SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Tom Clarke who wrote (318968)8/9/2009 11:59:34 AM
From: Little Joe  Respond to of 794323
 
I know my Congressman hasn't.

lj



To: Tom Clarke who wrote (318968)8/9/2009 1:57:07 PM
From: KLP4 Recommendations  Respond to of 794323
 
Some of Betsy McCaughey's Background~~VERY accomplished woman!

Betsy McCaughey

en.wikipedia.org

Betsy McCaughey
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Betsy McCaughey



upload.wikimedia.org



________________________________________
72nd Lieutenant Governor of New York

In office
January 1, 1995 – December 31, 1998

Governor George Pataki

Preceded by Stan Lundine

Succeeded by Mary Donohue

________________________________________
Born October 20, 1948 (age 60)
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Political party Republican and Democrat

Profession U.S. Constitutional historian, Patient advocate

Betsy McCaughey (born Elizabeth Helen Peterken, October 20, 1948, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) was the Lieutenant Governor of the State of New York from 1995 to 1998, during the first term of Republican Governor George Pataki. She has provided commentary on United States constitutional law and healthcare policy. She is currently an Adjunct Fellow at Hudson Institute.

[edit] Early life, education, and family

McCaughey and her twin brother William, were born on October 20, 1948 in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, the daughter and son of Albert Peterken, a maintenance man in a fingernail-clipper factory, and his wife, Ramona.[1] The family moved around the Northeast before settling in Westport, Connecticut when she was six years old, where she attended public schools through the 10th grade. For 11th and 12th grades, she attended the Mary A. Burnham School, a college preparatory boarding school in Northampton, Massachusetts ninety miles away from home, on a scholarship, graduating in 1966.

McCaughey then went on another scholarship to Vassar College in Poughkeepsie, New York, where she majored in history, wrote her senior thesis on Karl Marx and Alexis de Tocqueville, won Woodrow Wilson and Herbert Lehman Fellowships, and graduated with a B.A. with distinction in 1970.[2] McCaughey's father, Albert, died at age 60 in August 1970, and her mother, Ramona, an alcoholic, died at age 42 a few months later of liver disease. McCaughey went on to graduate school at Columbia University in New York City to study history, earning a M.A. in 1972 and a Ph.D. in U.S. constitutional history in 1976.[2]

Her Ph.D. dissertation on William Samuel Johnson was awarded the Columbia University Graduate School of Arts & Sciences Bancroft Dissertation Award for outstanding dissertation in American History (including biography), diplomacy, or international affairs, in 1976.[3] It was published as a book, From Loyalist to Founding Father: The Political Odyssey of William Samuel Johnson, by Columbia University Press in 1980.

In 1972, she married Thomas K. McCaughey, a Yale graduate she had met in college and who was then moving up as an investment banker.[4] While completing her Ph.D., McCaughey trained in the corporate banking department at Chase Manhattan Bank, and served as a lending officer in the Food, Beverage, and Tobacco Division.[5] In 1977, the McCaugheys, who had been living in a rental apartment in the Upper West Side of Manhattan, purchased and moved into an apartment on Park Avenue in the Upper East Side; they later added a country home in New Canaan, Connecticut.[4]

In the 1980s, with her husband enjoying a successful career at Salomon Brothers, McCaughey also entertained her husband's clients, decorated their Park Avenue apartment and country house in New Canaan, Connecticut, and volunteered at her daughters' private school.[4]

The McCaugheys separated in 1992 and divorced in 1994 with McCaughey granted custody of their three daughters. She married businessman Wilbur Ross, Jr. in December 1995,[6] and divorce papers were filed in November 1998.[7]

[edit] U.S. Constitutional historian
For the next decade, McCaughey taught history in series of one-year, untenured assistant professor appointments at Vassar and Columbia and a National Endowment for the Humanities post-doc fellowship and interrupted by years off to have and care for three daughters.[4]

From 1986 to 1988, McCaughey was a guest curator at the New-York Historical Society responsible for its four-month exhibit titled "Government by Choice: Inventing the United States Constitution" that opened on September 17, 1987 to commemorate the bicentennial of the U.S. Constitution and an accompanying book, Government by Choice: Inventing the United States Constitution, published in 1987 by Basic Books with a preface by retired U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger and a foreword by U.S. Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY).

