Portman’s Support For Same-Sex Marriage And Why Respect For Equality Should Be A Basic Qualification For Office

Sen. Rob Portman’s (R-OH) evolution on the issue of marriage equality—from opponent to advocate—followed a deeply personal conversation he had with his son two years ago. It’s a conversation countless families must grapple with and a conversation that now underscores the disconnect between the head and the heart of conservatism’s view of marriage equality at a pivotal moment in the debate.

Though Portman’s experience is heartening, Americans must demand more from their leaders than public acknowledgement of private family truths. Portman, Vice President Dick Cheney, and the recent wave of prominent conservatives coming out in support of equality should be commended for demonstrating a commitment to family above the politics of the moment. Still, respecting equality under the law should be a basic qualification for office, not an epiphany a lawmaker experiences after recognizing that inequality hurts the people he loves and the millions of parents and children he serves.

The damage is caused largely by the anti-gay laws and policies that their party has championed for years. DOMA, for example, is a legislative reflection of the discrimination that forces hundreds of thousands of gay and lesbian children to remain hidden in the closet living in shame of who they are. DOMA is the reason that same-sex couples face a higher tax burden than their heterosexual counterparts, resulting in less income and higher poverty rates among the LGBT community. And DOMA demonstrates that LGBT people are still treated like second class citizens in a country that supposedly values equality and justice above all else.

In coming out, one of the most powerful lessons learned is that telling your story may make it easier for the next person. By coming out to loving parents, Portman’s son made it that much easier for others to do the same. In fact, his example clearly demonstrates the ways in which coming out to your friends and family can enrich their lives, and may change the lives of people you’ll never meet.

Last month, 131 prominent Republican politicians signed a brief calling on the Supreme Court to end DOMA and rule in support of marriage equality for same-sex couples. These Republicans have acknowledged what a strong majority of Americans already know: that there is no reason for a Washington bureaucrat to stand between LGBT Americans and the altar. While the degree to which Portman’s evolution will move his party forward is still uncertain, by sharing an honest love for his son and concern for his future, he will make it that much easier for others facing similar circumstances. Hopefully, Portman’s conversion will inspire lawmakers to recognize the damage their anti-equality policies are causing to their LGBT constituents before they realize the victims are their loved ones.

Jon Shields is a Special Assistant for the Communications team at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

View the original article here

USAID distributing ‘basic hygiene supplies’ to displaced Syrians

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is distributing “hygiene kits” at a Syrian refugee camp as part of a $385 million effort to help those affected by the country’s ongoing civil war, according to a statement published on the U.S. Embassy’s website Thursday.

“Good basic personal hygiene and hand washing are critical to help prevent the spread of illness and disease, and providing basic hygiene supplies and education was identified as a priority in the camp,” the statement reads in part.

The family hygiene kits include towels, toothpaste, toothbrushes, soap, shampoo and feminine pads. USAID is also providing containers for water transportation and storage, building and repairing water pumps and septic tanks, and establishing trash removal services at the camp near the Turkish border.

More than 60,000 people have died in the nearly two-year-old conflict in Syria. The White House and Congress have grappled with how to deal with the increasingly combustible situation.

The Obama administration has repeatedly pushed for regional powers to take the lead in resolving the crisis, and has opposed arming the rebels because it has said the weapons could fall into the wrong hands.?

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and others have criticized the administration for not doing enough to remove the Syrian government from power.

?Secretary of State John Kerry said last week the administration is weighing new options for dealing with Syrian strongman Bashar Assad, suggesting the United States may yet ramp up its involvement in the country's civil war.

View Comments

View the original article here

James Hansen Slams Joe Nocera For Failure To ‘Understand Basic Economics’ And Selective Quotation

You might think an A-list business reporter for the NY Times would know basic economics. But not in the case of Joe Nocera.

His umpteenth confused post on the Keystone XL pipeline suggests that when he talks to people like, say, James Hansen, he doesn’t really listen:

On Monday, I finally spoke to Hansen. His knowledge and sincerity are easy to admire, even if his tactics are not. He told me he would like to see oil companies pay a fee, which would rise annually, based on carbon emissions. He said that such a tax could reduce emissions by 30 percent within 10 years. Well, maybe. But it would also likely make the expensive tar sands oil more viable. If you really want to eliminate expensive new fossil fuel sources, the best way is to lower the price of oil, which would render them uneconomical. But, of course, that wouldn’t exactly lower demand either.

#FAIL. Just how admirable is it to interview a world-class expert, mis-state his position, get the economics of his plan exactly backwards, and then disparage his tactics in the pages of the NY Times?

Hansen, as I would assume everyone knows, wants all fossil fuel providers to pay a fee, not just oil companies. Further, Hansen has published what he emailed Nocera:

An economic analysis indicates that a tax beginning at $15/tCO2 and rising $10/tCO2each year would reduce emissions in the U.S. by 30% within 10 years. Such a reduction is more than 10 times as great as the carbon content of tar sands oil carried by the proposed Keystone XL pipeline (830,000 barrels/day). Reduced oil demand would be nearly six times the pipeline capacity, thus rendering it superfluous.

How precisely would a high and rising CO2 tax make the dirty tar sands more viable? In an epic blunder of basic economics, Nocera has apparently confused a higher market price for oil — which would make the tar sands more viable — with what Hansen has actually proposed, a higher price to the consumer and businesses for using carbon-based fuels (but no direct change in the market price).

Ironically, Nocera’s economics are so backwards that he fails to realize that his final lines of snark are also utterly dead wrong. The carbon tax Hansen proposes would clearly lower demand for oil overall, and thus lower the price of oil, which would also undermine the tar sands viability.

