The Only Thing Wrong with Planned Parenthood is its Name

Planned Parenthood is an organization that provides health care services to 2.5 million men and women in the United States.  This includes, cancer screenings, STI/STD screenings, contraception, and OB/GYN care.  A Government Accountability Office report released in March 2015, stated nearly 80% of Planned Parenthood clients had incomes at or below 150% of the federal poverty level.    Statistic after statistic demonstrates Planned Parenthood provides a heath care safety net for millions (predominantly women) in the U.S.  Yet, there is only one statistic that seems to matter to Republican congressional members (predominantly men) and that is the fact that 3% of all Planned Parenthood health services are abortion services.  The Republican controlled House voted Thursday to make it easier for states to deny federal family-planning funds to groups such as Planned Parenthood that also perform abortions.

Regardless of which side of reproductive rights argument anyone defends, there is no logical, let alone humanitarian, defense to a move that threatens to erase healthcare access for so many women and low income families in America.  Congress long ago limited federal money from being used to provide abortions starting with the Hyde Amendment in 1976.  There is no budgetary advantage to defunding Planned Parenthood.  In fact, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the government would spend nearly $130 more over the next decade by axing funding for Planned Parenthood.  The current move is simply punitive punishment to appease the pro-life wing of the GOP.  It will allow congressional Republicans to use Planned Parenthood's name in newsletters and sound bites to show how they are anti-abortion while ignoring the fact they are cutting healthcare access to women and the poor.

Somewhere along the line Planned Parenthood's name became synonymous with abortion.  Donald Trump and Mike Pence call it an "abortion factory."  While that's a term that makes just as much sense being figuratively applied to describe their administration, the misconception around Planned Parenthood needs to change or the argument will never get reframed to encompass what's actually at stake.  

Planned Parenthood needs a rebranding.  It should be descriptive of the core preventative health mission, perhaps:  Health Care for Women and Low Income Families.  With a rebranding, the newsletter clips and sound bites pro-life pandering Republicans would be forced to use would be accurate.  Instead of being able to chest pound the statement "I am against funding Planned Parenthood" they would have to use the more accurate, "I am against funding Health Care for Women and Low Income Families."

A branding change seems like a ridiculous idea to shift the conversation to where it belongs but the conversation itself has become so ridiculous maybe the idea has some merit.  The abortion debate isn't likely to go away and but it needs to be separated from basic preventative health care.  Maybe it's that easy.  Few things are but maybe.

The GOP's Summary Execution of Net Neutrality Has One Tiny Bright Spot

This week the Trump administration continued its assault on the senses, common sense in particular, with the confirmation of a clueless Education Secretary and an alleged racist Attorney General.  Trump advisor and Kellyanne Conway cited a fake terrorist act to justify defense of the administration's indefensible immigration ban and she also broke federal ethics rules by shamelessly hawking First Daughter Ivanka Trump's fashion line on Fox News.

One story moving beneath the circus-like fray is the Federal Communications Commission's new partisan agenda that threatens to end any hope of net neutrality and endorses big media conglomerates to carve up the internet.  Net neutrality rules bar internet access providers from slowing consumer access to web content.  Without them, Comcast or AT&T could chose to prioritize traffic to their own services over competitors like Netflix or Amazon Video.  Internet service providers could also impose extra fees for access to those competing services or exempt traffic to their own services from data caps effectively penalizing consumers that choose alternate products.

During the Obama administration, the FCC moved to subject internet providers to heavier regulation, with the FCC effectively taking over regulatory jurisdiction on issues like privacy from the Federal Trade Commission.  The Open Internet Order essentially codified net neutrality and treats internet service providers as utilities subjecting them to tighter scrutiny under Title II of the Telecommunications Act.