[edit] Opinion columnist

From 1989 to 1992, after considering becoming a television journalist,[8] McCaughey was a senior scholar at the Center for the Study of the Presidency and wrote opinion columns for The Wall Street Journal, USA Today and The New York Times:
• In an October 1989 New York Times op-ed, McCaughey criticized increasing the size of and redistricting the New York City Council to increase minority representation and comply with the Voting Rights Act, quoting U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's 1989 concurrence from City of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co.,[9][10] and in a March 1991 Wall Street Journal op-ed, McCaughey criticized the requirement that the fifteen-member Districting Commission, jointly appointed by the mayor and the city council to redistrict the city council, match the racial composition of the city.[11][12]

• In a September 1991 New York Times op-ed on the eve of Senate hearings on the nomination by U.S. President George H. W. Bush of then 43-year-old Clarence Thomas to a lifetime appointment to the U.S. Supreme Court, McCaughey countered an op-ed by Derrick Bell, saying that the 17 opinions written by Thomas during his 18 months of experience as a judge showed a record of judicial restraint and that Thomas would not be a judicial activist who valued his own concepts of justice and natural rights over Congress's laws, established precedents, and the Constitution.[13][14]

• In a March 1992 New York Times op-ed, McCaughey criticized then New York Governor Mario Cuomo's Task Force on Judicial Diversity's consideration of creating smaller judicial districts to increase representation of underrepresented African American and Hispanic judges to comply with a June 1991 U.S. Supreme Court decision that the Voting Rights Act also applied to judicial elections.[15][16][17]

• In a June 1992 USA Today op-ed, McCaughey worried that U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas might be the swing vote in deciding Cipollone v. Liggett Group and in "a devastating blow to American business" might decide against federal preemption of state laws and against the Tisch family-owned tobacco company.[18][19]

• In another June 1992 USA Today op-ed, McCaughey praised the U.S. Supreme Court's Planned Parenthood v. Casey 5–4 decision for not overturning Roe v. Wade, but instead adopting Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's undue burden standard of review of laws restricting abortion to uphold Pennsylvania law requiring mandatory counseling and a mandatory 24-hour waiting period for all women and parental consent for minors but invalidating its spousal notification requirement.[20][21]

• In an October 1992 Wall Street Journal op-ed, McCaughey criticized pending lawsuits in Connecticut and New Jersey asking state courts to order racial integration across town lines of affluent predominantly white and Asian American suburban schools and poor predominantly African American and Hispanic city schools to achieve racial balance.[22][23][24]
In 1993, the John M. Olin Foundation funded a fellowship at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank (where a friend on its board of trustees had recommended McCaughey to its president), for McCaughey to write a book on race and the legal system to be titled Beyond Pluralism: Overcoming the Narcissism of Minor Differences and write opinion columns:

• In a March 1993 Wall Street Journal op-ed, McCaughey criticized the Congressional Black Caucus and the U.S. President George H. W. Bush-appointed acting U.S. Attorney General for objecting to a federal district judge's order that the jury for the retrial of U.S. Rep. Harold Ford, Sr. (D-TN), the first African American to represent Tennessee in U.S. Congress, be selected from in Jackson, Tennessee, 80 miles northeast of Memphis, from seventeen heavily Republican and predominantly white rural counties in western Tennessee outside of Memphis, and transported to Memphis for the trial.[25][26][27][28]

• In June 1993 USA Today and Wall Street Journal op-eds, McCaughey praised the U.S. Supreme Court's Shaw v. Reno 5–4 decision, in which Clarence Thomas was the swing vote, in favor of five white voters who said their rights were injured by redistricting to comply with the Voting Rights Act that placed them in one of two newly created majority African American districts and resulted in the election in 1992 of the first two African Americans to represent North Carolina in the U.S. Congress since the Reconstruction era.[29][30][31][32]

More at this link: en.wikipedia.org



To: Tom Clarke who wrote (318968)8/9/2009 2:00:21 PM
From: KLP2 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 794323
 
PS-This link has many other items of interest: AARP Town Hall on President Obama's Healthcare Plan
on
July 28, 2009

defendyourhealthcare.us

Lies, Damn Lies & Obama's Health Plan!

