Northeast Michigan Democrat Chatter

The World According to Stupak

2010-03-02T17:42:00.000-08:00

The World According to Stupak

March 2, 2010

President Obama's healthcare proposal adopts language on abortion from the Senate health reform bill that requires insurers to segregate public and private premiums and use only private money to pay for abortion services. But Representative Bart Stupak will have none of it, claiming that the legislation still allows public funding of the abortion. In fact, the legislation very clearly prohibits direct government funding of abortion. But Stupak also objects to "indirect" funding, refusing to vote for a reform bill unless it prohibits taxpayer money from "subsidizing" health plans that cover abortion care.

The amendment Stupak sponsored, which is currently part of the House bill, does bar so-called indirect funding. It forbids insurers from selling plans that include abortion coverage to any people who receive help from the government in paying their premiums--a restriction that would apply to approximately 85 percent of customers in the new health insurance exchange and thus virtually eliminate abortion coverage from the exchange.

An analysis of Stupak's opposition to indirect funding, however, reveals implications that go well beyond the fight over abortion.

Money in Stupak's world is "fungible," or interchangeable, meaning whatever money the government gives you frees up private money for you to use on something else. So every dollar the government pays toward your health insurance premium allows you and the insurer to spend private funds in that plan that you might not otherwise have had on abortion. To Stupak, that subsidization is the equivalent of a direct payment.

But by that token, every government benefit a woman receives, whether monetary or in-kind, whether for healthcare or for something else, could be seen as subsidizing an abortion if she has one.

If everyone thought like Bart Stupak, a woman seeking an abortion:

(1) would not be able to take a public bus or commuter train to an abortion clinic, even if she paid her own fare;

(2) would not be able to drive on public roads to a clinic, even if she drove her own car and paid for her own gas;

(3) would not be able to walk on public sidewalks to the clinic, even though she paid property taxes;

(4) would not be able to put her child in childcare while she was at the clinic if she received a tax credit that offset the cost of childcare;

(5) would not be able to take medicine at the clinic that was researched or developed by the government, even if she paid for the medicine herself.

Would anyone argue that the government is "subsidizing abortion" by building roads and sidewalks, offering public transportation, developing medicine and providing childcare? Similarly, making healthcare premiums more affordable, even for plans that include abortion coverage, would not mean that the government would be paying for abortion.

Our society recognizes the distinction between direct and indirect funding all the time. Indeed, if we did not, our government probably could not function. Religious organizations receive tax money to provide direct social services but are strictly prohibited from using that money for sectarian purposes. Nonprofit organizations obtain government grants that can be used for charitable activities but not for electioneering. And we already have a precedent with respect to abortion: family planning clinics get public funding to provide contraception that cannot be spent on abortion. No reasonable person sees this funding as subsidizing activities that have been deemed ineligible for government spending or views the accounting practices used to segregate funds as illegitimate or inadequate.

No transaction in our modern society is completely free of government involvement. The food we eat costs less because of farm subsidies. Students attend private universities with the help of Pell Grants and Stafford loans. Our churches and temples can afford to operate in part because they are tax-exempt. And employers who offer health insurance do so because of tax incentives. Stupak's reasoning, taken to its logical extreme, would mean that virtually every activity in which we engage is government funded, regardless of whether it is condoned or condemned.

Either there is no such thing as indirect funding or everything receives indirect funding, but there is no in between. Either the government pays for abortion or it does not. Stupak, who until recently lived in the "C Street House"--a townhouse owned by a religiously affiliated organization that receives a tax exemption--cannot accept indirect subsidies in one area but reject them in others.

For these reasons, segregation requirements alone should have been sufficient for those who object to taxpayer-funded abortion. But Senator Ben Nelson also managed to wrangle a last-minute deal that goes even further, making customers write two checks each month--one for the abortion coverage and one for everything else--even though both checks would come from private, not public, sources.

Last week the White House chose to go with the Senate solution, in part because Democrats must now use the reconciliation process to pass comprehensive healthcare reform. Because this process can address only items that affect the budget and the abortion provisions do not change government spending levels, they probably can no longer be modified. Therefore, the White House may have had no option but to endorse the Senate's version.

Moreover, prochoice legislators and advocates refuse to accept the Stupak Amendment and have vowed to block it at every turn. And though they also oppose Nelson's language because it imposes unprecedented restrictions on private abortion coverage, they recognize that it is the lesser of two evils. Meanwhile, Stupak claims that he too has enough votes to stop health reform in its tracks.

But Stupak's line of thinking goes way too far. He and the House members who voted for his amendment ought to accept the Senate language that already prohibits government money from being spent on abortion, put the issue to rest and take this historic opportunity to extend health coverage to millions of Americans.

About Jessica Arons

Jessica Arons is the Director of the Women's Health & Rights Program at the Center for American Progress.

Dept. rules against native rights, says Eagle Rock isn’t sacred

2010-01-23T11:59:00.000-08:00

Intercontinental Cry

Dept. rules against native rights, says Eagle Rock isn’t sacred

Posted by Ahni on January 21, 2010 at 10:04am 0 comments 305 views

The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, has shamelessly and underhandedly given its final approval for Kennecott’s proposed Eagle Mine project, a nickel and copper sulfide mine on the Yellow Dog Plains.

In issuing the approval, the MDEQ overstepped the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community’s treaty rights, and dismissed a 2009 ruling by Administrative Law Judge Richard Patterson, who found that Eagle Rock is a place of spiritual importance to Keweenaw Bay Community and should be protected.

Judge Patterson, in his ruling, stated that both Kennecott and the MDEQ “did not properly address the impact on the sacred rock outcrop known as Eagle Rock” and suggested that they move the mine’s entry point somewhere “away from the rock”.

The MDEQ unilaterally decided that the judge’s ruling was unnecessary “…because it pertained to Eagle Rock as a place of worship. They believe that a place of worship must be a building and therefore negates comments that were not in favor of the mining company,” explains the Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve, who works along side the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community and others opposed to the mine.

However, the MDEQ did much more than dismiss the ruling and deny the sacredness of Eagle Rock. First, it handed the matter down to a Senior Policy Advisor, who made the decision on his own and just two days before the MDEQ was formally dissolved.

Cynthia Pryor, Campaign Director for the Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve, comments:

“What just happened here? The DEQ, as party to a State of Michigan Administrative Contested Case process, just unilaterally bypassed both the legal process and Administrative Law Judge Patterson in making a sweeping declaration and finding of law. This sweeping “judgment” was made not by Judge Patterson, not by past DEQ Director Stephen Chester, not by the interim DEQ Director Jim Sygo, but by a Senior Policy Advisor within the DEQ. This was done as a final DEQ action on the matter – on the day before the DEQ was to be dissolved and the new DNRE Director was to take office.

“How blatant can this be? This is the dramatic action of a DEQ that hopes as a last ditch effort to resolve the Kennecott issue and allow this mine on the Yellow Dog Plains – before their authority is superseded by a new agency. Delegation of DEQ Director ‘final decision’ on the matter, was given to Senior Policy Advisor Frank J. Ruswick, Jr. two weeks ago. There was no known correspondence from Judge Patterson to the DEQ, Kennecott or the petitioners during this time frame. But out of the blue, a day before DEQ dissolution, this DEQ policy advisor made a judgment, ruling and order granting Kennecott both a Part 632 mining permit and a ground water discharge permit AND vacating a remand order made by then Director Stephen Chester concerning Eagle Rock as a “place of worship”. A policy advisor of the DEQ became a Judge and a DEQ Director and has so ruled – and we must accept that?

This is an egregious act that now will absolutely require appeal to a higher court and should require an appeal to the new DNRE Director Rebecca Humphries and the Governor of this state. We should not sit by and accept such action as the accepted mode of “lawfulness” in this state.

For more information, please visit: http://savethewildup.org, http://lakesuperiorminingnews.net, http://yellowdogwatershed.org

What You Can Do

To lodge a complaint against the MDEQ’s shameful move, contact Michigan Governor Jennifer M. Granholm:

Governor Jennifer M. Granholm
P.O. Box 30013
Lansing, Michigan 48909

PHONE: (517) 373-3400
PHONE: (517) 335-7858 – Constituent Services
FAX:(517) 335-6863
EMAIL: http://www.michigan.gov/gov/0,1607,7-168-21995-65331–,00.html

The Huron Mountain Club, National Wildlife Federation, Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve, and the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community have long opposed the project because of some major environmental concerns, and because the mine would adversely effect the Keweenaw Bay Community’s treaty rights and Spiritual practices.

In 2009, Judge Richard Patterson issued a ruling that partly–and only partly—favored Keweenaw Bay

ignoring Judge Richard Patterson ruling that Eagle Rock be honored as a Native American sacred site.

