Policing the policemen

Posted on January 25, 2012 by ScottC

So, now that this weekend’s brouhaha is largely past us and the postmortem recriminations have been played out, complete with after-the-fact play by play and color commentary, I thought I would add my own observations about something that has heretofore been unremarked upon, and that is how third parties react to a perceived instance of a breach in ATiM etiquette.

I for one am very reluctant to play moderator or referee in the midst of a heated conversation between two other people, particularly by calling someone out, and especially as a public matter.  (Ignore, for now, the fact that I am usually a participant and rarely a third party observer in such conversations.)  Both personal experience and observation suggests to me that it rarely ends up being helpful, and often makes things worse, embroiling yet more people in the heat rather than cooling things down as intended.  Perhaps a private e-mail, or brief “Come on, people” from a third party might be useful.  But if that doesn’t work, I think letting things play out and having a postmortem later is likely to be less damaging than trying to intervene by taking people to task on the board.

This is a self-moderated blog, and in the first instance it means exactly that- each of us is expected to moderate ourselves individually, according to the rules that we all know.  And I can say from personal experience that, having determined to one’s own satisfaction that one hasn’t done anything wrong, to see the repeated insinuation from third parties that one is out of bounds can be extremely grating, even if, in retrospect, there may be a point.  This simply dials up, rather than alleviates, the heat of the situation.

Letting an inflamed situation play out is not the end of the world.  What makes our discussion standards notable here is what we are striving to achieve, not the fact that we always and everywhere achieve it.  If, in a given instance, we fail, then we fail.  On to the next one and try again.  And an after-the-fact discussion about it may well prove more valuable, or at least less damaging, than a heat-of-the-battle attempt to stop it.  Active third-party moderation is not always, and perhaps not even often, the best approach.

My two cents.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 38 Comments »

Bits & Pieces (Tuesday Night Open Mic)

Posted on January 24, 2012 by Kevin S. Willis

You probably won’t want to watch the whole thing. It lasts over 2 hours.

In 2009, Casey Pugh asked thousands of Internet users to remake “Star Wars: A New Hope” into a fan film, 15 seconds at a time. Contributors were allowed to recreate scenes from Star Wars however they wanted. Within just a few months SWU grew into a wild success. The creativity that poured into the project was unimaginable.

The 5 Online Petitions that Prove Democracy is Broken. Like that was really necessary.

Coming up with stuff to link to would be a lot easier if the Net Nanny here didn’t block The Onion. Someone link to something from The Onion.

Will this be Apple’s First $40 Billion Quarter?

I miss Bloom County.

For you physicists and metaphysicists in the audience . . .

Click on it to actually see the whole thing. All right. That’s it for tonight. Just somebody link to something in The Onion.

— KW

And, by the way, the FAQ page is up. Look it over and let me know what you think–and feel free to add (or just leave it in a comment and I’ll add it either tonight or [more likely] tomorrow)!
— Michigoose

Filed under: Bits and Pieces, FAQ, Star Wars | Tagged: , , , , | 60 Comments »

State “Flexibility” and the ACA’s Essential Health Benefits

Posted on January 24, 2012 by novahockey

HHS has been making a big deal about how “flexible” the essential health benefits requires are for states.   Sure, it’s very flexible.  They can choose from column A or column A1.

States would have the flexibility to select an existing health plan to set the “benchmark” for the items and services included in the essential health benefits package.  States would choose one of the following health insurance plans as a benchmark:

  •  One of the three largest small group plans in the state;
  • One of the three largest state employee health plans;
  • One of the three largest federal employee health plan options;
  • The largest HMO plan offered in the state’s commercial market

States can modify coverage within a benefit category, but they have to cover items and services for the following 10 categories of care: (1) ambulatory patient services, (2) emergency services (3) hospitalization, (4) maternity and newborn care, (5) mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment, (6) prescription drugs, (7) rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices, (8) laboratory services, (9) preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management, and (10) pediatric services, including oral and vision care.

So, states have the “flexibility” to craft a benefit package that is based on the existing plans in their state and must include a statutorily mandated list [Section 1302(b)(1) of the ACA] of benefits.   States can tweak the specific benefits in each category but can not reduce the value of coverage.   And God help you if you try, for example, to change a formulary to cover a generic vs. a brand name, or institute step-therapy in that prescription drug category.

