U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) George Stern

(R) Sheri Davis

50%↑

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
March 14, 2014 06:26 AM UTC

Friday Open Thread

  • 42 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

The meaning of all of that
Some media is the whack
As you believe it's true
It blows me through the roof
Suckers, liars, get me a shovel
Some writers I know are damn devils
For them I say

Don't believe the hype

–Public Enemy

Tweet
Share

Comments

42 thoughts on “Friday Open Thread”

  1. Well, he has done it again. Why President Obama continues to lie about ACA when the truth will do is beyond me.  During the Between Two Ferns ferns interview, Obama said that you can get insurance "for what it costs to pay your cell phone bill."  This is a claim the he and his administration falsely made back in 2013.

    Lambert over at naked capitalism refuted this claim then and does so again:

    Second, neither claim is true. The average individual’s phone bill is $71 a month. According to the White House’s own doubtless self-serving figures, released today, “a 27-year-old with income of $25,000 will be able to get [silver] coverage [including subsidy] for $145 a month.” So Obama’s only off by 100% for young women. It’s even worse for families: The average family spends $139 a month on cell phones. Again according to White House figures, “a family of four with income of $50,000 will generally be able to buy a silver-level plan for $282 a month [including subsidies].” …. Discrepancies like these actually matter to people who don’t have a lot of money.

    (Snip)

    Of course, because ObamaCare’s costs are rat’s nest of special cases and vary randomly by age, location, family status, work status, phases of the moon, and so forth, an average cost is hard to determine. For an individual 27-year-old in Maine making $30,00 a year in Penobscot County, the cheapest plan is $163/month after subsidy ($30,000 is the median for “some college.”) If there’s a cell phone plan that’s more expensive than that, it’s, well, a Cadillac plan.

     

    1. Sorry, Dodd – this claim is true. The Prez didn't say anything about "average cell phone bill", he said that you* "can get insurance for what it costs to pay your cell phone bill."

      This is a valid claim. At the risk of several people on here bemoaning supporting my low-income self, after subsidies, my monthly insurance payment is $27 for a Kaiser plan. My prepaid cell phone bill is under $25.

       

       

      *generic you

      1. I love Democratic apologists. Here is exactly what President Obama said back on September 24, 2013:

        [OBAMA:] I can tell you right now that in many states across the country, if you’re say a 27-year-old young woman, don’t have health insurance, you get on that exchange, you’re going to be able to purchase high quality health insurance for less than the cost of your cellphone bill.

        His current comments must be viewed in light of what he has said in the past.

        I don't know your specific circumstances and would not ask you to disclose them. But, you raised the issue and I cannot address your personal situation without detail. Suffice it to say that there are perhaps millions of people who are qualifying for Medicaid through the exhanges due to ACA at no cost whatsoever.  But, this is special circumstance which is not addressed by President Obama back in 2013 or his recent comments.

        1. JD, what is the cost (average) of a plan actually purchased by a 27-year old woman on the healthcare exchange? I think you'll have to do better than a few examples, because it sure looks like you and the authors you cite are picking and choosing. 

          A Verizon plan for a smartphone (preferred by many millenials because their coverage is significantly better) starts at $100/mo. ($90 + tax and fees). There are ,lof course, many cheaper options, but I don't see too many millenials with flip phones.

          2. Ok. I went to Connect Health for Colorado. Using the hypothetical 24 year old, non-tobacco user with annual income of $25,000 per year, the cheapest silver plan with a $1,750 deductable and $5,000 annual out-of-pocket maximum has an unsubsidized premium of $191.83.  The 24 year old would get a subsidy of $51.92 (according to the Kaiser subsidy calculator tool). The net monthly cost would, therefore, be $139.91.

            Now, he could opt to purchase the cheapest plan on the exchange which as an unsubsidized monthly premium of $145.70, but this plan has an annual deductable of $5,000 and maximum out of pocket costs of $6,350.  – in short, for someone making $25,000 per year, junk insurance.

    2. "Why President Obama continues to lie about ACA when the truth will do is beyond me." I could say the same of you. 

      You said "Obama said that you can get insurance "for what it costs to pay your cell phone bill."" But that's not what the President said. What he said was that "Most YOUNG Americans…"

      And that is true, depending, I suppose, on how you define young. But most college-aged people or recent graduates either don't work full time or earn below the subsidy threshold, so they can usually get plans for very little.

      The Full Transcript is here. That line is on page 4. 

      …most young Americans, right now they're not covered and the truth is they can get coverage all for what it costs to pay your cell phone bill.

      1. Mea culpa. Given the context, I assumed the "most young Americans" was implicit. My apologies.

        I must take execption to this statement:

        But most college-aged people or recent graduates either don't work full time or earn below the subsidy threshold, so they can usually get plans for very little.

        As I understand it, these people would be covered by their parents health insurance policies – at least until they reach the age of 25.

          1. This assumes that their parents have insurance to put them on. 

            And even so, it allows the OPTION to put the 18-26 year olds onto insurance, but it still costs additional money to do so if the parent is not already on a plan that covers dependents. 