Kennecott the final permit for the Eagle Mine project on the Yellow Dog Plains, ignoring Judge Richard Patterson ruling that Eagle Rock be honored as a Native American sacred site.

concluding that only buildings may be considered “places of worship.”

tatement was issued giving “final approval” of mining permits that were being contested by Huron Mountain Club, National Wildlife Federation, Yellow Dog Watershed Preserve, and Keweenaw Bay Indian Community. The approval was given before the administrative law judge had submitted a clarification of his ruling. The MDEQ stated the judge’s ruling was not needed since it pertained to Eagle Rock as a place of worship. They believe that a place of worship must be a building and therefore negates comments that were not in favor of the mining company.

Whitmer: State must protect its consumers

2010-01-12T09:51:00.000-08:00

MISenDems (via Twitter)

Whitmer: State must protect its consumers

New law needed to put teeth into enforcement

As Michigan residents hit the stores this holiday season, they shop with confidence assuming they will be dealt with fairly and honestly. That may be true at the mall or most retail stores, but unfortunately, there are many other instances where consumers could be at risk of being taken advantage of. The state's economic woes have caused an increase in scams and other bad business practices.

At the same time, Michigan's Consumer Protection Act - once revered as the most powerful in the country - continues to be watered down by politicians and their special interests.

The Michigan Consumer Protection Act was a bipartisan agreement instituted in 1976 that banned 29 unfair, deceptive or unconscionable business practices in the sale of goods and services and empowered the state attorney general to go to court to stop such conduct.

But over the last decade, it has been gutted by a Republican majority in the Michigan Supreme Court installed by Gov. John Engler. In two cases, the first in 1999 and the second in 2007, the court ruled to exempt most, if not all, businesses regulated by state or federal law, such as home improvement contractors, mortgage companies and plumbers.

These rulings broke 23 years of enforcement that the attorney general and consumer advocates relied on to hold businesses accountable for deceptive and unfair practices.

Many consumers are already struggling to make ends meet and support their families. Dishonest merchants can currently take advantage of customers in nearly every industry including credit and finance; gasoline, fuel and energy; and telecommunications, satellite and cable TV. With no teeth left in the Michigan Consumer Protection Act, there is nothing to keep businesses from taking advantage of Michigan citizens and leaves consumers with few options to defend themselves. We must properly hold deceitful businesses accountable for their practices.

That's why Michigan needs to restore the original intent of the Michigan Consumer Protection Act and I have introduced legislation in the Senate to do just that.

My bill, Senate Bill 573, will not only restore the act's true intent of consumer protection, but also help Michigan businesses compete on a level playing field instead of enabling companies to obtain a competitive edge by engaging in deceptive or unfair practices.

The Legislature no longer can sit idly by and allow Michigan's consumer protection law to continue to cater to unscrupulous businesses more than our citizens.

Too many of our state laws have been tinkered with to give more power to big business than the people, and now more than ever we should be putting our consumers first and keep Michigan's upstanding businesses competing fairly.

Passing my legislation and bolstering the Consumer Protection Act can help restore our reputation as a state that stands up for its citizens, and I hope my colleagues see its importance and address it soon.

Is Bart Stupak a Democrat?

2009-11-13T11:17:00.000-08:00

Northeast Michigan Democrat

Aside from "not voting" on many issues, Rep. Stupak votes with the Republicans on occassion according to the U.S. Congress Votes Database. He certainly does not stand firm with the Democratic National Platform:

THE 2008 DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL PLATFORM

RENEWING AMERICA’S PROMISE

Choice

The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right
to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all
efforts to weaken or undermine that right.

The Democratic Party also strongly supports access to comprehensive affordable family
planning services and age-appropriate sex education which empower people to make informed
choices and live healthy lives. We also recognize that such health care and education
help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for
abortions.

The Democratic Party also strongly supports a woman’s decision to have a child by ensuring
access to and availability of programs for pre-and post-natal health care, parenting skills, income support, and caring adoption programs.

Copyright © 2008 by the 2008 Democratic National Convention Committee, Inc.
For more information, contact: Democratic National Committee
430 South Capitol St., SE
Washington, DC 20003
202-863-8000
www.democrats.org

Stop Abortion Coverage Ban

2009-11-13T09:09:00.000-08:00

Stop Abortion Coverage Ban

The House of Representatives passed health-reform legislation that included an anti-choice amendment that will seriously jeopardize women's access to abortion – making it virtually impossible for private insurance companies that participate in the new health system to offer abortion coverage to women.

This would have the effect of denying women the right to use their own personal, private funds to purchase an insurance plan with abortion coverage in the new health system.

We must stop health-care reform from being enacted with this ban!

Sign our petition calling on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to stand firm against a ban on abortion coverage for women in the new health system.

Bob Fertik

Dear Activist,

The House passed an anti-choice measure that would essentially eliminate insurance coverage for abortion in the new system.

Help us fight back and stop the ban on women's insurance coverage for abortion.

Add your name to our petition to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid by 12 noon (EST) on Friday, November 13.

Anti-choice politics shouldn't trump women's health in Congress. It's unacceptable.

Yet that's what happened when the House passed the last-minute anti-choice Stupak-Pitts amendment to its health-reform bill.

We cannot let this attack stand in the Senate.

Sign our petition calling on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to save abortion coverage and ensure that the same ban is not included in the Senate's bill.

I can't stress this strongly enough: we must win in the Senate to keep millions of women from losing their private insurance coverage for abortion in the new health-care system.

A vote to ban insurance coverage for abortion in the new system will come down to the wire, so we must call on Majority Leader Reid to stand strong against this attack from the outset.

We need to deliver our petitions to Majority Leader Reid by the end of the week before the bill is brought to the floor, so add your name by 12 noon (EST) on Friday, November 13.

Here is what will happen if the Senate adopts the same Stupak-Pitts amendment that passed in the House bill:

It will be virtually impossible for private insurance companies that participate in the new system to offer abortion coverage to women.
This would have the effect of denying women the right to use their own personal, private funds to purchase an insurance plan with abortion coverage in the new health system—a radical departure from the status quo. Presently, more than 85 percent of private insurance plans cover abortion services.

We must win in the Senate. That's why we need to fight back today.

Stand up for women's access to abortion and sign our petition to Majority Leader Reid.

Thank you for standing with us during this fight.

My best,

Nancy Keenan
President, NARAL Pro-Choice America

You are subscribed to Democrats.com Activist Alerts.

Unhealthy Trend: House Action On Abortion Showcases Power Of Bishops’ Lobby

2009-11-11T10:30:00.000-08:00

Americans United for Separation of Church and State

Unhealthy Trend: House Action On Abortion Showcases Power Of Bishops’ Lobby

November 10, 2009

There’s at least a possibility that health-care reform will be scuttled thanks to the machinations of a powerful church that is determined to use the power of government to foist its dogma on all of us.

When political pundits talk about the power of religious groups to affect public policy in Washington, most tend to focus on the Religious Right.

Indeed, during the presidency of George W. Bush, Religious Right groups flexed a lot of political muscle and won numerous victories on Capitol Hill.

But the Religious Right has an Achilles’ heel: Its leaders and activists are so closely identified with the Republican Party that when Democrats are in charge, these groups have a much more difficult time advancing their agenda.

That’s not the case with the nation’s other prominent religious lobby – the Roman Catholic hierarchy. Lobbyists representing the Catholic bishops are careful to work in both parties and as a result are often successful no matter which party is in charge.

Consider the recent flap over health-care reform. The bill passed by the House of Representatives on Saturday contains a stunning provision: It states that low-income women who receive tax credits to buy health insurance won’t be permitted to enroll in any plan that covers abortion.

This language goes far beyond measures we’ve seen in other bills that bar direct tax funding to support abortion. The net effect of this language, many analysts believe, will be to force insurance providers to drop abortion coverage.

Any insurers who cover the procedure, after all, will be in effect ineligible from participating in the insurance exchange the bill creates. Most insurance firms are going to want to be part of that system, since it represents a lucrative new pool of customers. To get in it, they’ll simply drop abortion coverage.

How did this restrictive language get in the bill? As National Public Radio pointed out, lobbyists for the Catholic bishops aggressively worked both sides of the political aisle in a bid to bring the bill into conformity with church doctrine. In addition, Catholic priests across the nation were ordered to sermonize about the issue during weekly services.

“The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops actively lobbied for the amendment, offered by Democrat Bart Stupak of Michigan and Republican Joe Pitts of Pennsylvania,” reported NPR. “The Catholic Church, though opposed to abortion funding, has long advocated for universal health care as a fundamental human right and essential to the common good. Stupak was among 19 Democrats who in midsummer vowed to oppose any health overhaul plan that didn’t specifically prevent taxpayer money from being used for abortions.”

Americans United Executive Director Barry W. Lynn told NPR he is “horrified” by what happened.

“What we saw over the weekend was an act of unparalleled arrogance on the part of church officials,” Lynn said. “Basically, they were claiming they would kill health care for the sick and the poor if the Democrats didn’t give them the votes to impose religious doctrine into law. It’s scandalous that this religious group has such extraordinary control over the fate of women’s lives in this country.”