As far as the ability to craft a unique policy, that ability just isn’t there.  HHS admits as much in its recently released guidance.

Generally, according to this analysis, products in the small group market, State employee plans, and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) Standard Option and Government Employees Health Association (GEHA) plans do not differ significantly in the range of services they cover. They differ mainly in cost-sharing provisions, but cost-sharing is not taken into account in determining EHB. Similarly, these plans and products and the small group issuers surveyed by the IOM appear to generally cover health care services in virtually all of the 10 statutory categories.

The HHS analysis found that the differences among plans are minor.  Some plans cover or don’t cover acupuncture, bariatric surgery, hearing aids, and smoking cessation programs and medications.   So Mississippi can strike a blow for federalism by telling HHS, no, we’re not covering acupuncture.

Where there might be some differences now will be eliminated.  Not every state mandates coverage for behaviorial health treatment.  Now it is number 5 on the “must cover”  list.

Basically, the differences will be on the edges, minor and will address how something will be provided.  For example, pediatric dental plans may be wrapped into a medical benefit.  Or they can be sold as stand-alone plans.   That’s an issue that will be worked out on state-by-state basis.   But I don’t think that makes it more or less “flexible” for states.

States also have varying definitions of the various mandated benefit categories.  What “habilitative services and devices” isn’t necessarily consistent across state lines.  But, in general, it’s for physical therapy (PT), occupational therapy (OT), and speech therapy (ST).  Differences might be who qualifies (meaning what medical condition) and at what level of cost sharing for such benefits.   I don’t consider that flexibility.

Not all states current mandate coverage for the 10 categories (mostly  habilitative services, pediatric oral services, and pediatric vision services) .   While HHS is considering how to best rectify this, the law and HHS are very clear on this point: they will be covered.   How is TBD, but the guidance (linked below) lays out some options and basically tells state to pick an existing plan coverage, for example, the Federal Employees Dental and Vision Insurance Program, and graft it onto their “flexible” state plan.

States do have some flexibility within a benefit category, but only to a point.  States can adjust benefits within a category subject to a baseline set as reflected in the benchmark plan.

Here’s the kicker: Section 1302(b)(4)(G) and (H) direct the Secretary to periodically review and update EHB.  Translation.  Those 10 mandated benefit categories can become 20 if we want them to be.   Also, look for those categories to be more clearly defined through regulatory capture guidance.   Want to make sure a plan covers a specific treatment?   Gather data, hire a good lobbyist and you too can have your benefit become essential.

Full HHS guidance here. [Note:  opens PDF]

And if you missed it, Sebelius was on the Daily Show to talk about the ACA.   Bonus points for work-related Daily Show viewing.   Link at KHN.

[Apologies to Mark for taking so long with this. ]

Filed under: Affordable Care Act, health insurance | 41 Comments »

Morning Report

Posted on January 24, 2012 by Brent Nyitray

Vital Statistics:

Last Change Percent
S&P Futures 1304.6 -6.5 -0.50%
Eurostoxx Index 2410.3 -31.180 -1.28%
Oil (WTI) 99.26 -0.320 -0.32%
LIBOR 0.5591 -0.001 -0.18%
US Dollar Index (DXY) 79.989 0.191 0.24%
10 Year Govt Bond Yield 2.05% 0.00%

 

Stocks are lower on brinkmanship over the Greek settlement talks.  In spite of Greek worries, EURIBOR / OIS (a measure of stress in the  banking system that is watched closely by professionals) has been in steady decline for a month now.  It is currently 80 basis points lower than its post-crisis peak of 100 basis points in early December.

 

The Washington Post has an article on the potential robo-signing settlement with the large banks.  The size of the settlement is said to be around $25 billion and liberals want it larger.  It will supposedly include additional regulations on loan servicers, which could create loads of unintended consequences.  Mortgage Servicing Rights are already pretty much worthless, and the big banks are exiting the business.  Ocwen is refusing to advance principal and interest payments to bondholders until it recoups its advancements.  The administration could end up shooting itself in the foot if it goes overboard with the servicers.

 

Diamondback is settling with the SEC for $9 million.  Diamondback is a $2.5 billion hedge fund in Stamford CT and is run by ex SAC traders.  It will be interesting to see if the Feds get info that leads back to Stevie Cohen.

