Four Former Pennsylvania Governors Want To End Judicial Elections

The corrosive influence of increased spending and politicking surrounding judicial elections has manifested itself around the country, most recently in the conviction of a Pennsylvania Supreme Court justice for corruption linked to her own judicial campaign. But moves to change the process for selecting judges face an uphill battle. This month, four former Pennsylvania governors – two from each party – are capitalizing on the recent conviction of  Joan Orie Melvin to highlight the problem of political influence on judges and vie for a constitutional amendment to change the process.

A bill endorsed by the governors would have candidates for appellate courts in the state approved by a commission and then nominated by the governor, insulating them from the fundraising demands of a judicial election that may sway judges’ decision-making.

“When it comes to statewide judges, very few voters know who they are, and if they do know who they are, it’s for the wrong reasons,” said former Republican governor Dick Thornburgh, now working for the law firm K&L Gates. The former governors warned in a call Monday that judicial elections give the dangerous impression that judicial elections are for sale and cast a “very dark shadow” over the integrity of what should be neutral arbiters. To pass such an amendment, the Legislature would have to vote on the issue in two consecutive sessions, and then hold a referendum.

View the original article here

GOP Governors Refusing To Expand Medicaid Could Cost Their States’ Employers More Than $1 Billion

The Republican governors who are refusing to accept Obamacare’s optional expansion of the Medicaid program typically cite financial concerns; despite all evidence to the contrary, GOP leaders claim that accepting federal funds to extend health coverage to additional low-income American will end up being too costly for their states. According to a new study, however, they have it backwards. Continuing to resist health reform could be significantly financially riskier than simply agreeing to expand Medicaid.

Each governor resisting Medicaid expansion could end up costing the employers in their state over $1 billion dollars, a new Jackson Hewitt Tax Service report finds. That’s because, since the health reform law seeks to ensure that everyone has access to insurance, Obamacare holds businesses with more than 50 employees responsible for making sure their workers have adequate benefits. Employers won’t be penalized for failing to offer health care to their low-wage workers if those employees can access public insurance through Medicaid — but if states don’t expand their Medicaid pools, the workers who have no other way to get health care could end up costing their employers:

A clause in the 2010 health-care overhaul penalizes some employers when their workers aren’t able to obtain affordable medical coverage through the company. Employers can avoid those fees if their workers qualify for Medicaid as part of an expansion that as many as 22 states have rejected, according to a report today by Jackson Hewitt Tax Service Inc.

Without Medicaid, a “shared responsibility” payment of as much as $3,000 may be triggered for each employee who can’t get insurance through their company. In Texas, the largest state to refuse to increase Medicaid, employers may be liable for as much as $448 million in fines, the study found. In Florida, where the legislature has refused an expansion supported by Governor Rick Scott, employers may pay as much as $219 million. [...]

Of course, this won’t come as welcome news to many of the companies that have so far gotten away with denying their workers health benefits. Employers are decrying Obamacare’s “shared responsibility” provision for potentially raising their costs, threatening to slash their workers’ hours, freeze hiring and lay off staff, or raise the prices for their products.

But the health law is simply trying to work within an employer-based insurance system that hasn’t historically been able to ensure that poor Americans can access the benefits they need. If low-wage workers can’t qualify for public insurance programs because their governors won’t expand Medicaid’s eligibility levels, then they will need to be able to get health care from their employers. And if their bosses won’t provide it, they’ll have to turn to the subsidized insurance on Obamacare’s health exchanges — triggering the employer fine.

Even aside from Medicaid expansion’s potential to help alleviate the “shared responsibility” fee, several reports have projected that the states choosing to expand their Medicaid programs will actually save money by doing so. The financial benefits are largely thanks to the increased federal funding that will free up states’ funds for other purposes, but also because of the reduced strain of providing fewer health services for the uninsured once more people are covered.

View the original article here

Remarks by the President and Vice President at Meeting of the National Governors Association

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

State Dining Room

11:18 A.M. EST

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Thank you all.  I tell you what, I didn't know Jack was as good as he is until I heard that rhyme last night.  (Laughter.)  Jack, if you had done that, I’d be introducing you here.  (Laughter.)

Thank you all very, very much.  I’m sorry -- you guys are much more disciplined than the place I lived for 36 years, up on the Hill, and you’re running ahead of schedule.  And so the President is with me, and I want to thank you all for being here.  
We have a lot to work on.  There’s a lot from fixing a broken immigration system to rebuilding our nation’s infrastructure, and this new word everybody in America is learning about -- “sequester.”

This town, unlike many of your capitals, is I hope temporarily frozen in -- not indifference but in sort of an intense partisanship, the likes of which in my career I’ve only see the last couple years.  But you know the American people have moved to a different place.  By the way, thanks for being so nice to my wife last night.  I like you a hell of better.  (Laughter.) We disagreed on some things.  

But all kidding aside, I think the American people have moved -- Democrats, Republicans, independents.  They know that the possibilities for this country are immense.  They're no longer traumatized by what was a traumatizing event, the great collapse in 2008.  They're no longer worried, I think, about our economy being overwhelmed either by Europe writ large, the EU, or China somehow swallowing up every bit of innovation that exists in the world.  They're no longer, I think, worried about our economy being overwhelmed beyond our shores.  

