ThinkProgress Logo

Home Page

How California Is Debunking The GOP’s Obamacare Talking Points

Congressman: Woman Should Have Given Birth To Her Brain-Dead Fetus

Boy Scouts Move Towards LGBT Equality

NEWS FLASH

Florida Supreme Court Upholds State’s Controversial Drug Possession Law | On Thursday, the Florida Supreme Court upheld Florida’s tough drug possession law, ruling that it is constitutional. The law moves the burden of proof from the state to the defendant, so that defendants charged with drug crimes in Florida will now have to prove that they did not know they were carrying an illegal substance. In 48 other states the burden of proof remains on the state. In her ruling last year, U.S. District Judge Mary Scriven disagreed with Florida’s Supreme Court, calling the law “draconian and unreasonable,” and ruling that the law is a significant departure from the notion that defendants are innocent until proven guilty. Because federal district court rulings are not binding on state supreme courts, the final decision on the law’s constitutionality will be left to the U.S. Supreme Court.

–Alex Brown

By Guest Blogger on Jul 14, 2012 at 3:01 pm

Alyssa

A Tipping Point On Sexism And Video Games

By Alyssa Rosenberg posted from ThinkProgress Alyssa on Jul 14, 2012 at 11:02 am

It’s been a draining week, but I was heartened to see three items come over the wires today. First, James Fudge at GamePolitics, calls out the campaign against Anita Sarkeesian:

Admittedly we missed this story last week, but it’s important to highlight the ridiculous antics of some Neanderthals in the community that are so bent out of shape over a video series that they want to create a digital effigy of someone to abuse. The last time I checked, Canada and the United States were situated in a part of the world where women are equal to men and ideas can be explored without engaging in violence. The part of the gaming community that loathes Anita Sarkeesian needs to call off the Internet holy war it has declared on her for exploring ideas they seem to think are tantamount to blasphemy.

At Forbes, Erik Kain writes about overcoming how flabbergasted he’s been by some of the sexism he’s seen to speak out, and explain why sexism hurts male gamers as well as female ones:

Maybe it’s not my business to comment on what to do about it – girl gamers don’t need White Knights, after all – but I do think men can be useful, and probably necessary, allies. Men and women talking about sexism in gaming culture is an important way to make matters better for everyone involved. I’m including men in this statement because ending sexism in gaming culture is good for men, too. As with any other social setting, things get dreary quickly when it’s all boys. Life is more fun because there are two sexes, and treating people decently opens doors and reduces barriers to entry for everyone. More girl gamers means better, more varied games, and better online social interaction. Not objectifying and vilifying women means you have more actual human beings with whom you can interact, vastly enriching your social experience – and theirs.

And Sam Killermann, founder of Gamers Against Bigotry, an initiative that lets gamers pledge to avoid using slurs in trash talk, tells the Mary Sue about the attitudes he’s changed since he started the campaign:

About a dozen of the pledgees have contacted me saying things like “I never realized doing this actually hurt people,” or “I just thought it was part of the culture, so I played along” and ended their messages with “but I’m going to try to stop now.” And those are just the gamers in those situations who have gone out of their way to get in touch with me. We can safely assume more signed with those sentiments and didn’t let me know (see what I did there?).

I don’t know that sexism in gaming will disappear tomorrow, or within a year—there are powerful economic incentives for it. But over the last couple of months, it’s seemed like we’ve reached an action point, where men who were previously silent or neutral are no longer content to be so, and are working to marginalize the trolls amongst them. The moment when eradicating sexism becomes not a special interest but a shared interest is a powerful one.

Health

War On Women: The Impact Of Republican Governors Rejecting Medicaid Expansion

By Annie-Rose Strasser posted from ThinkProgress Health on Jul 14, 2012 at 8:31 am

Medicaid expansion is just the latest battlefield in the Republicans’ ongoing war against women. Republican governors turning down health care funds are making a political statement, but in the process are hurting, not helping, the women their states.