I should point out that most American Catholics don’t support the position taken by the church hierarchy and its army of lobbyists. A recent poll taken by Catholics for Choice shows that most Catholics support abortion coverage in health care reform, especially in cases of rape, incest and fetal abnormality.

Furthermore, 68 percent of Catholics say the church would be wrong to oppose the entire health-care reform plan merely because it includes coverage for abortion.

Efforts are under way to strip the language from the bill (which is on its way to the Senate), and religious leaders who oppose the bishops’ move are speaking out. Yesterday, four prominent leaders signed a joint letter opposing the Stupak language.

Others are mounting a lobbying counter-offensive on Capitol Hill.

How will this shake out?

It’s too early to tell, but there’s at least a possibility that health-care reform – a goal many in this country have sought since the days of Theodore Roosevelt – will be scuttled thanks to the machinations of a powerful church that is determined to use the power of government to foist its dogma on all of us.

Remember this the next time you see some right-winger on the television or in a newspaper whining that religious groups are shut out of the public debate.

By Rob Boston

STUPIFYING How bad is the Stupak amendment?

2009-11-11T09:58:00.000-08:00

STUPIFYING

How bad is the Stupak amendment?

What the Stupak-Pitts Coathanger Amendment Does

by mcjoan

Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 10:20:02 AM PST

Here's what it says:

The amendment will prohibit federal funds for abortion services in the public option. It also prohibits individuals who receive affordability credits from purchasing a plan that provides elective abortions. However, it allows individuals, both who receive affordability credits and who do not, to separately purchase with their own funds plans that cover elective abortions. It also clarifies that private plans may still offer elective abortions.

There's been a lot of debate around here about what that exactly means. Here's what it means. Millions of women will not have access to a legal medical procedure. Remember that, the legal part?

What's the harm, some say? It only makes sure that federal funding doesn't go to providing abortion, right? Wrong. Here's Jessica Arons, Director of the Women's Health and Rights Program at American Progress.

It effectively bans coverage for most abortions from all public and private health plans in the Exchange: In addition to prohibiting direct government funding for abortion, it also prohibits public money from being spent on any plan that covers abortion even if paid for entirely with private premiums. Therefore, no plan that covers abortion services can operate in the Exchange unless its subscribers can afford to pay 100% of their premiums with no assistance from government "affordability credits." As the vast majority of Americans in the Exchange will need to use some of these credits, it is highly unlikely any plan will want to offer abortion coverage (unless they decide to use it as a convenient proxy to discriminate against low- and moderate-income Americans who tend to have more health care needs and incur higher costs).

2. It includes only extremely narrow exceptions: Plans in the Exchange can only cover abortions in the case of rape or incest or "where a woman suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would, as certified by a physician, place the woman in danger of death." Given insurance companies’ dexterity in denying claims, we can predict what they’ll do with that language. Cases that are excluded: where the health but not the life of the woman is threatened by the pregnancy, severe fetal abnormalities, mental illness or anguish that will lead to suicide or self-harm, and the numerous other reasons women need to have an abortion.

3. It allows for a useless abortion "rider": Stupak and his allies claim his Amendment doesn’t ban abortion from the Exchange because it allows plans to offer and women to purchase extra, stand-alone insurance known as a rider to cover abortion services. Hopefully the irony of this is immediately apparent: Stupak wants women to plan for a completely unexpected event.

4. It allows for discrimination against abortion providers: Previously, the health care bill included an evenhanded provision that prohibited discrimination against any health care provider or facility "because of its willingness or unwillingness to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions." Now, it only protects those who are unwilling to provide such services.

Once again, just like in the pre-Roe days, the wealthy will have access to abortion, those who can't scrape several hundred dollars together won't. Because of how the exchange is structured, most of people covered through it will be receiving credits or subsidies. Therefore, most of the participants will not have access to a legal medical procedure. Additionally, the reality, as Arons says, is that the insurers participating in the exchange won't offer it at all, and the question remains whether they'll continue to offer it for women in employer-based programs outside the exchange, or whether it would just be easier for administrative and overhead purposes to stop covering it at all. Right now, nearly 90 percent of private, employer-based plans cover abortion services. This legislation could result in many of those plans dropping it, to make administration of plans simpler and more cost-effective. We know how critical the bottom line is to them.

And take another look at those exclusions: "where the health but not the life of the woman is threatened by the pregnancy, severe fetal abnormalities, mental illness or anguish that will lead to suicide or self-harm, and the numerous other reasons women need to have an abortion." Even planned pregnancies are regularly terminated--legally--because of the health of the mother or severe fetal abnormalities. Forcing women to carry these pregnancies to term is dangerous and cruel. Forcing low- and moderate-income women to have to make hard financial decisions to try to come up with the money for the procedure is cruel. It's also diametrically opposed to the very principles of healthcare reform. This legislation is supposed to be freeing Americans from having to make horrible financial choices between basic necessities and medical care.

Consider this real-life example:

By broadly writing in that insurers can chose whether or not to cover "abortion services," pro-life amendments don't just affect their intended victims -- women seeking a way out of an unwanted or medically harmful pregnancy. They also affect another group of victims -- women whose pregnancies have already ended but have not yet miscarried.

I'm one of those women, and this past Halloween I had what the hospital officially termed an "abortion."

....

I had learned the day before that the baby I thought was nearly 12 weeks old had no heartbeat, and had actually died at 8 weeks. I was given three options: wait for a miscarriage to occur on its own, something I was told my body had no intention of doing anytime soon, take medication that would expel the fetus, passing it in my own home (classified a "chemical abortion") or come in for a D&C to remove the fetal materials.

As much as I struggled with the sudden realization that the pregnancy was over, I also found myself trying to decide financially what I was willing to do. A chemical abortion would cost $40, but I would be alone, bleeding, and it could still be incomplete and I would require a D&C anyway, since my pregnancy was so advanced. Surgery would be quick, total, and under controlled circumstances, but would likely be our full maxed insurance amount of $1500. And of course, there was the free option of waiting for my body to finally realize I wasn't pregnant, but after 4 weeks the risk of infection was steadily climbing, increasing my chances of future miscarriage, infertility, or even death. With a toddler at home, and still nursing hopes for extending our family some day, this was not an option.

I chose the quick and total route of the D&C, despite the costs, prioritizing my health and the health of possible future children. I was lucky, and could afford to make that choice, because currently, my insurance cannot chose to refuse to cover what the hospital as termed an abortion.

This is the most expansive restriction on access to abortion Congress has passed. It goes well beyond Hyde, which has never been codified and which only governs federal, public plans. It's particularly galling that it comes under the umbrella of healthcare "reform."

Remember the promises? Reform was about expanding choices, not allowing government to come between you and your doctor, no one will lose their coverage, and if you like your current plan you get to keep it. Apparently being female is a preexisting condition that exempts us from the promises, too.

Tags: Stupak-Pitts Amendment, abortion, healthcare reform (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

The Stupak Stupor

2009-11-10T18:24:00.000-08:00

Published on Tuesday, November 10, 2009 by The Nation

The Stupak Stupor

by Emily Douglas

We know that the House healthcare reform bill passed after an eleventh-hour compromise (you might say betrayal) on abortion access. We know the compromise, the Stupak-Pitts amendment, is bad. But do we know exactly how it's bad for women (and their partners)? Here's a quick primer on what the amendment actually means for any woman accessing healthcare through the newly-created health insurance exchange.

Over the summer, legislators struck an agreement on abortion funding in which private plans offered through the health insurance exchange couldn't use federal dollars to cover abortion care. They could, however, cover abortion care with funds from individuals' premiums, and the agreement, the Capps Amendment, required at least one plan in every region to offer abortion care, and at least one not to. As many observers predicted, the Capps Amendment didn't mollify anti-abortion crusaders, namely the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, which commands an outsize role in the debate over healthcare reform.

So what we ended up with was drastically worse. After the initial compromise fell apart, Rep. Bart Stupak introduced the eponymous amendment, under which any plan purchased with any federal subsidy cannot cover abortion services--even with private funds. Plus, the public plan won't cover abortion care. While plans participating in the health insurance exchange are legally permitted to offer a version of the plan that does cover abortion--enrollment limited to those who pay for the entire plan without any subsidy--it's unlikely plans will go the extra mile to offer that coverage, Planned Parenthood's Laurie Rubiner said this morning on the Brian Lehrer Show. That would be "awfully complex," Rubiner explained. Because the majority of Americans purchasing insurance through the exchange would be using affordability credits, the plan without abortion coverage will become the "standard plan." Rubiner also cited privacy concerns over purchasing abortion-inclusive coverage. The Wall Street Journal observed, "Insurers may be reluctant to [set up abortion-inclusive plans] because it could complicate how they pool risk and force them to label policies in a way that could draw attention from abortion opponents."

At Change.org, Jen Nedeau pointed out that even women who currently have employer-based insurance that does cover abortion care (and 87 percent of employer-based plans do) may ultimately be affected. "Since the plan for the uninsured is designed to open up to everyone over time, including large employers, it is likely that women will lose access to abortion coverage as part of any health insurance plan available for purchase," Nedeau explains.