And I don't think they're any more -- there’s no -- there’s very little doubt in any circles out there about America’s ability to be in position to lead the world in the 21st century, not only in terms of our foreign policy, our incredible defense establishment, but economically.  I think the American people are ready to get up.  As a civil rights leader, when I was coming up as a kid, said, they're just -- the American people are tired of being tired.  I think they're ready to get up and move.  And you guys know that because it’s happening in your states.  You probably feel it in your fingertips more than most of us do here in Washington.

And as I said, I think they know we’re better positioned than any nation in the world to lead the world.  And that's why I think they're so frustrated by what they see and don't see happening here in Washington.  And I think their frustration is turning into a little bit of anger.

I found an interesting dynamic -- without ruining any of your reputations and picking out any one of you -- but whether it was a Democrat or Republican governor I had been talking to last night and over this past weekend, I heard from several of you, both parties, how do you deal with this going on up here?  How do you deal with the Congress?  No distinction, Democrat or Republican, depending who I was talking to, no distinction about who you’re dealing with -- but how do you deal with this?  Because you guys deal and women deal with legislatures that are split.  Some of you represent a minority party as a governor, yet you get on very well with -- you accomplish things in your home state.  And as I said, I’ve been here long enough -- that's the way it used to work, and I think we can make it work that way again.

But there’s a number of things we have to do immediately, and we may disagree on how to address them, but I don't think anybody disagrees on the need for them to be addressed -- from implementing the Affordable Care Act.  It’s the law.  You all are grappling with that.  Each of you are making different decisions, but you’re grappling with it.  You’re moving and you’re making your own judgments.  

We also have to -- I don't think there’s much disagreement there’s a need for immigration reform.  I’ve not met a governor from the time of implementing the Recovery Act to now who doesn't think that we have do something about our crumbling infrastructure in order to impact on our productivity here in this country -- continue to attract, keep and bring back American business from abroad.  

And there’s very little disagreement on the need to build an education system that has such immense possibilities for our people.

But on most of these issues we’re united by more than what divides us.  All these issues intersect at a place -- the ones I just mentioned and others -- they intersect at a place where both the state and federal governments engage.  So we’re going to have to work together.  They overlap in many cases.  

We’ll have our differences, but we all should agree that the United States has to once again have the highest percentage of college graduates of any nation in the world.  I don't think there’s any disagreement.  Everybody agrees and some of you governors have led the way on early education and the consequences for the prospects of success for our children not only of graduating, but avoiding the criminal justice system.  You’ve all led in knowing that we have to have reform of our high school system so that we -- and not only finding a pathway for people who are going to four-year college and community college but go into the trades.  

So there’s so much agreement that I think we ought to be able to get a fair amount done.  And we should all agree that to grow our economy we have to invest in manufacturing, clean energy, infrastructure, education.  The question is who invests and how much and how -- we’re going to debate that.  But there’s not much disagreement about the need to invest.  

And I think we’re all -- I’ve never met a Democrat or Republican who’s been a governor who doesn't think that the American people should have the sense that hard work is going to be rewarded, that there’s a chance that if you work hard, you got an opportunity.  I don't know of any group of men or women who are a better living example of that than all of you sitting in front of me in your own experiences.  

So the question is -- we all use the phrase “move forward in a balanced way” -- when one man’s balance is another man’s imbalance, but that's what we got to talk about.  That's what’s at stake.  But the one thing that I don't think any of you lack is a vision about how great this country can be now that we’re coming back, that we ought to be able to reassert ourselves in a way that we own the 21st century.  And I know the guy I’m about to introduce believes that as strongly as all of you do.

Ladies and gentlemen, let me introduce you to the President -- who’s back with the pastry chef and I’m wondering what he’s doing back there.  (Laughter.)  The President of the United States, my friend, Barack Obama.  (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you, everybody.  (Applause.)   Thank you.  Thank you, guys.  Please have a seat.  Well, welcome, everybody.  Thanks for being here.  

We all have a lot on our plate, everything from our immigration system to our education system.  As Joe talked about, our goal is to make sure that we can be an effective partner with you.

I want to thank the members of my Cabinet who are here, and members of the administration.  I want to thank Jack and Mary for their leadership of the NGA.  And everybody else, I just want to say thanks to you for being on your best behavior last night.  (Laughter.)  I’m told nothing was broken.  No silverware is missing.  (Laughter.)  I didn’t get any calls from the neighbors about the noise -- although I can’t speak for Joe’s after-party at the Observatory.  I hear that was wild.  (Laughter.)  

Now, I always enjoy this weekend when I have a chance to see the governors.  As leaders, we share responsibility to do whatever we can to help grow our economy and create good middle-class jobs, and open up new doors of opportunity for all of our people.  That’s our true north, our highest priority.  And it’s got to guide every decision that we make at every level.

As I’ve said, we should be asking ourselves three questions every single day:  How do we make America a magnet for good jobs? How do we equip our people with the skills and the training to get those jobs?  And how do we make sure if they get those jobs that their hard work actually pays off?  

As governors, you’re the ones who are on the ground, seeing firsthand every single day what works, what doesn’t work, and that's what makes you so indispensable.  Whatever your party, you ran for office to do everything that you could to make our folks’ lives better.  And one thing I know unites all of us, and all of you -- Democrats and Republicans -- and that is the last thing you want to see is Washington get in the way of progress.  