President Trump is on a mission to strip government regulation period and the GOP overall has an abysmal consumer advocacy record.  Killing net neutrality and removing regulations that offer consumer protections are top priorities for the now GOP controlled FCC.  New Republican FCC chair, Ajit Pai has stated repeatedly that net neutrality's "days are numbered."  It's surprising he's not calling the rollback the "separate but equal" clause since the spirit of the this move is the equivalent of digital discrimination.  It's a pretty simple proposition, internet service providers (aka big cable companies) will be able to gate and/or charge more for access to content they cannot monetize directly, content that is equally accessible by all today.

The problem is magnified since the ISP cable giants now also control so much content in addition to distribution.  During the Obama administration a merger deal between the top two cable provider ended when Comcast abandoned its attempt to buy Time Warner Cable after it became apparent the Justice Department planned to file an antitrust lawsuit to block it.  Under the Trump administration, a bid AT&T has made for Time Warner Inc. (a different company than Time Warner Cable) is expected to move ahead unchallenged.

AT&T is already the third largest TV/internet provider between DirecTV and U-Verse.  Adding Time Warner gives it control of properties such as CNN, HBO, and the Harry Potter franchise.  Comcast is the nation's largest TV/internet provider and controls NBC-Universal which includes a vast selection of television and motion picture properties.

Last year the FCC noted cable rates were rising at four times the rate of inflation.  Less competition is unlikely to drive down prices and further threatens internet access for the poor.  Between the death of net neutrality and even larger media conglomerates consumers should expect to be frustrated with fewer choices and higher prices.  The same people that created the cable bundle that forces consumers to buy forty channels they never watch in order to get the four channels they do watch, all for one high price, are being being given carte blanche to re-package streaming and surfing experiences in the same way.

Oddly enough, there could be one side benefit from this consumer nightmare.  Comcast owns MSNBC.  AT&T will own CNN.  Between the two they will control the majority of the distribution networks.  The aptly named Fox Entertainment Group owns the not aptly named Fox News but it doesn't own a major cable or internet distribution network.  As the two giants try and choke out competition in both content and delivery, Fox News could potentially get shut out or require a premium to watch.  While 130+ million subscribers are today willing to pay a premium to watch content like the most decorated drama in television history on HBO (Game of Thrones with 35 Emmy wins) it's hard to imagine the dubious contribution Sean Hannity makes nightly to broadcast journalism will be an equal draw if made available for an added fee.

Sure the death of Fox News is a long shot but it's the single bright spot to look forward to after the Republican controlled FCC dooms us to subjugation by the corporate internet overlords.

Idiocracy

Within days President Donald Trump's nominee to head the Department of Education will face a confirmation vote in the U. S. Senate. The nominee is Betsy DeVos, a woman who has never taught in, worked in, or sent her children to a public school.  She received her own primary, secondary, and post-secondary education from private schools.  She has been an advocate of for-profit charter schools but holds no degree in education or related field and lacks any experience with student loans.  DeVos distinguished herself during her confirmation hearing by demonstrating a lack of knowledge or understanding of portions of federal education law.  By literally all measure, DeVos has no qualifications applicable to holding a position in education beyond classroom parent volunteer let alone that of national education policy leader with control of a $69 billion budget.  Yet, Betsy DeVos is still on track to become Secretary of Education.

President Trump prides himself on his business acumen.  Under what circumstance would even he put someone with no relevant experience in charge of one of his companies?  Would Trump supporters be good with getting on a United Airlines flight with a pilot that has never been an airline passenger let alone trained to fly a Boeing 757?  It's likely safe to say most would think a trained professional paramount to successfully landing a passenger jet.  Attempting to justify an amateur heading the DoE sends the strong message that public education doesn't matter.

The DeVos choice speaks volumes about how Trump values education.  During the confirmation hearings, DeVos agreed that her family has collectively donated roughly $200 million to GOP candidates.  Trump is simply throwing the Republican Party a bone by rewarding a big donor with this nomination.  And what do one do with fluff appointee not part of the core team?  Obviously, place her in a spot believed to be valueless where she'll do no harm to actual administration priorities.  That worthless post in Trump's view is head of the Department of Education.