In defending his amendment, Stupak made one misleading and one outright false claim. He argued that women could purchase "abortion riders" on top of their insurance, much like they might purchase a dental or vision rider. Such an abortion rider doesn't exist now, and the legislation does not provide for its creation. Rubiner pointed out that in states where private coverage of abortion care is outlawed, riders don't exist either. Besides, they defy logic: "Women would have to plan for their unplanned pregnancy," Rubiner added. "It's illogical to think they would look for a plan that includes abortion."

And for the falsehood: Stupak claimed that his amendment "goes no farther than Hyde," the amendment banning federal Medicaid funding for abortion care except in cases of rape, incest, or threat to the woman's life. In fact, the amendment goes farther than Hyde in stipulating what kind of coverage a woman can purchase with private dollars. "It's the equivalent of arguing that women who receive abortions should not use public buses or highways to travel to the abortion clinic," Igor Volsky at Wonk Room points out.

In the Stupak amendment, the exceptions to the coverage ban read as follows: rape, incest or "where a woman suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would, as certified by a physician, place the woman in danger of death." The Center for American Progress's Jessica Arons writes, "Given insurance companies' dexterity in denying claims, we can predict what they'll do with that language." And in case you wonder what that leaves out entirely: "Cases that are excluded: where the health but not the life of the woman is threatened by the pregnancy, severe fetal abnormalities, mental illness or anguish that will lead to suicide or self-harm, and the numerous other reasons women need to have an abortion."

Emily Douglas is the web editor at The Nation. Formerly an editor at RH Reality Check, she has written on reproductive health, LGBT issues, women's rights and the law for The American Prospect, The Nation, RH Reality Check, and other publications. She was a spring 2007 intern at The Nation and graduated from Harvard College.

Let Bart Stupak Know What You are Thinking

2009-11-10T10:46:00.000-08:00

HAPPENING

If you are having trouble viewing this e-Newsletter, click here.

Visit Website | Unsubscribe | Forward to a Friend | Web Version

Stupak To Hold Escanaba Town Hall Meeting

For answers to commonly asked questions and other information on health care reform, please click here.

November 10, 2009

Dear Friends,

I invite you to attend the upcoming town hall meeting I will be holding on November 11th to discuss current national issues.

This meeting will provide an opportunity for you to directly tell me what is on your mind as well as allow me to provide you with an account of what is going on in Congress. Following are the details:

Wednesday, November 11, 2009
5:30 PM – 7:00 PM (EST)
Bay de Noc Community College
Besse Center
2001 North Lincoln Rd
Escanaba, MI
[ map it ]

Any change in the time of event will be announced by the local media.

Again, please join your neighbors and me on November 11. I look forward to listening to your ideas and comments.

Sincerely,

Bart Stupak
Member of Congress

Washington Office
2268 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225 4735
Fax: (202) 225 4744

Stupak denies knowledge of connections to mysterious ‘C Street’ house he lives in

2009-11-08T09:03:00.000-08:00

Yet Rep. Bart Stupak carries out the agenda of The Family in Congress.

Stupak denies knowledge of connections to mysterious ‘C Street’ house he lives in

'I don’t know what you’re talking about, [The] Family and all this other stuff.'

By Ed Brayton 7/23/09 3:26 PM

Despite weeks of media attention paid to the now-infamous “C Street” house owned by The Family, a secretive Christian group, U.S. Rep. Bart Stupak — who lives at the house near the U.S. Capitol — denied any knowledge of the nature of the mysterious Washington, D.C., rowhouse and any involvement with the organization that owns it and uses as a seat of influence on Capitol Hill.

U.S. Rep. Bart Stupak (Creative Commons photo by Brian Rendel via Flickr)

During a conference call with reporters Thursday morning, Michigan Messenger asked Stupak, a Menominee Democrat, about the house where he has lived for many years and his connections to the shadowy organization that owns it. The longtime Upper Peninsula legislator claimed to have “no affiliation” with the group, which is known as The Family or The Fellowship.

“I don’t belong to any such group,” Stupak said. “I rent a room at a house in ‘C Street.’ I do not belong to any such group. I don’t know what you’re talking about, [The] Family and all this other stuff.”

The C Street house, a former convent, is still listed on official tax documents as a church but it functions largely as a boarding house, with six to eight members of the U.S. House and Senate living there at any given time. Current residents include Stupak, Rep. Zach Wamp (R-Tenn.), Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) and Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.), and Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.).

The house has become the focus of much attention after the public admissions of adultery by Ensign and Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina. It has been widely reported that Coburn and other residents of the house knew of Ensign’s affair long before it became public and helped him negotiate his way through it. Sanford likewise mentioned in the press conference where he admitted his infidelity that he had been receiving spiritual counseling at the C Street house.

When asked if there were any ethical concerns created by living in a house inaccurately listed as a church in order to evade property taxes, Stupak replied: “I don’t own the building, I don’t know how the landlord has it listed. I pay rent for a room. I sleep there. I have a room.”

Jeff Sharlet, contributing editor at Harper’s magazine and the author of “The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power,” lived for a time at Ivanwald, another boarding house owned by the group in Arlington, Va., this one for younger men without political power.

Sharlet said that Stupak’s denial of any knowledge of The Family or its activities is false. “When I lived with The Family at Ivanwald, a house for younger men being groomed for leadership, I was told that Stupak was a regular visitor to the Cedars,” Sharlet said. The Cedars is yet another compound owned by The Family, one that hosts weekly prayer events led by former Reagan-era Attorney General Ed Meese.

Sharlet said that Stupak had much greater involvement with the group than he is admitting, noting that the congressman was “a Family-assigned mentor to one of my brothers at Ivanwald.” That Ivanwald resident, Sharlet said, “regularly left for what he and others described as mentoring sessions.”

Another reason to doubt Stupak’s denials, Sharlet said, is that members of the organization and those who live at the C Street house are sworn to secrecy about what goes on there, as fellow resident Zach Wamp admitted to the Knoxville News in the wake of the recent scandals. That makes such denials less credible, Sharlet said.

“The bottom line here is that Stupak is either being dishonest or confessing dangerous ignorance,” Sharlet said. “The house’s function has been public knowledge since the [Associated Press] wrote about it 7 years ago. Multiple mainstream media outlets have reported on the house’s role as in effect, a lobby in all but name, led by a man who is on video and audio record citing the leadership lessons of Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.”

Sharlet’s book describes The Family as a kind of shadow multi-national government, operating in secret through small prayer groups called “cells” and modeled after the organization of mafia and terrorist groups. Doug Coe, the leader of the group, frequently refers to the leadership lessons of Hitler and the example of the mafia as a model for how the group operates.

How far-reaching is The Family’s influence? David Kuo, a high-ranking official in the Bush administration who oversaw the White House’s office of faith-based initiatives, wrote in a recent book: “The Fellowship’s reach into governments around the world is almost impossible to overstate or even grasp.”

When contacted for a reaction to Sharlet’s accusations and for follow-up questions about his involvement in the organization and his residency at C Street, Stupak’s spokesman, Nick Choate, replied: “The congressman will not have any further comment on the matter.”

Correction: This article originally listed Rep. Joseph Pitts of Pennsylvania as a resident of the C street house, which has been widely reported elsewhere. But we have been informed by his spokesperson that the congressman does not reside at the C street house, nor has he ever resided there. We apologize for the error.

Michigan Chapter, Sierra Club Update, Early November 2009

2009-11-05T16:50:00.000-08:00

		Michigan Chapter Update Early November 2009: Get Outside with Sierra Club's Groups; Ratepayers ask Consumers Energy to Give Them a Break; Re-combining DEQ and DNR - what's it mean?; Become an Evergreen Supporter of the Michigan Chapter! Get Outside this Fall and Winter! Michigan is home to some of the most beautiful places on earth, as Outing Leaders from Sierra Club Michigan Chapter Groups can tell from first hand experience! You can enjoy Michigan's fall and winter more by getting outside with people who know some of the best kept secrets about our state's gorgeous outdoors! Find out about hikes, cross-country skiing adventures, and canoe trips, just to name a few! Check back regularly as the Outings and Events calendar is updated with new exciting outings and programs. Want to find out more? Contact your local Group Outing leader here or Chapter Outings Chair Lorne Beatty. Ratepayers Tell Consumers Energy to Give Us a Break! Consumers Energy's parent company CMS announced their profits last week, but the company continues pushing for a new, unneeded $2.6 billion coal plant, even though customers are using less electricity. More than 100 coal plants have been cancelled nationwide since 2002, mainly because of financial risks, but under Michigan law ratepayers will pay for a new power plant, not shareholders. Sierra Club joined with faith and community groups to call for CMS to invest in jobs and a clean energy future for Michigan instead of coal. "Michigan’s working families have been hit hard by this recession and can’t afford to pick up the tab for an expensive and dirty coal-fired power plant," said Patty Gillis from Voices for Earth Justice. "We need a break, and CMS Energy should put more of those earnings into energy efficiency to help businesses and homes cut electric bills and pollution at the same time." The full story is here. Find out how you can get involved in moving Michigan Beyond Coal -- it will be good for your family, Michigan's future and everyone's pocketbooks! Re-combining DEQ and DNR - what's it mean? Big changes are coming on January 17. Almost a decade and a half after they were split, Governor Granholm has ordered the recombination of the Department of Environmental Quality and the Department of Natural Resources. With budget woes and a plan to reduce the total number of state departments announced early this year, the recombination is not a surprise, but critical details are still up in the air. A transition team is to complete its recommendations by December 23 on what the new Department of Natural Resources and Environment will look like, but Sierra Club isn't waiting to weigh in. Sierra Club is working with environmental and conservation groups to demand protection of the interests of all Michiganders by assuring an emphasis on public health and sustaining our state's tremendous natural resources as these changes occur. Let us know your thoughts, and sign up to keep informed about the fast moving changes by sending an email to michigan.chapter@sierraclub.org. *Become an Evergreen Supporter* of the Michigan Chapter! Be part of the Sierra Club Michigan Chapter's Evergreen program by supporting the issues you care most about all year long: Keeping our Great Lakes healthy; building a clean energy future; protecting our public forests and wild heritage; and involving more people in democracy. Find out more about how you can be part of the Michigan Chapter Evergreen program here or contact Jan O'Connell with your questions! Support the Michigan Chapter's work by clicking here! Not a Sierra Club member yet? Join here!**