Unfortunately, in just four days, Congress is poised to allow a series of arbitrary, automatic budget cuts to kick in that will slow our economy, eliminate good jobs, and leave a lot of folks who are already pretty thinly stretched scrambling to figure out what to do.  

This morning, you received a report outlining exactly how these cuts will harm middle-class families in your states.  Thousands of teachers and educators will be laid off.  Tens of thousands of parents will have to deal with finding child care for their children.  Hundreds of thousands of Americans will lose access to primary care and preventive care like flu vaccinations and cancer screenings.  Tomorrow, for example, I’ll be in the Tidewater region of Virginia, where workers will sit idle when they should be repairing ships, and a carrier sits idle when it should be deploying to the Persian Gulf.  

Now, these impacts will not all be felt on day one.  But rest assured the uncertainty is already having an effect.  Companies are preparing layoff notices.  Families are preparing to cut back on expenses.  And the longer these cuts are in place, the bigger the impact will become.

So while you are in town, I hope that you speak with your congressional delegation and remind them in no uncertain terms exactly what is at stake and exactly who is at risk.  Because here’s the thing -- these cuts do not have to happen.  Congress can turn them off any time with just a little bit of compromise. To do so, Democrats like me need to acknowledge that we’re going to have to make modest reforms in Medicare if we want the program there for future generations and if we hope to maintain our ability to invest in critical things like education, research and infrastructure.

I’ve made that commitment.  It’s reflected in proposals I made last year and the year before that, and will be reflected in my budget, and I stand by those commitments to make the reforms for smart spending cuts.  

But we also need Republicans to adopt the same approach to tax reform that Speaker Boehner championed just two months ago.  Under our concept of tax reform, nobody’s rates would go up, but we’d be able to reduce the deficit by making some tough, smart spending cuts and getting rid of wasteful tax loopholes that benefit the well-off and the well-connected.  

I know that sometimes folks in Congress think that compromise is a bad word.  They figure they’ll pay a higher price at the polls for working with the other side than they will for standing pat or engaging in obstructionism.  But, as governors, some of you with legislators controlled by the other party, you know that compromise is essential to getting things done.  And so is prioritizing, making smart choices.  

That’s how Governor O’Malley in Maryland put his state on track to all but eliminate his deficit while keeping tuition down and making Maryland’s public schools among the best in America five years running.  That’s how Governor Haslam balanced his budget last year in Tennessee while still investing in key areas like education for Tennessee’s kids.  Like the rest of us, they know we can’t just cut our way to prosperity.  Cutting alone is not an economic policy.  We’ve got to make the tough, smart choices to cut what we don’t need so that we can invest in the things that we do need.  

Let me highlight two examples of what we do need.  The first is infrastructure.  This didn’t used to be a partisan issue. I don’t know when exactly that happened.  It should be a no-brainer.  Businesses are not going to set up shop in places where roads and bridges and ports and schools are falling apart.  They’re going to open their doors wherever they can connect the best transportation and communications networks to their businesses and to their customers.  

And that’s why I proposed what we’re calling “fix-it-first” -- I talked about this in my State of the Union address -- to put people to work right now on urgent repairs like the nearly 70,000 structurally deficient bridges across the country.  And to make sure taxpayers don’t shoulder the entire burden, I also proposed a partnership to rebuild America that attracts private capital to upgrade what our businesses need most -- modern ports to move our goods, modern pipelines to withstand a storm, modern schools that are worthy of our children.

I know that some people in Congress reflexively oppose any idea that I put forward, even if it’s an idea that they once supported, but rebuilding infrastructure is not my idea.  It’s everybody’s idea.  It’s what built this country.  Governor Kitzhaber, a Democrat in Oregon, has made clean-energy infrastructure a top priority.  Governor Brownback of Kansas, a Republican, has been fighting to upgrade water infrastructure there.  

And folks who think spending really is our biggest problem should be more concerned than anybody about improving our infrastructure right now.  We're talking about deferred maintenance here.  We know we're going to have to spend the money.  And the longer we wait, the more it’s going to cost.  That is a fact.  I think Matt Mead, a Republican, put it pretty well in Wyoming’s state address.  He said failing to maintain our roads “is not a plan for being fiscally conservative.”  Well, what's true in Wyoming is true all across the United States.  

And we could be putting folks back to work right now.  We know contractors are begging for work.  They’ll come in on time, under budget, which never happens.   And we could make a whole lot of progress right now on things that we know we're going to have to do at some point.  This is like fixing the roof or repairing a boiler that's broken.  It will save us money in the long term.   

I know that one of the biggest hurdles that you face when it comes to fixing infrastructure is red tape.  And oftentimes, that comes out of Washington with regulations.  In my first term, we started to take some steps to address that.  And we’ve shaved months -- in some cases, even years -- off the timeline of infrastructure projects across America.