When demographic study of Trump voters during a campaign win in Nevada revealed he commanded a significant portion of the non-college educated vote, Trump famously stated, "I love the poorly educated" during his victory speech.  In the context of the speech the remark was likely more a swipe at elitism than an actual anti-education platform statement but Trump's support does erode quickly among voters with higher levels of education.  The old adage knowledge is power is fundamentally true and that represents a threat to Trump who notoriously believes he is the smartest person in any room.

Trump is far from the smartest person in any room but he is the most narcissistic.  For that reason alone it's a near certainty that Trump will not back down on the DeVos nomination in the face of overwhelming evidence she is unqualified and crumbling support from even some GOP quarters.  Trump inability to admit error will compel him to bully this nomination through.   His actions are singularly focused on him "winning" and have nothing to do with cultivating the next generation of best and brightest with a quality public education policy led by a competent professional.

The idea a cabinet position is being used as a donor premium in politics the same way a coffee mug is used as incentive to donate to a public radio station is criminal.  The way America on the whole treats education is criminal.  We lack meaningful action around providing educators with quality teaching tools and livable wages.  The goal of clean, safe schools with strong curricula should dominate the nation education conversation.  Instead we have a sideshow of the ridiculous where the national discourse focuses on things like whether guns belong in schools or whether text books should include - what do we call them now - alternative facts.  Guns do not belong in schools, not even to fend off grizzlies per DeVos.  The Earth is also not 6000 years old nor did Jesus ride a dinosaur like a pony.

How many families have been proud of the first of their lineage to attend college, to get a well paying job, to be more successful than their parents?  Many voters cited increasing these opportunities in their reasoning to support Trump.  They should be appalled at the DeVos nomination.  Across the political spectrum education is nearly always cited as cornerstone to building the American Dream.  The President has backed an unfit amateur to manage that cornerstone; it's another step toward a destiny of idiocracy under President Trump.

Fly Over Country

Fly over country.  That's the less than flattering term that has sometimes been used to describe middle America between the coasts.  It's an elitist insult devaluing the people and issues many in middle America care about.  It also embodies a sentiment candidate Donald Trump was able to use in order to connect with millions of voters in middle America that felt abandoned by the establishment.  These people want jobs, they want prosperity, and they want to feel safe.  Trump, ironically an east coast elitist himself, played well to those desires, won the election and, this week, signed a series of executive orders that will do anything but bring the prosperity and feeling of safety to those in middle American he courted.

Of most significance, Trump this week signed an executive order banning refugee immigration to the United States and denies entry to those from seven majority-Muslim countries.   The action played well to Trump supporters in middle America who called out terrorism as a major campaign issue.  The desire to keep America safe is not unreasonable but it is a feeling that has been elevated to a near irrational level by some in middle America red states.  The last major terror attack committed in the heartland was carried out in Oklahoma City by an American (and a Christian), Timothy McVeigh.  It also happened over two decades ago.  Maybe it adds insult to injury that ISIS and Al-Qaeda joined the elitists that consider the majority of red states fly over country but, the fact remains, the heartland is quite safe today.  However, with Trump's executive order now in place, that safety may not remain true in the future.

The immediate impacts of the Trump ban are dangerous world wide.  First, it leaves Syrian refugees already cleared for entry into the United States stranded in a war zone.  These men, women, and children were already some of the most stringently vetted immigrants on record and now may die by Trump's pen.  Second, it gives radical terror groups propaganda to use as proof the United States is at war with Muslims.  This will only empower terrorist groups not defeat them.  Third, it abandons other individuals America promised to help such as some of the brave Iraqi nationals that, at great personal risk, acted as translators for U.S. forces in Iraq.

These actions will not make America safer.  They make America a liar.  They fuel anger and resentment against us.  They lay a foundation for those wronged to seek revenge.  Middle America should be scared now; all of American should be scared now.