            For many 18-26 year olds, parents' coverage is still not an option, either because their parents aren't yet covered or because expanding the coverage to include dependents costs more than the parent is willing to pay. In these cases, the ACA allows them to get covered for a very low dollar amount. 

              1. realtity ???

                There's really no better reality, IMHO!

                (Hey Dodd, didn't your mama ever tell you not to try to blog and porn surf at the same time . . . ???)

                  1. That's  quite the over-reaction to a little ribbing. If that's all it takes to get you to call someone a poor excuse for a human being, maybe you'd better avoid the blogosphere or up your blood pressure meds.

                    1. I guess some guys overreact when then get caught blogging with their discourse in their hand ?!?

                    2. What? You don't think I am engaging is "a little ribbing?"

                      Seriously, though, for a political website and community that wants to be taken seriously this kind of comment really drops below any level of civility. (Made possible, incidentally, by the anonimity allowed by the website.)

    3. Dodd brings up a very fair point. I think we would do better by acknowledging it and speak to how the ACA still is a positive thing even though Obama's price comparison is, with some exceptions, generally wrong. Aren't we supposed to be the group that insists on being fact based? If so, we shouldn't switch to insults when the facts are against us.

      1. Dodd is a blowhard who gets pretty nasty himself when someone calls him out.  I enjoyed Diogenes having a little fun at his expense.   Civility doesn't require one to suffer fools gladly.

  2. Happy Weekend Polsters:

    Dems and Obamacare Does anybody know what Udall's position is on Obamacare?

    Keep it as is?

    Make it even better?

    Throw in the towel?

    The message for Democrats from this week's special election for a U.S. House seat in Florida was clear: Talkingabout a fix for Obamacare will not move voters. Democrats are going to have to do it.

     

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-obamacare-florida-election-edit-0314-20140314,0,5688443.story

    1. It is a ludicrous suggestion that Democrats come together at the table to fix Obamacare with those who voted some 50 odd times to repeal it.  Sure, then after that they can work with Paul Ryan to "fix" social security.  Somebody at the Tribune is thinking about unicorns pooping rainbows.  Just plain dumb.

  3. I know there aren't a lot of people like me who listen to legislative committee on their free time instead of watching TV, but did anyone else notice this?

    In the House Transportation Committee meeting on Friday, HB 1225 failed the motion to refer to the COW by a vote of 6-7. But immediately after, on the vote to postpone indefinitely, this also failed by a vote of 6-7. 

    I have never heard that happen before, where was was not passed, but also not killed. What does that mean for the bill? 

    I was hoping the news coverage would say something about it, but they didn't even mention the second vote. 

    1. HB14-1225, the "no cell phone use while driving" bill, will probably be amended and brought back for another reading. I'd contact your legislator for updates – don't see anything on it now. Max Tyler would probably know, as he cosponsored.

      1. I sure hope so.  Cellphone drivers are the biggest threat to my personal well-being.  They are drive erratically and I constantly have to take precautions to avoid them. 

        This brings up one of my pet peeves — we tend to focus on minor problems and avoid addressing the more serious problems in society.  Two examples:

        –Focusing on drivers high on pot (who seem to be pretty good drivers in my estimation), versus banning cellphone driving.

        –Focusing on voter fraud versus accurately counting ballots that are cast.  (Has there ever been a recount that didn't change the totals, sometimes even the outcome?)

         

         

  5. There are three men running for office for whom I feel some sympathy because I think their personal lives are impacting their political decisions:

    Ken Buck:  Buck is fighting a serious blood cancer.  I thought that the repubs would grant him Gardner's old seat without a fight; but, it is a safe district and so everyone wants a shot; he now has primary opponents….tough.

    John Hickenlooper:  I think with his friendly divorce from Helen Thorpe, Hickenlooper lost a valuable "listener."  I think he may have talked things over with her before going public.  Now, he rambles and sounds like he is thinking out loud when he make public announcements.  He changes his mind too often.  I still would not be surprised if he dropped out; although it is getting late for that.

    Mark Udall:  Udall's son is in serious legal trouble and could go to prison.  That must be a heavy burden for any parent and to undertake a major and difficult Senate campaign while also dealing with this must be very difficult.

  6. Could we get these priveleged white men to stop pontificating on inner-city poverty?  Particularly those who once paid homage to Ayn Rand?

    Poverty exists in two forms today: those who actually live under those conditions – and the more extreme version – the empty shelves of leadership and vision – on Capitol Hill.  

    According to the Department of Agriculture, poverty is actually more heavily concentrated in rural, rather than urban areas. “More than 35 percent of the people living in completely rural counties live in high-poverty counties and more than 26 percent live in persistent-poverty counties. In contrast, about 6 percent of the people living in the most urban nonmetro areas live in high-poverty counties and 4 percent live in persistent-poverty counties.

    What say you, Congressman Ryan?