 

Japan is running a trade deficit?   Apparently, yes.  Part of it is due to the nuclear disaster and the earthquake, but it is also due to a strong currency and an aging population.  Japanese companies are succumbing to the same globalization forces we are and are moving production overseas.  The yen has been strengthening for 30 years, bottoming out at 277 in 1982.  It is now 77.

 

No major economic news today.  Apple will report after the close.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 149 Comments »

Question of the night: Is the personal political?

Posted on January 23, 2012 by Fairlington Blade

Hi all,

We’re about an hour from debate time and I wanted to expand upon something that came up in an earlier debate. Rick Perry voiced what I thought was a dangerous line of attack on Newt. Here’s the quote: “If you cheat on your wife, you’ll cheat on your business partner, so I think that issue of fidelity is important.” It’s an interesting challenge and one worth expanding upon.

Let’s take fiscal conservatives as an example. I consider myself a fiscal conservative in both the personal and political senses of the world. We bought our house in 2005, when the real estate world seemed to have gone mad. People were getting all kinds of crazy mortgages, which really pissed me off as it meant I couldn’t afford the kind of home I hoped to have. We held to a firm rule. 10% down. 15 year fixed mortgage. It would mean sacrifices, but it made fiscal sense. I’m glad we were careful as despite our care, we had financial troubles. The place needed a good deal more work than anticipated and so we blew through our savings, I took out a $15k improvement loan, and we were still running a bit short. [I’m fiscally conservative, but also make mistakes.] We bore down, built up some minimal savings, and paid off that loan 7 years early. We’re working to pay off my wife’s student loans next year (way early after having consolidated), and I want to pay off the mortgage by the time the boys exit elementary school (that’d be about 3 – 4 years early). I don’t want to be in a position of needing a paycheck ever again. I’ll note that I’m lucky in that I’ve had a relatively secure position during the last 4 years and my wife’s freelancing has taken off.

I’m also a fiscal conservative in the political sense. For me, being a fiscal conservative means that expenditures should match income. Cutting taxes without cutting expenditures is the act of a fiscal fool. So is increasing expenditures without increasing taxes. So, Medicare Part D was reckless. Expanding Medicare to include a drug benefit? Great idea! Doing it without touching FICA rates. Terrible idea¡ If you want federal taxes to be limited to 20% of GDP, fine. Then propose a budget that meets that.

Now, shocks occur. I am horrified by the present fiscal situation, but it beats a second great depression. It flips my personal stance (short term pain for long term gain). Ironically, the opposite seems to be the case. Short term deficits and long term cuts. The alternative is Greece (or the UK, which slipped back into recession).

That’s a somewhat lengthy example. Let’s bring it to politicians. Example A would be Rep. Joe Walsh (R-Illinois). Owes child support, a condo foreclosure, and tax liens. How can anyone take such an individual seriously? I’ll also put Charlie Rangel in the same class. For all his tap dancing, the attacks on Al Gore for his mansion hit home.

I’m curious as to other analogues. Do apparent contradictions between a politician’s personal behavior and their political positions matter to you? Are there any cases of where your vote has been affected by a politician’s personal actions?

And most important of all. Would you like to grope Sen. Rand Paul? 😉

BB

Filed under: politics | 15 Comments »

4th Amendment News: SCOTUS Rules GPS Tracking is a Search

Posted on January 23, 2012 by novahockey

We’ve talked about this case before.  Details at Wired.  The case was unanimous.   Scalia wrote the opinion and was joined by 4 others and Alito wrote a concurring opinion that was joined by three.  So 9-0 in favor of limiting a police power.

What’s really surprising is that it a 9-0 in favor of tossing a death sentence of a DC drug dealer.

The case is available here.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 10 Comments »

The Effect of Eliminating AFDC 1996-2010, a history lesson

Posted on January 23, 2012 by markinaustin

AFDC was a part of the original SS program that we older folks knew as “welfare”.  It was assailed by folks from all directions.  The late Patrick Moynihan decried the incentive to have more children on welfare because the checks were sized based on the # of children.  The Nobel winning physicist Shockley thought it encouraged the spawning of poor black kids who he wrote were inferior.  I think he called it a dysgenic effect, but I may have that word not quite right.  This was in the sixties.

Rs and some Ds pointed to the building of a permanent underclass. 