Obama says: "But keep in mind - I mean this is something that I can't emphasize enough - you don't have to participate. If you are happy with the health care that you've got, then keep it."

THE TRUTH: The health bills now before Congress would force you to switch to a managed-care plan with limits on your access to specialists and tests.
Two main bills are being rushed through Congress with the goal of combining them into a finished product by August. Under either, a new government bureaucracy will select health plans that it considers in your best interest, and you will have to enroll in one of these "qualified plans." If you now get your plan through work, your employer has a five-year "grace period" to switch you into a qualified plan. If you buy your own insurance, you'll have less time.
And as soon as anything changes in your contract - such as a change in copays or deductibles, which many insurers change every year - you'll have to move into a qualified plan instead (House bill, p. 16-17).
When you file your taxes, if you can't prove to the IRS that you are in a qualified plan, you'll be fined thousands of dollars - as much as the average cost of a health plan for your family size - and then automatically enrolled in a randomly selected plan (House bill, p. 167-168).
It's one thing to require that people getting government assistance tolerate managed care, but the legislation limits you to a managed-care plan even if you and your employer are footing the bill (Senate bill, p. 57-58). The goal is to reduce everyone's consumption of health care and to ensure that people have the same health-care experience, regardless of ability to pay.

Obama says: "I want to start by taking a new approach that emphasizes prevention and wellness so that instead of just spending billions of dollars on costly treatments when people get sick, we're spending some of those dollars on the care they need to stay well, things like mammograms and cancer screenings and immunizations, common-sense measures that will save us billions of dollars in future medical costs."

THE TRUTH: The truth is that the second most prevalent disease of aging -- cancer -- is largely linked to genetics and unknown causes. It's occurrence increases with age. Your risk of being diagnosed with cancer doubles from age 50 to 60 according to the National Cancer Institute.

The risk of some forms of heart disease can be reduced through healthy living. But other forms are linked to genetics. Shifting resources from treatment to prevention will leave patients who become sick inadequately cared for. In addition, virtually all studies show that prevention saves lives but not money. Eighty percent of preventive interventions add to medical costs. The reason is simple. Most people who take cholesterol lowering drugs or get mammograms wouldn't get sick anyway. Louise Russell, an economist at Rutgers University, concludes that "hundreds of studies have shown that prevention usually adds to medical costs." (Health Affairs, March-April 2009). The evidence is so conclusive that the only people who claim prevention saves money are politicians.

Obama says: "Nobody is talking about reducing Medicare benefits. Medicare benefits are there because people contributed into a system. It works. We don't want to change it."

THE TRUTH: The Congressional majority wants to pay for its $1 trillion health bills with a $500+ billion cut to Medicare. This cut will come just as Medicare enrollment increases by 30%. Less money and more patients will necessitate rationing.

The assault against seniors began in February with the stimulus package, which slipped in comparative effectiveness research, generally a code for limiting care based on the patient's age. Economists are familiar with the formula, where the cost of a treatment is divided by the number of years that the patient is likely to benefit. In Britain, the formula leads to denying treatments for older patients who have fewer years to benefit from care than younger patients.

In a 7/17 letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, White House budget chief Peter Orszag urged Congress to delegate its authority over Medicare to a newly created body within the executive branch. This measure is designed to circumvent the democratic process and avoid accountability to the public for cuts in benefits.



To: Tom Clarke who wrote (318968)8/9/2009 2:00:47 PM
From: Nadine Carroll7 Recommendations  Respond to of 794323
 
That's the opinion of staffers on Ways and Means. Has anyone actually read the whole thing besides Betsy McCaughey?

So far the only ones I have heard saying they have are doctors and nurses calling into conservative talk radio. They say the bill (I presume it's the first House Bill) functions like Medicaid; it's basically Medicaid for everybody. They also point out that Medicaid currently does not pay for a lot of medically necessary procedures.

It also is only supposed to be implemented in 2013. Gee, I wonder why?