“Passion provides purpose, but data drives decisions.”
–Andy Dunn
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: JohnNorthofDenver
IN: Trump/Vance Campaign Following Heidi Ganahl Playbook
BY: Early Worm
IN: Trump/Vance Campaign Following Heidi Ganahl Playbook
BY: Conserv. Head Banger
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: JohnNorthofDenver
IN: Trump/Vance Campaign Following Heidi Ganahl Playbook
BY: JohnNorthofDenver
IN: How Mayor Mike And A Slumlord Invented The “Takeover” Of Aurora
BY: harrydoby
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: 2Jung2Die
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: 2Jung2Die
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: JeffcoBlue
IN: Monday Open Thread
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
Single-Payer Advocates Worry ‘Medicare For All’ Hearing Could Be A ‘Farce’
WOTD2 from Vox: "The health care industry is betting on Joe Biden in its war against Medicare for all"
What side are you on?
It is fair to wait and see his plans before deciding.
An equitable, thoughtfully designed public option seems a good place to start. The average executive pay packages and profit margins for health insurance companies is obscene. There will always be a need for private insurers, but the industry bulges at the top. Providing an affordable option available to anyone will help to pop that bubble.
The most important thing to establish is that access to expert, responsible, healthcare is available to every member of every community in this nation and establish that principle as a right, not a privilege.
Mandating insurance, subsidizing it so everyone can participate, regulating to make certain key elements are included are IMHO, minimums.
Comprehensive "usual care" and catastrophic insurance would solve a huge number of problems. Figuring out how to deal with the "last year" costs which are about 40% of spending (or more) needs to be next.
Uncle Joe lost my support when the rumors stopped became more than just rumors.
Democrats Add Single-Payer Champion Ady Barkan To ‘Medicare For All’ Hearing
WOTD from Ashley Jardina via Vox: "White Identity Politics is about more than Racism".
WOTD3 from Frank Wilhoit via Brad DeLong: "Conservatism".
pompous balderdash.
I dunno…sounds right to me.
Xcel Energy OK'd to build massive $743M Colorado wind farm
https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/2019/04/25/xcel-cheyenne-ridge-wind-project-approval.html?iana=hpmvp_den_news_headline
"Xcel taking over construction of the 500-megawatt Cheyenne Ridge Wind Project and associated transmission lines…The project covers more than 100,000 acres in southeast Kit Carson County. Xcel plans to acquire turbines for the Cheyenne Ridge wind farm from Vestas-American Wind Technology, which manufactures wind turbine components at plants in Brighton and Pueblo."
Another nail in the coffin of Big Coal….
The Supreme Court of Kansas held today that the Kansas state constitution protects a woman's right to decide whether to continue her pregnancy, and that state statutes infringing upon that right are subject to strict scrutiny by the courts. The opinions are available here.
State constitutions will be relied on with increasing frequency in light of the anticipated rollback of federal substantive due process protections Gorsuch and the rapey alcoholic manbaby figure to facilitate.
Countdown to the "Right to Life" groups calling for amendment, abolition of the state Constitution, and impeachment of judges will begin in 3 …. 2 …. 1 ….
For sure…..they did that in Iowa when the state supreme court held in favor of marriage equality.
I'm a little surprised …. unless Kansas judges are not appointed by the governor. Can you imagine former Governor Skidmark not interrogating judicial candidates about the social issues, including reproductive choice?
I think one could build a case here in Colorado that any attempt to control abortion and contraception, beyond what the SCOTUS says, violates Article II, Section 4, on religious freedom.
I would not expect the current SCOTUS to completely overturn Roe, but would more likely return the decision to individual states. Those states that are strongly anti-abortion and anti-contraception could possibly be sued under pertinent sections of their state constitutions regarding religious freedom (note: I have not read every state constitution).
Colorado legalized abortion before Roe and did it legislatively. Given the track record of the egg amendment proponents and the current composition of the legislature and governor's office, it is unlikely to change even if Roe is overruled. But your point is well-taken about the state constitution providing an independent constitutional basis for right to reproductive choice.
Colorado's Constitution may provide for legal abortion, but it also restricts abortion for public employees (abortion can't be covered by insurance), for younger women, and for anyone on Medicaid.
Colorado legalized abortion in 1967. A freshman legislator, Dick Lamm, introduced a bill, and a Republican governor, John Love, signed it into law. But it had been pushed by a grassroots movement of women and men marching in the streets. Colorado's law was restrictive; it required approval by a three doctor panel and consent of the woman's parents or husband. Even that was controversial at the time. And 5-50% of emergency room admissions of women (more with women of color and poor women) were from attempted or septic DIY abortions.
Colorado's law did not go far enough, obviously. And laws varied state by state. So in 1973, Roe v Wade was decided by the Supreme Court, and abortion was legal nationwide. But again, we shouldn't give sole credit to nine justices who finally saw the light, but to pressure from below, from the streets.
There were marches in the street. There was organizing in moderate women's groups, radical feminist bookstores, lesbian bars, liberal churches, health clinics, nurse and medical worker's unions, other unions, everywhere.
The legislators and justices bowed to public pressure. I know. I was a youngun, but I was there – organizing contraceptive workshops in my high school, organizing and marching in the historic NOW/SWP march for "Free Abortion on Demand" in downtown Denver. Nobody "gave women" reproductive choice. It was a hard-won battle.
So counting on enlightened legislators interpreting the Constitution to keep abortion accessible now, in 2019, is a fool's hope. They must keep feeling pressure again from their constituents, and it has to be a grassroots movement again. We have to keep the pressure on.
What would happen if they started arresting women for having abortions, and putting them on trial?
Would you have to prevent pro-choice jurors from serving? What's it called on murder trials, death penalty averse?
Could you strike all religious zealots from the jury?
Could you strike all athiests?
"Death qualified" is the term on capital cases.
I was on a death qualified jury once. It was a life changing experience.
You may well be right about the fate of Roe, CHB. One can see SCOTUS giving Roe and its progeny the Miranda v. Arizona treatment, keeping the decision nominally alive but so watered down and riddled with exceptions that it's all but impossible for the state to violate it.
Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh loathe substantive due process on general principles and would have no trouble voting to do away with Roe entirely. Whether substantive due process survives and, if so, what it looks like will boil down to what Roberts and Alito decide.