So today, I’m accelerating that effort.  We’re setting up regional teams that will focus on some of the unique needs each of you have in various parts of the country.  We’re going to help the Pacific Northwest move faster on renewable energy projects.  We’re going to help the Northeast Corridor move faster on high-speed rail service.  We’re going to help the Midwest and other states, like Colorado, move faster on projects that help farmers deal with worsening drought.  We’re going to help states like North Dakota and South Dakota and Montana move faster on oil and gas production.  All of these projects will get more Americans back to work faster.  And we can do even more if we can get Congress to act.    

The second priority that I want to talk about is education  -- and in particular, education that starts at the earliest age. I want to partner with each of you to make high-quality preschool available to every child in America.  

Now, this is an area where we've already seen great bipartisan work at the state level.  I was just in Governor Deal’s state to highlight this issue because Georgia has made it a priority to educate our youngest kids.  And in the school district where I visited in Decatur, Georgia, you're already seeing closing of the achievement gap.  Kids who are poor are leveling up.  And everybody is seeing real improvement, because it's high-quality, early childhood education.

Study after study shows that the sooner children begin to learn in these high-quality settings, the better he or she does down the road, and we all end up saving money.  Unfortunately, today fewer than three in 10 four-year-olds are enrolled in a high-quality preschool program.  Most middle-class parents can’t afford a few hundred bucks a week in additional income for these kinds of preschool programs.  And poor kids, who need it most, lack access.  And that lack of access can shadow them for the rest of their lives.  We all pay a price for that.  

Every dollar we invest in early childhood education can save more than seven dollars later on -- boosting graduation rates, reducing teen pregnancy, even reducing incidents of violent crime.  

And again, I'm not the first person to focus on this. Governor Bentley has made this a priority in Alabama.  Governor Snyder is making it a priority in Michigan.  Governor Tomblin has made this a priority in West Virginia.  Even in a time of tight budgets, Republicans and Democrats are focused on high-quality early childhood education.  We want to make sure that we can be an effective partner in that process.

We should be able to do that for every child, everywhere -- Democrat, Republican, blue state, red state -- it shouldn't matter.  All of us want our kids to grow up more likely to read and write and do math at grade level, to graduate high school, hold a job, and form more stable families of their own.  That will be better for every state.  That will be better for this country.  That's what high-quality early childhood education can deliver.  And I hope that you're willing to partner with us to make that happen.

Let me just close with this.  There are always going to be areas where we have some genuine disagreement, here in Washington and in your respective states.  But there are more areas where we can do a lot more cooperating than I think we've seen over the last several years.  To do that, though, this town has to get past its obsession with focusing on the next election instead of the next generation.

All of us are elected officials.  All of us are concerned about our politics, both in our own party’s as well as the other party’s.  But at some point, we've got to do some governing.  And certainly what we can't do is keep careening from manufactured crisis to manufactured crisis.  As I said in the State of the Union, the American people have worked hard and long to dig themselves out of one crisis; they don't need us creating another one.  And unfortunately, that's what we've been seeing too much out there.

The American people are out there every single day, meeting their responsibilities, giving it their all to provide for their families and their communities.  A lot of you are doing the same things in your respective states.  Well, we need that same kind of attitude here in Washington.  At the very least, the American people have a right to expect that from their representatives.  

And so I look forward to working with all of you not just to strengthen our economy for the short term, but also to reignite what has always been the central premise of America’s economic engine, and that is that we build a strong, growing, thriving middle class where if you work hard in this country, no matter who you are, what you look like, you can make it; you can succeed.  That's our goal, and I know that's the goal of all of you as well.  
So I look forward to our partnering.  And with that, what I want to do is clear out the press so we can take some questions. (Applause.)

END
11:40 A.M. EST

President Obama is on hand for the unveiling of the new Rosa Parks statue in the U.S. Capitol

February 27, 2013 12:00 PM EST

To mark African American History Month, as well as the 150th anniversary of the year the Emancipation Proclamation, we talked with White House Curator Bill Allman about a painting called Watch Meeting--Dec. 31st 1862--Waiting for the Hour that hangs near the Oval Office in the West Wing.

President Obama strongly believes we need to replace the arbitrary cuts known as the sequester with balanced deficit reduction, and today he was at a shipyard in Newport News, VA to talk about what failing to do so will mean for middle class families.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

Remarks by the First Lady and Dr. Jill Biden to National Governors Association

The White House

Office of the First Lady

State Dining Room

10:40 A.M. EST

DR. BIDEN:  Thank you very much.  (Applause.)  Thank you, David, for that kind introduction.  And thank you all for coming this morning.  It was great to see you all last night.  And wasn’t Audra McDonald incredible?  (Applause.)  

So we’re delighted to have you here at the White House again this morning.  And the last time we were together, Michelle and I talked to you about one of our top priorities of our initiative Joining Forces, which I’m sure you all know about, which is our way to honor and support our troops, veterans and military families.

And we talked about one of the top concerns that we hear about from military spouses wherever we go, and that's professional licensing.  So I’m sure you remember this from last year, many of you do who were here.  

And our nation’s military spouses move 10 times more than their civilian counterparts, and 35 percent of those spouses have jobs that require a professional license.  So they're our teachers, our nurses, our social workers.  And we heard from a teacher -- this is just one of the instances -- who had 10 years' experience in her specialty in one state, and then when she moved to another state, she had to wait because the exam only took place twice a year.  So she lost a lot of time and actually a lot of income because she had to wait.  And then we met a nurse who moved 10 times during her husband’s service and needed to go through a different and complicated process every time she moved.  