    In defending his “inner city” remarks on Wednesday night, Ryan changed his focus to “rural” poverty, saying, “This isn’t a race based comment it’s a breakdown of families, it’s rural poverty in rural areas, and talking about where poverty exists — there are no jobs and we have a breakdown of the family. Government data has corroborated that rural areas, not inner cities, are increasingly key to the problem of poverty.

    These dynamics exist right under our nose.  The southeastern quadrant of our state has some of the most daunting challenges of any Colorado demographic.  A region that should be the breadbasket of our state.  A region that should be a clean energy power house.  And what do we get? A power house of growing poverty. 

    I understand rural Colorado has it's own "narrative problem".  It's an utter collapse of leadership on every level, fueled by an ongoing, fantasy-like narrative and belief we are somehow 'independent' of a changing state and national economy.  A set of leaders who just want things to "be like they use to be".  Leaders who, for the most part, must be dragged in to the new world.  But, drag…we must.

    1. A very informative post.  Rural poverty has been a persistent problem and seems even more so now.  Many areas of the country didn't even blink when the Depression years began.  I found another visual aid.  It doesn't map just rural poverty, but it does send a similar message.  I was speaking with a hotel manager in Del Norte.  He has observed a few more younger people moving into the area whose jobs are not location dependent.  That is a small sign of hope for an area that has a difficult time of attracting young and educated workers.  If you aren't from there the chances are you won't stay there.  Many parts of the San Luis Valley are very pretty and the skiing is good at Wolf Creek and Monarch, but it's hard to make a living. 

      http://www.povertyusa.org/the-state-of-poverty/poverty-map-county/

      1. Long ago and far away, I knew a little about the Hispanic villages of Northern New Mexico that are linked historically with the San Luis Valley.  In those days, young people would leave the villages and go to the big cities, and there would be real worry that the villages would "die."  But, when times were bad, like during the Depression and various recessions, the village populations would swell as the young people came back.  The villages acted as a safety net.  I don't know if there is anything like this happening in other parts of rural America….

    1. Not quite as dire a take. Any op who doesn't use this as a motivator is just stupid. He's not saying Dems are doomed. From article you linked us to:

      "It doesn’t necessarily have to be a harbinger. We have a turnout issue. And I think that this is a screaming siren that the same problems that afflicted us in ’10 — and traditionally we've had tougher off years than presidential years — that could face us again," Plouffe told Bloomberg TV's "Political Capital with Al Hunt" in an interview set to air Friday night.

      Plouffe ran Obama's 2008 campaign and served as a senior White House adviser before stepping down shortly after the president won re-election.

      "I think for, particularly red states, and we've got a bunch of red states though like in Louisiana, in Arkansas, we have significant minority population. We’re going to have to work over time on turnout," he said. "It’s not just about data and technology. The candidates themselves are going to have to do a good job."

  9. I think we still don't know how ACA is ultimately going to impact elections.  In my house of many colors, we have dealt with preexisting conditions that became huge problems when kids came of age and left their parents' health insurance. I know from that experience and from other experience, that people would do anything to get medical insurance for their kids; and, that people would limit their wages in order to remain eligible for medicaid.  For these reasons, I absolutely support the concept and the plan of ACA.  For these same reasons, I am absolutely outraged at the poor rollout and execution, so far, because I think it endangers the whole plan and these provisions as well as potentiallly the whole program could go down the drain because of the sloppy way in which the Obama administration has managed this critically important program.

    Now, apart from me and mine, I know seniors who are outraged over the changes in Medicare Advantage.  I know former Obama supporters who lost their insurance and are outraged at the options left to them.  I know women who have had tubal ligations who are being forced to pay for maternity benefits…who are angry and it is a very personal kind of response.

    I don't think that there can be any one conclusion about how ACA is going to impact coming elections.  I do think that Obama protected his "base" by giving the unions wavers and because federal employees are by and large not impacted; my sense is that more people are angry that those, like myself, who are grateful.

    1. Sorry, dwyer. You lost me at the women with tubals paying maternity. I've been paying for prostrate exams my whole life. And vasectomies.

      Where is the outrage?

      1. What I like about progressives is that they usually present a factual and/or logical response to an argument. What I don't like about progressives is the assumption that such a response translates into voter agreement on the issue.

        What I don't like about many who post here is the tendency not to read clearly what someone else has posted and then to project into a comment that which was not said.

        So, I began my comment by saying "I think we still don't know how ACA is ultimately going to impact elections. – See more at: http://coloradopols.com/diary/55466/friday-open-thread-22#comments

        I concluded with this statement:

        I don't think that there can be any one conclusion about how ACA is going to impact coming elections. – See more at: http://coloradopols.com/diary/55466/friday-open-thread-22#comments

         

        In the body of my comment, I gave opinions based on my personal experience – both positive and negative with ACA.  The fact that you, Gertie97 did not object to paying for screening and preventive care unique to males does not change my friend's outrage at having to pay for maternity benefits that neither she nor anyone in her family are going to need.  She is no longer an Obama supporter.  It doesn't matter that I "lost" you.  It does matter that Obama/democrats lost her.   

        Medicare does not have maternity costs as a covered expense.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

114 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!