It was in 1992 that WJC campaigned to get rid of welfare as we knew it. Ds in Congress opposed him. He finally found an ally in Newt.  In 1996, AFDC was replaced by Temporary Assistance to Needy Families. Assistance is limited to two years, and not a lifetime. Work retraining or schooling is a requirement.  Here is how the numbers dropped:

Year Average monthly TANF recipients US Population (%) Poverty rate (%) Annual unemployment rate (%)
Average monthly TANF recipients, percent of U.S. families in poverty and unemployment rate
1996 12,320,970 (see note) 4.6 11.0 5.4
1997 10,375,993 3.9 10.3 4.9
1998 8,347,136 3.1 10.0 4.5
1999 6,824,347 2.5 9.3 4.2
2000 5,778,034 1.4 8.7 4.0
2001 5,359,180 1.9 9.2 4.7
2002 5,069,010 1.8 9.6 5.8
2003 4,928,878 1.7 10.0 6.0
2004 4,748,115 1.6 10.2 5.5
2005 4,471,393 1.5 9.9 5.1
2006 4,166,659 1.4 9.8 4.6
2007 3,895,407 1.3 9.8 4.5
2008 3,795,007 1.2 10.3 5.4
2009 4,154,366 1.4 11.1 8.1
2010 4,375,022 1.4 11.7 8.6
       

 Many Euro countries still have permanent welfare, and thus have %s on welfare like we had on AFDC.  I thought the move from AFDC to TANF was long overdue and I thought it put a big crimp in whatever “culture of dependency” had been created.  I would oppose deleting TANF.  I still think the public believes we have the old AFDC system, but I may be wrong.  I offer this in the spirit of historical information, just in case it is new to some of you. 

Filed under: Uncategorized | 43 Comments »

Morning Report

Posted on January 23, 2012 by Brent Nyitray
Vital Statistics:
Last Change Percent
S&P Futures 1311 0.2 0.02%
Eurostoxx Index 2442.2 15.200 0.63%
Oil (WTI) 98.97 0.640 0.65%
LIBOR 0.5601 -0.001 -0.18%
US Dollar Index (DXY) 79.746 -0.410 -0.51%
10 Year Govt Bond Yield 2.06% 0.04%
Congrats to the Pats and G-Men.
Markets are slightly higher this morning as Greek bondholders have made their best and final offer to the EU and IMF. Much of Asia was closed overnight in observance of the Lunar New Year.
Even Krugman is figuring out the economy is improving. He notes that housing has been a drag on the economy, but six years into the bust, it is becoming less and less of a drag as the excesses have been largely worked off. If housing becomes a positive, it could finally set the stage for the virtuous economic cycle we have been waiting for.
Of course Krugman takes shots at Obama for “giving into Republican demands that he slash spending” and at Bernake for giving in to Republican demands that it tighten money, positing that we wouldn’t be on the slow road to recovery if we had simply listened to him. He also goes on to slay the Bush dragon and the ECB dragon as well. The Fed tightened? Obama slashed spending? Whatever, Paul. I used to like Krugman when he was just an economist, now he is more of left wing Larry Kudlow.
Earnings Season continues this week with a ton of reports. The biggest names will be Apple, Boeing, and McDonalds, but there are a lot of industrials and energy names reporting as well. In economic data, we have the FOMC decision this week (will be interesting to see if the recent economic strength is noted in the statement). Durable Goods and Leading Economic indicators will be good data points this week.

Filed under: Earnings Announcements, Economic data, Uncategorized | Tagged: | 56 Comments »

I Just Trashed a Post

Posted on January 22, 2012 by Michigoose

I just came back from a night out with friends and I cannot believe how low the commentary got on the Saturday morning post  that I put up; those of you who were commenting on it today (Sunday) and who got into a pissing match just proved that we’re only as good as our ideals–and yours were pretty damned shabby.

I  trashed the post for one reason–bullying on this blog.  We’re only going to succeed if we adhere to Rule #5, and you guys didn’t.  Quit bullying.

Yeah, I’m pissed.

 

Update:  Let me be clear about something.  I trashed the post because I was the original author and I don’t want my name associated with the commentary that happened on there.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 177 Comments »

Best wishes, Gabby!

Posted on January 22, 2012 by suekzoo

Filed under: Uncategorized | 6 Comments »

« Previous Page — Next Page »