So these are just a few of the countless stories we’ve heard that illustrate what a challenge license portability really is for our military spouses.

Back in February of last year when we met with you, only 11 states had pro-spouse legislation.  So the First Lady and I asked you for your help, and you’ve stepped up.  Yes.  (Applause.)  And you stepped up because you appreciate how much our military families do for our country every single day.  And just last month, Arkansas became the 28th state to pass legislation.  

In just one year we’ve made tremendous progress, and the First Lady and I are really appreciative of your efforts.  But there’s still more to do.  Right now we’re thankful that we have 13 more states that already have introduced legislation and are headed in the right direction.  So if your state has a small active-duty population, you might think that this issue may not impact you, but every state has a National Guard or Reserve.  And with so many families -- military families transitioning out of the military now and in the next few years, they’ll be focused on finding good jobs, good schools and good communities, whether there is a military base nearby or not.

So for the sake of our military families, it’s important that all 50 states get this done.  And passing these laws is just the first step.  We hope all of you will reach out to your bases and your National Guard and Reserve communities, talk with the military spouses -- I’m sure many of you already do this already -- and make sure that these laws are working for our military families.

So thank you for helping ease the burden for our military spouses and you’ve all done so much in all of your states.  So again, thank you for all that you’ve done already.

And now I’d like to introduce someone who has been working tirelessly for military families, someone who would like to tell you about our next effort.  You didn't think you were coming here without an ask, right?  (Laughter.)  So to make sure that all of our military families have good family -- good family-supporting jobs, so I’d like to introduce our First Lady, Michelle Obama.  (Applause.)

MRS. OBAMA:  Thanks so much.  (Applause.)  Thank you all.  Good morning.  Thank you.  I hope you all got some rest after last night.  We had a good time -- little tired.  (Laughter.)  If you noticed, I stayed up a little bit later -- (laughter) -- a little bit longer than I had anticipated, but it was well worth it.  But it's good to have you back this morning.

I want to thank Jill, once again, for that introduction, but more importantly for being such a tremendous partner on our Joining Forces initiative.  She's brought her level of passion and focus to this.  We could not be where we are without somebody like Jill who knows these issues, who lives them as a Blue Star mom every day.  So I want to thank her.  But I also want to echo -- absolutely.  (Applause.)  

And to echo Jill, I want to start by thanking all of you for the incredible work that you have done on the effort of spousal licensing.  I mean, it's truly a tremendous effort to go from 11 states to all but 13 states having gotten that done.  And as I was talking to Governor Christie and others, this isn't an issue that people don’t want to work on, it's just a matter of governors being aware of what's going on in their states.  And the truth is, is that once you know, so many of you have stepped up because we all want the best for our troops, our veterans, and for their families.

Your leadership has been truly phenomenal, and it just goes to show the power that states and governors have to make a difference for our troops, veterans and our families.  But, like Jill said, our work here is far from finished.  And I'm not just talking about licensing for our military spouses, I'm also talking about supporting our men and women in uniform as more and more of them make that transition back to civilian life.  

And as my husband announced during the State of the Union address, 34,000 troops are going to be coming home from Afghanistan in the next year.  And that -- yes, that’s a good thing.  (Applause.)  And that war will be over by the end of 2014.  So in the coming years, more than 1 million servicemembers -- 1 million of them -- will make the transition to civilian life.  I mean, just think about that impact -- a million men and women hanging up their uniform, trying to figure out what's next, and doing everything they can to make that change as seamless as possible for all of their families.

So the fact is that while this time of war may be ending, the truth is that our responsibilities to our troops and their families will really just be ramping up.  And that’s what I want to talk with you all about today -- how we can fulfill what is perhaps our most pressing responsibility to our troops.  And that is to make sure that when they come home after serving and stepping up on our behalf, that they can find a job -- and not just any job, but a good job, the kind of job that they can raise their families on.  Now, some of this work has already begun.  Last summer, my husband created a taskforce to help our servicemembers obtain the national certification that they need to help fill high-demand civilian jobs starting with the manufacturing industry.  

And today, we are excited to announce that we’re expanding this effort to the state level to focus on the health care and transportation industries.  So the idea is simple.  Many of you are working on these issues already.  If a servicemember has spent years treating wounded troops in a military hospital, they shouldn’t have to then spend thousands of dollars to get back into the classroom and study things that they've already learned just to get the same kind of job in the civilian world.  We want to make it easier for those who served as medics or drivers in the military to get new jobs as paramedics and nurses and physician assistants or truck drivers.

And since the credentials and licenses for those jobs are issued through the states, that means that all of you as America's governors have a very unique responsibility and opportunity to address this issue.  We know that right now our men and women in uniform face all kinds of obstacles before they can put their skills to use at home.  These men and women have spent thousands of hours in combat zones, saving lives amid explosions and gunfire.  They've driven armored vehicles thousands of miles on dangerous roads lined with IEDs.  Yet, back here at home they can't get hired to drive a semi or serve as an EMT.