Michigan Chapter | 109 E. Grand River Avenue, Lansing, MI 48906 | P:(517) 484-2372 | Contact Us

Envisioning a Sustainable Future for Northeast Michigan

2009-10-12T14:22:00.000-07:00

Envisioning a Sustainable Future for Northeast Michigan

Known for many years as the “sunrise side,” Michigan’s northeast coastal region is rich in natural resources and home to many significant historic and cultural sites. Residents and visitors alike enjoy the region’s long stretches of undeveloped shoreline for hunting and fishing, visit the area’s network of historic lighthouses, and dive the many shipwrecks preserved in Thunder Bay.

Capitalizing on these regional assets while maintaining a sense of place and community character was the focus of the Northeast Michigan Integrated Assessment (NEMIA), a collaborative project supported by Michigan Sea Grant. The goal of the region-wide effort was to examine ways to enhance sustainable tourism and economic opportunity in the three-county region that includes Presque Isle, Alpena and Alcona counties.

“Our goal was to work with the region in developing strategic and research-based opportunities to leverage these coastal resources for their tourism and economic values,” explains Michigan Sea Grant Extension Educator Brandon Schroeder, “while considering how we can plan for and protect the integrity of these resources and our local quality of life that is defined by these important coastal resources.”

Coastal Access, Tourism and Economic Development

The past few decades have been economically challenging for the northeast region due to a combination of factors including high unemployment attributed in part to lost jobs in mining, manufacturing and agriculture, as well as the closure of a U.S. Air Force base. In recent years, some of the traditional hunting and angling tourism base has also fallen.

To address these challenges, representatives from 32 local and regional organizations met regularly as part of the NEMIA project, which began in 2005. The meetings were convened by Northeast Michigan Council of Governments (NEMCOG) and held at Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary in Alpena.

Together, participants agreed to frame the assessment around the following policy question: How can coastal access be designed, in a regional context, for sustainable tourism that stimulates economic development while maintaining the integrity of natural and cultural resources, and quality of life?

To provide baseline information, collaborating researchers conducted five technical assessments to characterize the status of life in northeast Michigan. Assessments include socioeconomic, ecological, cultural, planning and zoning, and sustainable design. The sustainable design assessment was one of eight projects chosen nationwide to be conducted by the American Institute of Architects’ Center for Communities by Design.

Additional research collaborators included Michigan State University Extension, University of Michigan School of Natural Resources and Environment, UM Department of Urban and Regional Planning, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Sanctuary Program, and The Nature Conservancy.

Identifying Priorities

Complementing the research, NEMIA stakeholders explored several case studies, two from the United States and one from Australia, where similar challenges and opportunities have played out. They also provided input to collectively develop a vision for the region. Several policy theme areas, with a suite of potential actions identified with each theme, emerged as priorities:

Preserving a sense of place and community character
Natural/cultural/maritime heritage and resources tourism
Growing an entrepreneurial community and attracting business interests
Government coordination and communication
Incorporating modern technologies

These guiding principles helped provide a framework for the technical assessments, which are undergoing peer-review. Following peer-review, the assessments will be incorporated into a final document presenting policy options, potential actions, or legislative tools that will help the region realize its vision for a sustainable future.

New partnerships and collaborations have already emerged as a result of the NEMIA process. The following activities are among the highlights.

State Parks Planning Process
NEMIA served as a catalyst for the Michigan Department of Natural Resources to develop regionally coordinated management plans for Negwegon, Rockport, and Thompson’s Harbor state parks. In addition to developing individual management plans for each park, the MDNR will develop a regional plan for all three properties with input from a newly formed citizen advisory committee made up of local residents. “NEMIA encouraged us to look at planning beyond the individual park basis,” notes Paul Curtis of the MDNR. “It made sense in this instance and has led to similar planning for three parks in southwest Michigan.”

Creating Entrepreneurial Communities (CEC) Initiative
NEMIA helped position a team from northeast Michigan to be selected as a CEC Pilot Community, a regional economic development opportunity supported by Michigan State University Extension and the MSU Product Center. Economic development consultant Bethany Styer was among the four people chosen to represent the three-county region in intensive five-day training focused on energizing entrepreneurs. Now certified to train others, Styer says the NEMIA process emphasized the positive benefits of thinking on a regional level. “It brought the three counties together to help take a look at the needs, to broaden our focus and realize that what we have in common is greater than what separates us,” says Styer.

Huron Blueways Project
NEMIA provided a grass roots process that led to successful MDEQ Coastal Management Program funding of a project coordinated by NEMCOG to identify coastal access points, water routes and other amenities from Mackinac to Harrisville in an effort to enhance recreational opportunities for paddlers along northern Lake Huron.

“NEMIA brought more recognition to this large coastal area to try to build upon but not spoil what’s there,” notes Richard Deuell of NEMCOG. “Anytime we can bring communities together to interact and discuss a common resource is always a plus.”

Regional Coastal Tourism Survey
Marine Sanctuary staff and NEMCOG are partnering with other NEMIA work group members to conduct a study to gather tourism data that are current, specific and relevant to northeast Michigan. Some of the ongoing initiatives in the northeast region include the US 23 Heritage Route Initiative, Huron Greenways, Sweetwater Trails, and development of Northeast Michigan as a Maritime Heritage Tourism Destination through the Michigan Department of History, Arts and Libraries.

Great Lakes Stewardship Initiative Funding
The northeast region received $5,000 in funding from the Great Lakes Fishery Trust to support Great Lakes place-based education. This initiative engages schools and student learning through projects that provide coastal resources stewardship and community benefit. The NEMIA work group supported this proposal, and several work group members offered to help schools and students engage in coastal projects identified through NEMIA discussions.

Coastal Tourism Business Support Website
In its own commitment to implement the prioritized actions identified through the NEMIA process, Michigan Sea Grant is investing funding to develop a web-based clearinghouse or “toolbox” designed to provide targeted support to emerging entrepreneurs interested in eco- or cultural coastal tourism in the region. Businesses will have access to regionally relevant economic development and business start-up tools, tourism development and marketing products, agency resource protection strategies and plans, and “best practices” examples from existing coastal businesses successfully operating within
the region.

See: www.miseagrant.umich.edu/nemia

Rural Communities Need Health Care Reform More Than Anyone

2009-10-01T21:46:00.000-07:00

Rural Communities Need Health Care Reform More Than Anyone

Posted by: Deepak Bhargava . Thursday, Oct 01, 2009

(originally published in the Huffington Post)

The lie that health care reform would hurt rural communities has been one to which progressives and moderates have been slow to respond, perhaps because there have been so many myths and distortions to keep us busy. The extreme right clearly believes that the only way they can win the health care reform debate and stop change in its tracks is tell one whopper after another. From 1950-esque claims of socialism to the mythological death panels, they've shown no remorse in simply scaring people with out-and-out falsehoods.

In no case has this been more obvious than the fairytale that somehow health care reform would be bad for people who live in rural areas. Quite the contrary, rural areas have the highest proportion of both uninsured and under-insured. The numbers are discussed in an excellent Los Angeles Times article:

"The states that tend to be more conservative have a higher rate of people who are uninsured," said Ron Pollack, executive director of FamiliesUSA, which backs a health care overhaul. As a result, health care reform is going to provide a disproportionate amount of resources to those states."

In Wyoming, for example, nearly one in three people younger than 65 went without health insurance at some point during the last two years, according to Pollack's group. A huge majority of the uninsured have jobs, but work for employers who don't provide coverage.