Fly over country, your claim in voting for Trump was the establishment turned its back on you.  How would you feel in the shoes of those that now face the real threat of loss of life due to America turning its back on them?  The lack of empathy you show just adds fuel to the stereotypes that led to the fly over insult itself.  Divisiveness is brutalizing us internally and we are now taking it out externally.  It must stop.  

The immigration ban order must be rescinded and Trump's fear mongering conquered.  We are nearly all immigrants.  An excerpt from the poem at the foot of the Statue of Liberty reminds us how America was built "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..."  That mantra has worked pretty well thus far and made America great.  Let's not let abandon our history, values, or duty to fear mongering.  What Trump has done can be undone and ironically would make America great again.

America First

Donald J. Trump is officially the 45th President of the United States.  His inauguration was painted on a canvas fitting of the campaign.  The overcast skies of a cold, grey, January day was the backdrop for the man the majority of voters in America did not want to become president to take the oath of office.  The fact remains, Trump is the president.  His inaugural speech was no less combative than the campaign and struck an uneasy tone of nationalism, America first, America first, America first…

In general, the idea of prioritizing the national interest is not bad.  It is both patriotic and a measured expectation to which we should hold all our leaders accountable.  Unfortunately, the tone and context in which Trump wraps his American first banner is disconcerting.  It's premature to say Trump's vision strikes of nationalism in the same manner as that of Germany in the 1930's; for now, Trump's America first mantra echo's the fictional Gordon Geko's catch phrase "greed is good."  

It's often hard to tell where Trump first ends and America first starts.  Trump can hardly complete a statement without lavishing praise upon himself over his own decisions, business acumen, or alleged intelligence.  As president, Trump now sees himself as the embodiment of America.  Trump first now equals America first. 

Despite the implied narcissism, the nationalistic rhetoric plays well to the minority that elected him.  From exit polls to Facebook posts, supporters want Trump to fix "it" for them.  The "it" represents many different complex problems that few of them fully understand but the literal translation of the sentiment is the Trump/Geko ideal of me first.  

Me first isn't a core principle on which to run our democracy.  It's not the core principle on which to run one's own life.  Me first doesn't appear in the Constitution, the Bible, the Koran, or even Emily Post's book of Etiquette.  Trump supporters deep down must know that.  Of course, it will probably take an awakening to the fact that in the Trump administration the pronoun "me" never really meant them in the first place.  

Thank You Mr. President

The 44th President of the United States concludes his service to the country in a few short days. Barack Obama's presidency has meant different things to different people across the country.  That holds true for me too.  I've not agreed with every policy enacted or decision made but I believe President Obama has been an upstanding steward of our democracy for the last eight years.  He has governed with dignity, poise, and patience in the face of an opposition that has acted repeatedly to disrespect the man, often on a personal level.

I've great concern over what a future with the 45th President at the helm will bring but I'd like to set that aside for the moment and express my gratitude to President Obama for his work the last eight years.

Mr. President, I thank you for your service; here are a few of your accomplishments that resonated in particular with me:

Economic Recovery - sure the economy is cyclical but the 2008 recession became a crisis with a lot of help from banks that ran amok, two ill advised wars, and eight years of poor policy decisions.  First, Mr. President, thank you for not letting the American auto industry die.  The decision was never about saving GM, Ford, or Chrysler, it was about saving their people and many others that would have suffered under a Big 3 collapse.  Second, thank you for banking finance reform.  Industry cannot police itself.  I hope some of the Wall Street reforms enacted survive such that the next economic crisis will be less severe.

The Affordable Care Act - Unless your father gave you millions to start your own business most of us have probably worked part-time, been unemployed, or worked for a small business that didn't provide health insurance.  I sure did, and while to a 22 year old brain that might seem like an acceptable risk, the truth is, it's an unacceptable risk for anyone living in the greatest country on earth.  The ACA isn't perfect but it's a starting point that gave help to millions.  Thank you Mr. President for giving us something to build on.