So take the example of Maria Aliftiras.  She spent eight years as a medic in the Army Reserves -- eight years.  But when she left the Reserves, she had to take 1,200 hours of courses and clinical work to get her civilian paramedics license.  And she said that hundreds of those hours, about half of the coursework she had to take, was spent reviewing skills she had already mastered.  

And then there is former Navy Corpsman Eric Smith, who was once in charge of a 20-bed intensive care unit in San Diego.  After that, he served two tours in Iraq as a combat medic for a Marine infantry unit.  But when he came home, he couldn't get hired in a medical clinic.  So he had to take up odd jobs.  He had to serve as a bartender, do some day work.  And at one point, he even had to sign up to be a test patient for a drug study just to make enough money to get by.  And as he put it -- and these are his words -- he said, "In the civilian world, my military education and training did not translate because I didn't have a piece of paper saying that it did."  So we all have to think about that.  Because of a piece of paper, because our credentialing processes don't adequately reflect the skills and expertise our troops have gained serving this country, putting their lives on the line -- troops like Petty Officer Smith end up tending bar instead of saving lives.

But, fortunately, again, all of you have the power to make this right.  As we have seen on the spousal licensing issue, there are a number of ways that you as governors can help put our troops back to work without lowering a single professional standard in your states, because that's something we talked about.  This is not about lowering standards.  We've done this for our troops with manufacturing skills, and hundreds of them have earned advanced certifications already.  So now it’s time to get them back to work in the medical and transportation fields as well, and to do it right away.

So our goal is that by the end of 2015 -- we’ve got another goal, 2015 -- we want all 50 states to have taken legislative or executive action to help our troops get the credentials they need.  And that means that our troops will be taken care of no matter what state they decide to call home, which is why on the spousal licensing issue it is so important to get the rest of those 13.  We don’t want our men and women -- and their families -- in uniforms and veterans to be limited to where they can live because not all states are onboard.

Now, we know that every state is different and that what works beautifully in one state might not work as easily in another, so we’ve given you all packets like we did a year ago that lay out, step by step, all kinds of options for what each of your states could do on this issue.  And in your packet you’ll also get some tips and also some success stories from states like Oklahoma, Colorado, where Governors Fallin and Hickenlooper have taken important steps to ease the credentialing burden on their veterans in their states.  So we have some wonderful models already out there.  

And I want to emphasize that today will not be the last time that you hear from Jill and me on this issue, because with everything that involves our troops, veterans, and families, we will be working to help support you in whatever way we can along the way.  And we have a couple of folks here today who can help with whatever you need.  We have Todd Veazie, who is here, who’s the new Executive Director for Joining Forces.  Todd is right there.  We have Frank DiGiovanni, who is with the DOD.  Frank, would you stand so that they can see you as well?  

They are here and ready to answer any questions, to provide any follow-up that you may need.  Put them in contact with whoever they should be talking to in your states.  And, more importantly, we’re also going to be talking to your spouses about this, which is really the key -- (laughter) -- because we’re going to make sure they nag you until this happens in your state.  It’s what we’re doing at lunch.

DR. BIDEN:  Yes, that’s right.

MRS. OBAMA:  We also have members of the American Legion here today as well, because they’re behind this effort 100 percent.  And we are so grateful that they’ll be spreading the word about all of this throughout their state and local chapters across the country.  

But in the end, all of you are the ones who can make the biggest difference for our troops on this issue.  So we need you.  We need you to champion these credentialing issues right from the governor’s mansion.  We need you to find allies and supporters in your state legislators.  We need you to galvanize and involve the media in this effort in every way that you can as well.  

Because what we do know is that when you do all that -- what you know as well as Jill and I have seen that people step up.  You see that this is one of those issues, as we talked about at dinner, that everyone can get behind.  That’s the beauty of it.  You’re not going to have to twist many arms to make this happen.  People on both sides of the aisle will start lining up to help on this issue because they know like you and I know that if we do this, we’re not just upholding our values and honoring our troops -- we’ll also be lowering the unemployment rate.  We’ll be improving our health care system.  We’re going to be boosting economic growth in this country through these efforts.

And most importantly, we’re going to be strengthening our country not just for now but for the years ahead.  And in the end, that’s really what Joining Forces is all about.  It’s not just about supporting our heroes while they’re on the battlefield.  It’s about standing with them in these times; standing with them and their families when they come home.  When they come, it’s a forever commitment, because we know that they don’t stop serving this country when their military service ends.  That is the beauty of our servicemembers.  They keep on going.  

We know that they are the next generation of leaders all over the place -- in our businesses, in our hospitals, in our schools.  They are the key resources that will put this country on the track and keep it on the track of greatness.  So we don’t just owe it to them to get issues like this right.  We owe it to our communities and we owe it to our country.  That’s how we will continue to grow our economy, lift up our families, and create even greater opportunities for generations to come.

So today, I want to once again thank you all.  Thank you for everything you do as leaders in your states.  Thank you for the sacrifices that you and your families make to do these jobs.  And thank you for everything that you have done and will continue to do for our men and women in uniform and their families.  And Jill and I look forward to working with you all in the years to come.

So again, thank you.  God bless.  I hope you have a productive day.  And we’ll be following up.  (Laughter.)  Take care.  (Applause.)  