It's rural America that stands to benefit the most from a public option. Not merely because universal access will disproportionately benefit such areas, but because many rural states simply have no competitive market for health insurance. A recent report illustrated that 94 percent of the health insurance markets in the United States are "highly concentrated." Where is the problem the worst? In small and rural states. Lack of competition means higher premiums, and it also means larger numbers of people being frozen out of access to health care. If you live in a region with only one major provider of insurance, you have no place to go when you get turned down for a preexisting condition.

A group of videographers recently traveled to state fairs around rural America to record the health care stories of ordinary Americans. Their simple, heartfelt stories stand in sharp contrast to the outrageous and insurance lobby-orchestrated extremism at town halls that has captured the imagination of the mainstream media. How different the debate might be if the media was interested in facts rather than antics. For instance, how many American's have heard stories like these:

Ronda Hilker from Nebraska had this to say:

My husband and I are honest, hardworking, tax paying, land owning, US citizens who used to have what we thought to be "good health coverage." We had paid our premiums faithfully on time every month for nearly 17 years, to later learn our hospital claims were denied! We are left with massive medical debt, and this was with insurance. Yes, we thought we had great insurance up until the time we actually needed it for a farm-related accident! Something must be done to hold these companies, doctors and hospitals accountable. People are literally dying from health related accidents/illness that could have been prevented with prompt, caring and adequate health care.

The huge need for real health care reform that contains a public insurance option for all Americans makes it all the sadder that rural state senators like Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, have essentially given up on bi-partisan health care reform negotiations. Instead, many have chosen to spread falsehoods about the President's plan. They need to hear more from the real people in this debate who have much to benefit from reform. For now, it seems they are preoccupied with counting the money they have received from health insurance industry lobbyists. A reality that is made clear in this advertisement:

The extreme right and big health insurance lobbies are coming together in an effort to tear us apart. Their strategy is to sow fear and divide rural from urban, black from white and low income from high income. We face a critical moment: we can either give in to the old politics of fear and division, or we can rededicate ourselves to renewing America by moving forward together as one nation. Unless we stand up to the "No We Can't Coalition," all of the hope and possibility of President Obama's election will disappear before our eyes.

Get involved and make yourself heard!

How to Sustain a Local Economy: From PB&J to Regional Currencies

2009-10-01T16:03:00.000-07:00

Published on Thursday, October 1, 2009 by The Ann Arbor Chronicle (Michigan)

How to Sustain a Local Economy: From PB&J to Regional Currencies

by Mary Morgan

When The Chronicle entered the lower level meeting room of the downtown Ann Arbor library, the first things we noticed were three large trays of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, cut into bite-sized wedges. As public forums go, this was an offbeat gnoshing choice.

Panelists at the Sept. 23 Michigan Peaceworks forum on the local economy, from the left: Tom Weisskopf, University of Michigan economics professor; Ellen Clement, Corner Health Center executive director; Jeff McCabe, People's Food Co-Op board member; Lisa Dugdale, Transition Ann Arbor; Michael Appel, Avalon Housing executive director; John Hieftje, mayor of Ann Arbor. (Photo by the writer.)

It turned out that the sandwiches - and apples, soft drinks, potato chips and other food - were all sourced from Michigan, in keeping with the theme of Wednesday night's event. The panel discussion focused on the state's economic crisis, and how the community can respond to it. Buying local products is one example.

Starting a local currency is another possibility - the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority is funding a study to look into that. Generating electricity locally is also an opportunity - Mayor John Hieftje told the group that he didn't think the dam at Argo Pond would be removed, in part because it might be used for hydropower in the future.

The forum - "Michigan's Economic Situation: Crisis or Opportunity?" - was hosted by Ann Arbor-based Michigan Peaceworks and Washtenaw Voice, a coalition of local nonprofits that are working together to increase voter turnout and bolster the community in other ways. Michigan Peaceworks is the lead agency in this effort, part of the broader Michigan Voice initiative.

State and national issues were part of the discussion, but most of the six panelists focused on how the local community can take action in specific areas, including food, health care, housing and the environment.

The Panelists' Perspectives

Laura Russello, executive director of Michigan Peaceworks, moderated the panel. She began by announcing that state Rep. Rebekah Warren, a Democrat whose district includes Ann Arbor and who was originally scheduled as a panelist, got stuck in Lansing and sent her regrets. (The legislature is trying to resolve a projected $2.7 billion budget deficit by the start of its fiscal year, on Oct. 1.) The others who spoke at Wednesday's forum represented a cross-section of the community, including academia, nonprofits and the government. Here's a sampling of their comments.

Tom Weisskopf, University of Michigan economics professor

Weisskopf, who served as director of UM's Residential College from 1996 to 2005, compared the current economic crisis to the Great Depression of the 1930s. Though not as deep as that decline, today's economy faces unprecedented challenges, he said.

"We really need a transformation, not just a recovery," Weisskopf said.

He described the Solidarity Economy, an international movement that rejects profit-centered values and embraces cooperation, equality and local control. He listed several examples of ways that this movement is taking shape. Community land trusts - nonprofits that provide "truly affordable housing," he said - are cropping up across the country, and have lower foreclosure rates than the general housing market. One successful example is the Champlain Housing Trust in Burlington, Vermont.

Community-owned corporations, with locally elected boards and shares sold to local investors, are another example of the solidarity economy. In Ann Arbor, People's Food Co-op fits this model, Weisskopf said. Other "solidaristic" examples include worker-owned cooperatives like Cleveland's Evergreen Cooperative Laundry, community development financial institutions, and the green jobs movement, with efforts like the Green Collar Jobs Corps in Oakland, Calif.

Ellen Clement, Corner Health Center

Clement began by noting that she'd worked for over 20 years in public health - earlier this year, she resigned as health officer for the Washtenaw County Public Health Department to take the job as executive director at the Corner Health Center, a Ypsilanti clinic for teens. "Believe me, it's an eye-opening change," she said.

Responding to the question of whether the economic crisis can be turned into an opportunity, Clement said that for health care, dramatic change won't happen without a crisis. That crisis has arrived, and it's time to make sure that health care is seen as a right, not a privilege, she said. "There's just, to me, no excuse for not having health care for all."

But providing health care alone won't be enough, she said - it's also about keeping Americans healthier, with policies and incentives that focus on preventive care and promote healthier lifestyles. Clement cited efforts like the Ann Arbor Non-Motorized Transportation Plan and the Ann Arbor YMCA's Pioneering Healthier Communities, which focuses on providing recreational programs to youth in Ypsilanti.

She noted that as they listen to the panelists, the audience would see that all of the topics are interconnected - that's what sustainability is all about, she said.

Jeff McCabe, People's Food Co-op and Friday Mornings @ Selma

McCabe contends that food is taken for granted, more so than even air or water. There were moments of crisis regarding the quality of our air and water that prompted policy reforms, he said. "In food, we haven't seen that change yet."

Americans still want their food fast and cheap, McCabe said, and the locavore movement - with its focus on eating locally grown and produced food - hasn't even taken one mile out of the 1,500 miles that food travels, on average, to get to our table.

About 1% of food consumed by residents of Washtenaw County is actually produced in the county, McCabe said. What if that were increased to 10%? Assuming that local residents spend over $1 billion annually on food, increasing consumption of locally grown food could put $100 million into the local economy, he said. Demand would drive an increase in local farming, potentially generating thousands of jobs.

McCabe cited Eliot Coleman of the Four Season Farm in Harborside, Maine, as a model of a small-scale, year-round venture that could work equally well in Washtenaw County. McCabe supports local efforts toward that goal - proceeds from Friday Mornings @ Selma, a weekly breakfast salon run by McCabe and his wife Lisa Gottlieb, help fund hoop house projects in this region.

"We vote with our wallets every day," McCabe said. "Think about that when you buy your food."

Lisa Dugdale, Transition Ann Arbor

Dugdale, a founder of Think Local First of Washtenaw County and now a project manager for the Clean Energy Coalition, said the current economic crisis was really an inevitability. She described the Transition Town movement as a response to the challenges of global warming, peak oil and economic instability. [See previous Chronicle coverage of Transition Ann Arbor. Dugdale is one of the group's organizers.]

There are concrete actions that individuals can take, Dugdale said: Buying less, repairing or repurposing items you already own, buying from locally owned businesses that will keep money circulating in this community.

More broadly, the community could do an "economic leakage" study, Dugdale said, looking at sectors that drain the most money out of the community, then focusing economic development efforts in those areas. Food production might be a sector that fits this category, she said.

Creating a local currency is another way to keep money in the community, Dugdale said. Think Local First was recently awarded a grant from the Downtown Development Authority to analyze the feasibility of starting a local currency, she said.

The Chronicle made a follow-up query to Susan Pollay, the DDA's executive director, who said that the $6,000 grant was authorized earlier this month. Some of the questions that the study will address include:

How strong is the demand for a local currency program?
How would a local currency program be different than gift certificate programs to local businesses (such as the former Ann Arbor Gold program run by the Ann Arbor Area Chamber of Commerce) and how are those differences articulated?
If a local currency program were created in Ann Arbor, would it involve coordination with a local bank? If so, how would that bank be selected?
Can a local currency program be managed by an existing organization (e.g. Think Local First) or is a separate agency needed?
What kind of longevity are other local currency programs experiencing?
Is it anticipated that local businesses would see revenue increases as a result of a local currency program? Are there other benefits one might see from such a program?

