and nothing more.......I could give a fk less if a cracka's ass-licker apple like you cares...at all.....
May 4, 2017 19:16:45 #
(Main)
CounterRevolutionary wrote:
Hey, Mr. Goofus, I didn't make reference to GEICO,... (show quote)
I referenced GEICO slow boy because they say "that's what you do" and that is the same as saying it is someone's Modus Operandi or M.O.
No it is not about being rich. I understand the taxes people pay do a lot of things for me I couldn't do with only my income so I believe in doing the same for others because I am a giver as well as a taker. I am not a model or prostitute so my looks have nothing to do with my pay...my educational level does and since I'm not an ass kissing toadie brother, the resultant knowledge gained is the thing. I guess that is the least he could do since Africans built the country for free. All the home ownership went down the tubes during W's recession and go and research how it was harder on people of color in terms of wealth lost and employment opportunities. I'm not jumping up and down for joy over nothing W did, for me or you....BTW...sarcasm s a feminine trait.....rudeness is masculine......