END
11:08 A.M. EST

President Obama is on hand for the unveiling of the new Rosa Parks statue in the U.S. Capitol

February 27, 2013 12:00 PM EST

To mark African American History Month, as well as the 150th anniversary of the year the Emancipation Proclamation, we talked with White House Curator Bill Allman about a painting called Watch Meeting--Dec. 31st 1862--Waiting for the Hour that hangs near the Oval Office in the West Wing.

President Obama strongly believes we need to replace the arbitrary cuts known as the sequester with balanced deficit reduction, and today he was at a shipyard in Newport News, VA to talk about what failing to do so will mean for middle class families.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

11 GOP Governors Still Need To Decide Whether Or Not To Deny Health Care To Low-Income Americans

Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) announced on Wednesday that he will turn down Obamacare’s optional expansion of the Medicaid program, which makes him the thirteenth Republican leader to refuse to extend public health insurance to additional low-income Americans. Six GOP governors — in Arizona, Michigan, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio and Nevada — have expressed support for expanding Medicaid, and the rest still need to decide what they want to do about that particular provision of the health reform law.

And even though most GOP leaders claim that expanding Medicaid would be too costly, they’re actually being lobbied by hospital companies, economists, and health care experts who all say the financial benefits — since the federal government will fully fund the first several years of expansion — are too good to turn down:

“It’s fascinating, because on the political level, it’s a classic clash between money and politics,” said Dan Mendelson, CEO of Avalere health advisory company. He said he and his 170 advisers working with the health care industry are hearing plenty about expansion.

“It sets up a really difficult tension between the Republican governors and the hospitals, but there’s an increasing level of political cover being given to the governors to expand their programs,” Mendelson said. [...]

In Florida, a recent poll found that 60% of residents would like to see Medicaid expanded, Mendelson said. Several economic studies have found the states may benefit both by federal funds going into local economies, as well as taxes from those sales going back into the coffers of local government.

The significant federal funds allocated to states that choose to expand Medicaid led the hospital industry to wonder if governors were bluffing about rejecting the expansion. That quickly proved not to be the case, as stubborn GOP politicians in some of the states with the highest rates of uninsurance in the nation still refused to cooperate with the health care reform law.

Diverse coalitions across the country have partnered to pressure resistant lawmakers to expand their Medicaid programs. The growing list of GOP governors who have accepted the optional expansion over the past few weeks seemed to signal that political deadlock may soon give way to reality, but the remaining Republican leaders may buck that trend when they eventually announce their own decisions.

View the original article here

Kansas Governor’s Tax Plan Will Cost Hundreds Of Millions Of Dollars, Despite Raising Taxes On The Poor

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback (R), like Republican governors all across the country, aims to implement a regressive tax plan that involves cutting income taxes for the rich while, in his case, maintaining a sales tax hike that primarily hurts the poor. The sales tax increase was supposed to be temporary when it was adopted in 2010, but Brownback now wants to make permanent.

Sales taxes disproportionately impact the poor, who are more likely to spend all or most of their income. According to an analysis by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, Brownback’s plan will raise taxes on the poorest Kansans, but still lose hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue due to huge tax cuts for the rich:

– The poorest 20 percent of Kansas taxpayers would pay 0.2 percent more of their income in taxes each year, or an average increase of $22.

– The middle 20 percent of Kansas taxpayers would pay 0.2 percent less of their income in taxes each year, or an average cut of $104.

– Upper-income families, by contrast, reap the greatest benefit with the richest one percent of Kansans, those with an average income of over a million dollars, saving an average of $6,528 a year.

The plan would cost the state $340 million in revenue, despite hiking taxes the poor. And Kansas already has a regressive tax system, with the poorest residents paying a rate more than twice as high as the richest 1 percent.

View the original article here

GOP Governor’s Plan To Pay For Roads By Taxing The Poor Advances

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) has been stumping for his new transportation plan, which would eliminate the state’s gas tax and instead fund transportation via an expanded sales tax. The plan would shift the cost of transportation funding away from those who use the system and onto Virginia’s poorest residents. But so far, it has encountered little resistance:

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell’s controversial transportation bill passed the House of Delegates Finance Committee on Wednesday, moving past its first hurdle in the state’s 2013 General Assembly session.

In a 14-8 vote along party lines, the committee passed McDonnell’s package, which calls for eliminating the state’s 17.5 cents per gallon gas tax and raising the state sales tax from 5 percent to 5.8 percent.

McDonnell’s plan would wallop the poor, while letting the richest Virginian’s (not to mention any out of state drivers passing through) off largely scot-free, as this chart shows:

“Eliminating the gas tax paid by highway users and raising taxes on all other Virginians to pave our roads makes no sense,” said State Sen. Chap Petersen (D). “Indeed, eliminating our traditional road funding because cars are more efficient makes about as much sense as canceling your child’s college fund because tuition keeps rising.”

View the original article here

Virginia Republicans Work To Implement Obamacare, Despite GOP Governor’s Opposition To Reform

Even though President Obama will be inaugurated for his second term on Monday, GOP lawmakers across the country are still in denial about the fact that Obama’s re-election secured the future of his landmark health reform law. Republicans have been digging in their heels against reform, allowing deadlines to come and go without making any progress toward implementing the Affordable Care Act in their states.