The Paris Climate Accord - It really doesn't matter which political ideology is on top if on top means: on top of a raft bobbing up and down in Waterworld.  Thank you Mr. President for taking steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  This is a global problem that takes global leadership and you've given us a start.  If we squander the opportunity to build upon this work the consequences for generations to come will be catastrophic.

Ending the War in Iraq - There's no good way to cut and run from a disaster and Iraq was a disaster.  Everyone and their brother will armchair quarterback this one for a long time.  Did you move to fast or wait to long.  The bottom line is there is no right time to pull out of a quagmire.  The clean up guy on this one gets little thanks but you have mine Mr. President for doing a difficult job.

Setting an Example - The presidency isn't easy under the best of circumstances.  Politics is hard and the President must endure withering political attacks.  It must be difficult to remain "presidental" during those times.  You have also had to face personal attacks that no predecessor has had to endure.  I'm sad that our country still has pockets of people that engage in thinking that has no place in the 21st century.  As President you've likely been able to experience the best and worst Americans can deliver.  Thank you Mr. President for enduring the bad and sharing the good with dignity, patience, humor, and honor.

Good bye, Mr. President; job well done.

Who Needs Healthcare?

It's genuinely hard to understand.  How can people be against healthcare?  The Affordable Care Act today covers some 20 million Americans that would otherwise go uninsured yet the ACA has been under attack since the day it was first proposed by President Obama.  For that matter, the idea was under attack from the first day Bill Clinton proposed universal coverage nearly 15 years earlier.  It seems like pretty indefensible position to be against healthcare yet it remains popular with some Americans.  Obamacare, as the ACA is colloquially called, isn't perfect but the plan congressional Republicans hatched this week to prioritize its repeal without any replacement plan threatens to remove access to healthcare for those same 20 million people.

No one, not even the repeal contingent, is arguing Obamacare costs lives.  Well, at least no high profile crazy has since Michele Bachmann's sideshow on the House floor back in 2013.  However, there is wide speculation around how many lives it has saved.  The question seems to come down to what is a life worth?  The same people arguing to repeal Obamacare sure have no problem answering that question when the life at issue is a fertilized egg.  It's sacrosanct. Why then the rush to put 20 million living, breathing people at risk?  Let's catalog a few reasons the GOP may be considering:

• Rich white people in general typical receive employer provided healthcare.
• Members of congress specifically enjoy the privilege of healthcare for life just for serving.
• More than half the 20 million are women and children, the latter of which can't vote and the former of which are, well, women.
• The "it's a free country argument" typically put forth by those that think wearing a motorcycle helmet impedes on their right to a traumatic brain injury or fear the government infringing on their toddler's right to shoot them in a Walmart.

This debate is about all our family's lives.  Affordable healthcare goes beyond those without the accesse the ACA provides.  It's about corporate plans not being able to exclude preexisting conditions.  It's about children being able to remain on their parents coverage long enough to become the next generation of doctors.  Republicans have said that they want to preserve those sections of the ACA but have presented nothing concrete to indicate they are actually serious about it.  If Republicans have a better plan, great, let's hear it enact it, and support it.  They do not have one, they may never have one, and until they do the ACA must remain in place.

There is no question that the ACA could be better.  Part of the reason it isn't perfect is due to the lack of bipartisan support for the issue at all.  Partisanship on this issue must end.  Healthcare for everyone is good.  Putting people at risk so the political argument can continue is not good.  Only an idiot would disagree when put in those simple terms.  The problem is that while the concept is simple, healthcare is complex, expensive and hard.  Understanding complexity and reality beyond the familiar is something that many americans have demonstrated great ineptitude at doing.  That's ok, it's congress we are paying to understand that complexity and solve the problem.  We are paying them significantly, including covering their healthcare for life.  Assuming you're not in the idiot ranks and believe healthcare is good, do not let the ACA be repealed without a valid replacement.  Are you willing to put a dollar sign in front of your own life or that of your family?  Repeal without replacement is a decision that will do exactly that.