The study will likely take three to four months to complete, according to Pollay.

Michael Appel, Avalon Housing

Appel explained how housing has become more than just shelter. For many, it's an asset that creates inter-generational financial stability, even more so than income. People were frightened by the recent housing crash because the dramatic drop in their home's value meant they were losing the value of a long-term asset, he said.

These personal financial difficulties turn into community crises, as entire neighborhoods are hit by foreclosures. Ann Arbor is less affected than some communities, Appel said, but some areas of Washtenaw County are suffering dramatic foreclosure rates. Foreclosures also displace renters - when their landlord loses the house through foreclosure, the renters are forced to move, even if they've been paying rent. This affects some of the poorest in the community, he said.

The housing crash also affects the nonprofit that Appel runs. Their model relies on private investors, who in turn receive tax incentives for investing in Avalon projects. [The group's most recent project, Near North, received approval from the Ann Arbor city council on Monday.] But real estate is no longer seen as a secure investment, he said. Further, if a corporation - and potential investor - isn't profitable, tax credits would be of little value to such an entity. These factors have curbed the amount of equity available for low-income housing projects.

There are still some opportunities, Appel said. Much of the federal stimulus money is going into the housing sector. The irony, he said, is that the government's "cure" isn't focused on helping people find a place to live - it's focused on fixing housing as an investment. In general, he said, it's worth considering whether housing should be viewed as a way to build financial security.

Any investment in housing should stress energy efficiency, Appel said, as well as coordination with transportation and jobs. We've seen how the suburbs can leave the local economy vulnerable, he said.

John Hieftje, mayor of Ann Arbor

Hieftje said he was a member of the Michigan Climate Action Council, which released a report in March of 2009 that included several policy recommendations related to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental issues. However, the state has been slow to act on those recommendations, he said.

Hieftje spoke about various environmental initiatives undertaken by the city of Ann Arbor, including the installation of LED street lights, the addition of bicycle lanes and the goal of using 30% renewable energy for municipal operations by 2010. As an example of areas that are doing even more, he pointed to Ontario, Canada, which has large-scale wind farms and two major solar plants. Public policy in Canada and Europe - including the use of feed-in tariffs - makes it easier to promote renewable energy in those countries, he said.

One of the things that Michigan can do to promote economic recovery is to refocus on making cities the kind of places where people want to be, Hieftje said - the business will follow.

Audience Q&A

The audience asked a range of questions. Here's a sampling.

Q: How does the city reconcile the seemingly contradictory goals of encouraging alternative transportation while building a new parking structure? Hieftje said that although the city supported alternative transportation, they weren't trying to create a non-motorized downtown. They'll be losing at least 700 parking spaces in the coming years, he said, and the new underground parking structure on Fifth Avenue - a project which will be breaking ground next week - is only replacing the parking they're losing. He added that Google wouldn't have located in downtown Ann Arbor if there hadn't been parking available. Insufficient parking simply drives business to the suburbs, he said.

Q: Can Ann Arbor's dams be used to generate local electrical power? Can Ann Arbor establish a city utility? The city already produces electricity at Barton and Superior dams, Hieftje said. The dam at Gallup has a 50% greater capacity for generating electricity than Argo dam, he said, with about a 35-year payback on investment. But new technologies might make it possible to tap the water flow in ways that aren't yet possible, Hieftje added. That's why it might be smart to keep the dam at Argo, he said: "I don't really see Argo Dam going away." [See previous Chronicle coverage of an Ann Arbor Energy Commission meeting that discussed the issue of hydropower at the city's dams.]

Because of changes at the state level, it's harder to establish a municipal utility now than in the past, Hieftje said. The city hasn't given up on that possibility, but it isn't easy.

Q: It seems that the organic and local food movement is elitist. How can these movements affect food availability for people with less money? Jeff McCabe said it's a matter of prioritizing. Do you spend money on a box of cereal or spend time cooking a healthy grain? Those are choices that people make. He noted that commercial food is subsidized, making it more difficult for smaller, organic producers to compete on price. Ellen Clement said that there's some relationship between the price that people charge and their customer base, citing the example of dramatically lower prices at the Ypsilanti Farmers Market, compared to the market in Ann Arbor.

Q: What are the political roadblocks to building green communities? Hieftje blamed the Republican-controlled state Senate for a reluctance to give up old ways. Policies need to change in Lansing that affect what local municipalities can do. He added that he thought the locally elected legislators did a good job.

The Q&A was followed by breakout sessions, focused on food, health care, housing and the environment. Later, in wrapping up the evening, Russello said they'll be taking the information and feedback from the forum and using that to identify projects for the Washtenaw Voice coalition. They'll be launching a website with a calendar and blog. It will be progressive, she said, adding that organizers are still trying to define exactly what "progressive" means in this context.

Groups Involved in Washtenaw Voice

The following local groups, or the local chapters of these state and national organizations, are part of the Washtenaw Voice initiative. The coalition is not affiliated with the Washtenaw Community College student newspaper, which is also called the Washtenaw Voice.

The Ecology Center

Michigan League of Conservation Voters

Working America

The Women's Center of Southeast Michigan

Interfaith Council for Peace and Justice

University of Michigan Labor Studies Center

Michigan Peaceworks

Learning Disabilities Association of Michigan

Clean Water Fund

Chelsea Community Hospital

March on the Vote (no website available)

Health Care for Michigan

Center for Michigan

Transportation Riders United

Metropolitan Organizing Strategy Enabling Strength

Partners in Personal Assistance

Michigan Voice

2009-10-01T16:00:00.000-07:00

Michigan Voice

State Photo:

Contact

Name:

Amanda Stitt / Danielle Atkinson

Email:

amanda@statevoices.org

Title:

Director / Field Director, Michigan Voice

Phone numbers:

Office: (517) 420-2833 / (313) 964-5099

Mission:

Michigan Voice is a state based collaboration formed in 2005 to improve long-term coordination and communication among nonprofit civic engagement organizations in Michigan. The collaboration's nonpartisan mission is to engage underrepresented or socially responsible voters in the democratic process and to establish collective action around a common issue agenda.

Partner Organizations:

ACCESS
ACLU Fund
ACORN
APIA-Vote
Black Youth Vote
Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good
Center for Progressive Leadership
Clean Water Action Ed Fund
Common Cause of Michigan
Detroiters Working for Environmental Justice
Ecology Center
Environment Michigan
Gamaliel of Michigan
Jonah
Labor Constituencies (APRI, LCLAA, APALA)
Mary Church Terrell Council for Community Empowerment
MI AFLCIO
Michigan Alliance of Timebanks
Michigan Campaign Finance Network
Michigan Citizen Ed Fund
Michigan Education Association
Michigan Election Coaltion
Michigan Election Reform Alliance
Michigan Environmental Council

Michigan Equality
Michigan Health Care Security Campaign
Michigan League for Human Services
Michigan League of Conservation Voters ED Fund
Michigan Legal Services
Michigan National Organization for Women Foundation
Michigan Pride at Work
Michigan State Conference NAACP
Michigan Unitarian Universalist Social Justice Network
MichUCAN
MOSES
Native Vote
Planned Parenthood Assoicates of Michigan
Project Intersect
Project PreVote
Restaurant Opportunities Center of Michigan
Rosa and Raymond Parks Institute for Self Development
SEIU
Sierra Club Foundation
The White House Project, Michigan Field Office
Transportation Riders Untied
Triangle Foundation
United Food and Commercial Workers
Working America Ed Fund

Plans & Reports

Plans & Reports Links:

Michigan Voice 2009 Plan

Michigan Voice 2010 Plan

Program Areas

1) Central Statewide Voter File	5) Central Communications and Media Hub
2) Coordinated Voter Reg, ID and GOTV	6) Statewide Policy Summit
3) Voter Protection and Reform	7) Ballot Initiative Development
4) Polling, Modeling and Research	8) Coordinated Training

Michigan Coalition for Progress

2009-09-27T08:35:00.000-07:00

Michigan Coalition for Progress

We are an independent progressive voice for the people of Michigan dedicated to holding our elected political leaders accountable and moving Michigan forward. Join us today.

About Us

Founded in 2006 in Kalamazoo, the Michigan Coalition for Progress is an independent progressive voice, over 40,000 members strong, dedicated to holding our elected political leaders accountable. We are a positive, issue-based group, bringing people together to elect progressive leaders who are committed to bringing the change we need to Michigan.

It's time to put Michigan first. For way too long, conservative Republicans in the state legislature have stood in the way of the change we need to move Michigan forward. We need to hold our leadership accountable. By empowering citizens to play an active role in the legislative process, we can help ensure that our leaders in Lansing uphold their commitment to bringing positive change to Michigan.