But even in states led by GOP politicians who remain resistant to health reform, like Virginia’s Gov. Bob McDonnell (R), some Republican officials are taking matters into their own hands to prepare for Obamacare’s implementation. As the Huffington Post reports, Virginia Republicans — including some members of the governor’s own administration — are working behind the scenes to plan a health exchange, despite Gov. Bob McDonnell’s resistance to reform:

McDonnell surprised no one when he decided last month Virginia wouldn’t create a health insurance exchange under Obamacare. The trouble, though, is that health care reform is coming to the state and its residents whether Virginia’s Republican politicians want it or not. It’s a reality Republican opponents of Obama’s health care law are facing across the country.

That’s why the McDonnell administration and some GOP legislators are working behind the scenes to get ready, as the Richmond Times-Dispatch reported Wednesday.

Against McDonnell’s stated position that the federal government should do all the work to set up and maintain a health insurance exchange, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reported some Republican legislators are pushing for the state to work in partnership with federal authorities, an option seven other states including neighboring West Virginia and North Carolina already have chosen. Twenty-five states, including Virginia, will have a federally operated exchange while 17 states and the District of Columbia will run their own. Mississippi’s case is still up in the air.

Virginia isn’t alone. Even before the presidential election, conservative officials in states like Mississippi, Kansas, and Arizona were working under the radar to quietly prepare their states for the inevitable wave of health care reforms. Those Republican lawmakers have begun to clash with the other members of their party because they realize that resisting Obamacare may not be in their best interests anymore — particularly when it comes to setting up exchanges, which the federal government will simply step in and do for the states that refuse to do it themselves.

View the original article here

Sherrod Brown Compares GOP Governors to Hitler, Stalin

Promoted from diaries.

Last year while governors across the Midwest worked to reform broken public union laws, Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) slandered them in a speech that could have easily been written by one of the millionaire “leaders” at SEIU, NEA, or AFSCME.

During one of his stemwinders about the wondrous things unions do, Sherrod dropped a reductio ad Hitlerum on Governor Kasich (OH), Governor Walker (WI), and Governor Christie (NJ):

Bizarrely, Sherrod claims he’s not comparing Kasich, Walker, and Christie to Hitler, Stalin, and Mubarak in the middle of comparing them to Hitler, Stalin, and Mubarak. While he’s conflating overdue reforms with mass murder, Sherrod also repeats one of his favorite deceptions by pretending government unions are the same as private industry unions.

Several media outlets noted the dictatorial portion of Sherrod’s rant, and the next day he apologized for stepping in it:

“But in speaking about this, I should not have mentioned the hostility of tyrants like Hitler to unions,” Brown said. “I don’t want my mistake to distract from the critical debate in Ohio, and I apologize for it.”

Sherrod didn’t want “to distract from the critical debate” over public union reform! Even now, slamming Ohio’s Senate Bill 5 as an “attack on workers” is the cornerstone of Sherrod’s stump speech – yet he always runs out of time before debating any of the critical specifics. Big Labor’s opponents are evil because it’s evil to oppose Big Labor.

Sherrod Brown is desperate to get additional mileage out of the union bosses’ $40 million smear campaign, but remember what was actually in Ohio’s union reform bill:

Replace automatic step increases with merit pay for public workers.Require public employees to pay 10% of their pension costs and 15% of their health insurance costs.End forced payment of “fair-share” fees for public workers who don’t want to join a union.End last-in, first-out firing policies, requiring considerations other than tenure when local governments must make layoffs.Public workers retain the privilege of collective bargaining for wages & working conditions, but may no longer go on strike against the public.

No less the Progressive than FDR, patron saint of caring Democrats, knew public unions are an awful idea. Either Sherrod Brown is too dense to recognize government and private industry are different, or he’s been lying for years to protect his favorite interest group.

Footnote: This clip is from the same speech where Sherrod claimed public union reform violates Christian principles. Refer again to the bullet points above; those are the sort of hateful reforms that get you slandered on the Senate floor as a tyrannical heathen by Sherrod Brown.

Transcript of the C-SPAN clip follows.

Sherrod Brown: Because we, as a country, we stand for a more egalitarian workforce. We stand for worker rights. We believe workers should organize and bargain collectively, if they choose. We believe in a minimum wage. We believe in workers’ compensation. We believe in worker safety. We believe in human rights, and all of that is about the labor movement, and, you know, you can support labor rights in Guatemala, but you better damn be sure you’re supporting labor rights in Wilmington, and Columbus, and Cleveland, and, and Detroit, and Dover, Delaware, and everywhere else.

And that’s, um, that’s, those were, those were some of the words Secretary Clinton said – I’m obviously expanding on them – but, as a nation, you know, I I I I look back at history and some of the worst governments we’ve ever had, you know one of the first things they did? They went after the trade unions. Hitler didn’t want unions, Stalin didn’t want unions, Mubarak didn’t want independent unions. These, these autocrats in history don’t want independent unions. So when I see, when I see in Egypt, or if I see in, in the old Soviet Russia, or I see – history tells me about Germany – I, I, I’m not, I’m not comparing what’s happening to the workers in Madison or in Columbus to Hitler and Stalin, but I am saying that history teaches us that unions are a very positive force in society that creates a middle class and that protects our freedom.

Cross-posted from jasonahart.com

View the original article here