And as Brad Plumer notes in his debunking, “No, a carbon tax wouldn’t be good for Canada’s tar sands,” tar sands oil “would be at an even greater disadvantage” since it “is more carbon-intensive than other types of crude, creating 14 percent to 17 percent more greenhouse-gas emissions over its lifespan.”

It is a sad commentary on the state of (lack of?) basic editing at the NY Times that it ran this error-riddled piece.

Finally, if you were seduced by Nocera’s “maybe” into wondering whether a CO2 price rising to $115/tCO2 in 2023 would cut U.S. CO2 emissions by 30%? Well, the Energy Information Administration says that a mere $25/tCO2 would cut CO2 emissions 20% in 10 years. So I think it is rather obvious that another $90/tCO2 on top of that would easily cut emissions 30% (especially since Hansen doesn’t want to stop the CO2 price rise after just 10 years).

As Hansen writes:

Joe Nocera was polite, but he does not understand basic economics.  If a rising price is placed on carbon, the tar sands will be left in the ground where they belong.

Hansen explains why he posted his email to Nocera: “Joe Nocera quoted a private comment from a note explaining that I could not promise I would be back in New York to meet him.  But he did not mention the contents of the e-mail that I sent him with information about the subject we were to discuss.  The entire e-mail is copied below.” In a cover email, Hansen explains, “Apologies to Bill McKibben for the comment that could be misconstrued — I do not question the efforts to wake up the public to the situation at hand, and pressure elected officials to serve the public interest, not special interests.”

Last year, Nocera took exception to my saying he joined “the climate ignorati,” asserting that I was casting him as a “global warming denier.” But as I noted at the time, the ignorati are, as Google reveals, “Elites who, despite their power, wealth, or influence, are prone to making serious errors when discussing science and other technical matters.” The shoe fits.

jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery('#comment_submit').click(function(){if(jQuery('#comment_check:checked').length

View the original article here

HHS Delays Basic Health Plan Option Until 2015

The Obama administration has delayed by one year the rollout of a health program aimed at low to moderate-income people who won’t qualify for the expanded Medicaid program under the federal health law.

Under the so-called Basic Health Program, some states had planned to offer government insurance to people who don’t qualify for Medicaid, but who would be hard pressed — even with federal subsidies — to afford the premiums and cost-sharing of plans offered in the new insurance marketplaces. Those earning up to twice the federal poverty level, or about $47,000 for a family of four, would have been eligible.

The Department of Health and Human Services on Wednesday said it basically ran out of time to put out guidelines to get the program running by 2014.

“HHS expects to issue proposed rules regarding the Basic Health Program for comment in 2013 and final guidance in 2014, so that the program will be operational beginning in 2015 for states interested in pursuing this option.”

HHS said it will work with states to have the program available in 2015 and help states continue efforts to help people get coverage who don’t qualify for Medicaid.

Proponents of the Basic Health Program idea maintain that having such a plan would make coverage more affordable by offering lower cost-sharing.

Washington, Minnesota, Iowa and New York are scheduled to end their programs later this year because it was assumed beneficiaries would get coverage through the health law. Massachusetts’ program will expire in June.

Another advantage of the basic health program is that people won’t have to worry about paying the government back if their incomes increase during the year in which they are enrolled, while people getting subsidies could face that prospect.

“We see this as good news because we have a clear commitment that BHP funding will be available in 2015, as well as a commitment that the federal government will work with us to continue MinnesotaCare through 2014 until BHP funding becomes available,” said Jeremy Drucker, spokesman for Minnesota Department of Human Services. About 130,000 people are enrolled in MinnesotaCare, which is scheduled to end in December.

This entry was posted on Thursday, February 7th, 2013 at 5:58 am.

View the original article here

Brave New Foundation Needs Some Brave New Basic Phone Training

Hanging Up 090 – Remedial Call Termination Procedures

Meet Jesse Lava, campaign director – campaign director – at Brave New Foundation: progressive, comedy savant, and first-time user of phones. If you’ve never heard of the man or the group, well, no surprise there. But they do exist, and they are hilarious.

Oh Jesse, you so crazy! They eat babies? YOU ARE A COMIC GENIUS! SOMEONE GET THIS MAN AN HBO SPECIAL RIGHT NOW!

The fake sincerity, the outburst of laughter releasing his obvious nervousness … you’d almost think it was a job interview or an audition or an 11 year old who just asked if your refrigerator was running. I’ll hand it to him, though; he did manage not to babble on about the Kochtopus or the Illuminati.

Tonight, Brave New Foundation is debuting a “documentary” titled Koch Brothers Exposed, which if the trailer is any indication, will consist in the main of accusations that the Kochs have lots of money, and that you should probably be upset about that. (George Soros could not be reached for comment.) You can read “sincere” Jesse discussing the premiere here. Just don’t bother trying to click on his link to the film, it doesn’t work. First day on the internet, too, one might assume.

The best part of the faux call above, for me at least, was the voice at the end suggesting they do a “second take” because “there was so much sirens? When you were talking?” Like, Oh. My. Gosh. For sure. As organized, bought-and-paid for fake grassroots harassment campaigns go, this one clearly needs a little more practice. I mean, if you’re going to be in the business of demonizing rich people for being involved in political causes, you might try starting out not being funded by Soros. Step two is to find people who know how to use things like, oh I don’t know, phones, the internet, English .. you know, starter tools.

By the way, if you’d like to fail to hang up on Brave New Foundation, you can reach them at 310-204-0448.

View the original article here