The Michigan Coalition for Progress is leveling the playing field, because for too long, Lansing has been inundated with right-wing and special interest dollars. Our funding is transparent and a matter of public record.

Help us in our fight to move Michigan forward by joining our coalition, or by donating today.

Support Basic Healthcare for Women

Submitted by Caleb on 2 September 2009 - 10:38am.

Next week, it is expected that a package of bills will be considered in the House Judiciary Committee to prevent unintended pregnancies, create contraceptive equity, ensure medically accurate abstinence education and ensure access to emergency contraception.

The “Prevention First” legislation (HB 5155-HB 5165) will reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and slow the spread of STDs such as HIV.

Contact your Representative and ask him or her to get to work on improving reproductive health care, while maintaining a women’s right to privacy.

Re-Energize Michigan!

Submitted by Caleb on 5 August 2009 - 11:05am.

Recently, a coalition of legislators, business leaders and clean energy advocates announced an innovative plan to make Michigan a leader in alternative energy production by offering incentives for renewable energy development and manufacturing, energy efficiency and alternative energy production.

We need your help turning this legislation into law.

Investing in clean energy is a critical step in strengthening the Michigan economy. It is imperative that Michigan takes the lead on alternative energy technologies that will create thousands of new jobs in the wind, solar and construction fields for our skilled workers.

Join the Coalition for Progress, Clean Water Action, Progress Michigan, Michigan League of Conservation Voters and other Michigan-based organizations and tell our legislature that you support the “Re-Energize Michigan!” proposal.

Meet Sarah Roberts

Submitted by Caleb on 9 July 2009 - 10:23am.

State Representative Sarah Roberts (D-24) is in her first term, serving southeastern Macomb County, specifically St. Clair Shores and Harrison Township. Roberts previously served as a Macomb County Commissioner.

Roberts is committed to protecting Michigan’s environment and natural resources-especially our water. A member of the Great Lakes and the Environment Committee as well as a former organizer for Clean Water Action, Roberts understands how precious our natural resources are and can be counted on to protect them in Lansing.

A graduate of the University of Iowa and a resident of St. Clair Shores, Roberts is a volunteer coordinator for Green Michigan and a participant in the local “Adopt-a-Road” program.

Learn more about Sarah Roberts and her House colleagues at www.housedems.com

First District Democrats of Michigan

2009-09-26T11:58:00.000-07:00

The First District is the second largest congressional district in land mass east of the Mississippi River. Its boundaries contain much of the northeastern part of the Lower Peninsula in addition to the entire Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Altogether, the district makes up about 44% of the State of Michigan. It contains the second longest shoreline of any district in the United States, with Alaska being the first.

It contains all of 30 Michigan counties and a portion of the 31st. Making it comprised of almost 3/8th's of the states 83 total counties.

The district is represented by Democrat BART STUPAK, who has been its representative since 1993.

County Contact Website

ALCONA ROGER LOVE

ALGER PAUL GOODBURN

ALPENA KEITH TITUS

ANTRIM JAMES MCKIMMY

ARENAC JOELLYN PEDOTA

BARAGA

BAY TONY PAWELSKI WEBSITE

CHARLEVOIX BILL LOVETT WEBSITE

CHEBOYGAN RICHARD WEST

CHIPPEWA DOROTHY JOHNSON WEBSITE

CRAWFORD KEVIN TOMCZAK WEBSITE

DELTA WILLIAM CHARON

DICKINSON GENO ALESSANDRINI

EMMET GORDON BOURLAND WEBSITE

GLADWIN ROSALIND CARL

GOGEBIC LAUREL MAKINEN

HOUGHTON BRIAN HODUSKI
BRIAN RENDEL
WEBSITE

IOSCO ROZANNE CURLEY WEBSITE

IRON RONALD SHERWOOD

KEWEENAW JACQUELINE JAASKELAINEN

LUCE JILL MAKI

MACKINAC JOANN FORD
JIM RAMELIS

MARQUETTE TONY TOLLEFSON

MENOMINEE RUBY IVENS

MONTMORENCY ROSEMARY NUHFER

OGEMAW DALE SHELTROWN

ONTONAGON ROGER HALQUIST

OSCODA

OTSEGO GARY KOZMA WEBSITE

PRESQUE ISLE MICHAEL VOGLER

SCHOOLCRAFT DIXIE ANDERSON

OTHER LINKS OF INTEREST

Michigan Democratic Party

Democratic National Committee

Michigan House Democratic Caucus

Michigan Senate Democratic Caucus

The First District Democrats of Michigan's annual fundraising events are our NORTHERN MICHIGAN and UP BIG BASH'S!

2009-09-26T11:37:00.000-07:00

FIRST DISTRICT BIG BASH INFORMATION

The First District Democrats of Michigan's annual fundraising events are our NORTHERN MICHIGAN and UP BIG BASH'S! Held in two different area's each year it is a guaranteed GOOD TIME to meet and network with fellow democrats, hear from democratic elected officials & candidates and HAVE A GREAT TIME!

PLEASE MAKE PLANS TO JOIN US FOR ONE OR BOTH EVENTS!

SATURDAY OCTOBER 24, 2009

NORTHERN MICHIGAN BIG BASH -

PETOSKEY MI - ODAWA HOTEL

HOSTED BY: THE EMMET COUNTY DEMOCRATIC COMMITTEE

SATURDAY NOVEMBER 7, 2009

UP BIG BASH -

MARQUETTE MI - RAMADA INN

HOSTED BY THE MARQUETTE COUNTY DEMOCRATIC PARTY

Details at this link

Staff Writer, Reporter and Publishing Job Postings

2009-09-25T12:13:00.001-07:00

Ads for September 24-30, 2009

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER AND BUSINESS MANAGER
OPPORTUNITIES

Responsible for providing financial leadership and
financial planning for Jams media LLC & Web Press of Michigan Corp.
Experienced accountant to direct internal accounting programs,
procedures & staff, including cost accounting, systems and procedures,
data processing, acquisitions analysis, financial planning, internal
audit, forecasting, banking, profit and loss & budgeting. MBA, CPA,
.Vice President of Finance or 6-10 years Business management
experience preferred. Send resume to pneill@mihomepaper.com
pneill@mihomepaper.com>
. Posted 9/24/09.

STAFF WRITER

Kaechele Publications Inc. is seeking an enterprising
journalist capable of covering the actions of local governments and
writing in-depth feature stories from communities throughout Allegan
County. Candidates must be able to work independently and on deadline,
have a vehicle and be willing to drive anywhere in the county.
Photography skills are a plus. Successful candidate will also be
responsible for planning and designing several special publications.
Personal integrity and a willingness to get to the truth in a story
are a must. Full-time position with benefits. Send resume and cover
letter with salary requirements to Ryan Lewis, Editor, PO Box 189,
Allegan, MI 49010 or email rmlewis@allegannews.com
rmlewis@allegannews.com>
. Posted 9/10/09.

REPORTER”

Mid Michigan weekly seeks a talented reporter to write both new
and/or sports. Full time position, must be available to cover sports
and/or some evening meetings. InDesign and photoshop experience
helpful, but will train. Benefits available. Earn while you learn.
Send your resume to: Gratiot County Herald, 123 N. Main St., Ithaca,
MI 48847, or e-mail to: phyllis@gcherald.com
phyllis@gcherald.com>
. No phone calls please. Posted 9/3/09
.

REPORTER

Grand Haven Tribune has an immediate opening for a general
reporter. The Grand Haven Tribune serves three separate communities on
the western shores of Lake Michigan. We publish a six-day daily
newspaper, website, photo-sharing site and have plans to expand our
electronic journalism even further. Comfortable with print and web
reporting? Not afraid to shoot video too? Then we want to talk with
you about a great opportunity to hone your skills for bigger and
better things down the road. We offer competitive starting salary,
paid vacations, 401k and health insurance. Plus you are close from
Grand Rapids and minutes from our pristine beaches. If you are
qualified and interested in this great opportunity for first-time
reporters, or a weekly reporter looking for daily experience, submit
your resumÃ© and samples of your recent work to: Len Painter, Grand
Haven Tribune, 101 N. Third Street, Grand Haven, MI 49417.
lpainter@grandhaventribune.com lpainter@grandhaventribune.com>
. Posted 9/3/09.

If you have any items or job openings that you would like in next
week's FME, e-mail them to bulletin@michiganpress.org.

No charge for ads 100 words or less to member newspapers of the
Michigan Press Association and students whose papers are MPA members.

Ads must be submitted to bulletin@michiganpress.org no later than
Wednesday noon. Non-MPA member ads 100 words or less run for four
weeks for $40 with payment due in advance.

Non-MPA student ads 100 words or less run for four weeks for $20 with
payment due in advance. All ads should be limited to 100 words. All
ads containing over 100 words will be charged an extra $10. The Free
Member Exchange is available at MichiganPress.org and is delivered to
subscribers by e-mail. E-mail bulletin@michiganpress.org to subscribe
to the electronic distribution list.