In fact, the two states with the highest number of uninsured women — Florida, where 30.3 percent are uninsured, and Texas, where 26.2 percent are — have been most vocal in opposing the expansion. Here is why turning down the Medicaid expansion is a war on women:

– Women are far more than half of Medicaid recipients. In fact, they make up 68 percent of the programs participants. That’s because women tend to live longer and meet more of the eligibility guidelines (often because they have children):

– Women are more likely to be poor. The Center for American Progress reports, “of the approximately 15 million adults eligible for coverage under the Medicaid expansion, around 10 million of them—or two-thirds of the expanded Medicaid population—are nonelderly women.”

– Women tend to work in industries that don’t offer coverage. Industries that are heavily female include: domestic workers, wait staff, cashiers, and child care workers, all of which tend not to offer health coverage to employees, but which provide a large enough income that those women tend not to be eligible for Medicaid currently.

– Without the expansion, women won’t get prenatal care. The Medicaid expansion requires coverage of prenatal assistance for women up to nearly twice the federal poverty level, 133 percent. Without it, those women won’t be able to get coverage while they’re pregnant.

– Women will not have expanded access to preventative care. Currently, women without coverage don’t seek care that could save their lives, and their dollars, later on down the line. But women who are eligible for Medicaid tend to seek preventative treatment at about the same level as women on private insurance plans:

– Children get won’t healthy parents. Low-income children are already covered under CHIP, but that doesn’t mean their parents are. Eligibility is different for adults and kids. Indeed, twenty four percent of the uninsured are parents of dependent children. Since low-income women, particularly, tend to be single mothers, the expansion means more coverage for more moms whose kids rely on them.

Justice

Alabama Judge Rebukes Private Correctional Company For Running ‘Debtors Prison’

By Adam Peck posted from ThinkProgress Justice on Jul 13, 2012 at 6:00 pm

Shelby County Circuit Court Judge Hub Harrington

In 2010, four residents of Harpersville, Alabama filed suit against several local officials and private prison company Judicial Corrections Services, alleging that they were illegally imprisoned in the Shelby County jail.

The charges were alarming: the four inmates claim low income defendants are routinely denied adequate counsel, are not advised on their constitutional rights and — most egregiously — are saddled with outrageously high fines and bond rates that the indigent have no way of paying.

On Wednesday, Shelby County Circuit Court Judge Hub Harrington handed down his decision, and tore into the defendants:

When viewed in a light most favorable to Defendants, their testimony concerning the City’s court system could reasonably be characterized as the operation of a debtors prison. The court notes that these generally fell into disfavor by the early 1800′s, though the practice appears to have remained common place in Harpersville. From a fair reading of the defendants’ testimony one night ascertain that a more apt description of the Harpersville Municipal Court practices is that of a judicially sanctioned extortion racket. Most distressing is that these abuses have been perpetrated by what is supposed to be a court of law. Disgraceful.

Judge Harrington goes on say that defendants appearing before the Harpersville Municipal Court are “subjected to repeated and ongoing violations of almost every safeguard afforded by the Unite[d] States Constitution, the laws of Alabama and the Rules of Criminal Procedure.”

At issue are the fines that JCS is authorized to impose if an individual convicted of a crime is not immediately able to pay the imposed fine. That person is placed on “probation,” and JCS begins to collect an additional $35 fee every day the individual does not pay in full his or her penalty. If the mounting debt is not paid, JCS forwards the case back to the court and the person is imprisoned for “probation violations” with no adjudication.

The ruling, which enjoined the court and JCS from further imprisoning probation violators and added a 30 day grace period for individuals to pay off a court-ordered penalty before JCS begins to charge their $35 fee, highlights yet another problem with states’ growing reliance on private companies to run corrections services.

In Florida, lawmakers who accepted thousands of dollars from private prison companies have passed legislation to expand private prison contracts, in Arizona Governor Jan Brewer accepted more than $60,000 from another private prison company in exchange for favorable legislation, and in Pennsylvania, a judge was sentenced to 28 years in prison after it was revealed he channeled hundreds of young people into privately run juvenile detention facilities in exchange for lofty payouts.

Economy

George H.W. Bush Challenges GOP On No-Tax Pledge: ‘Who The Hell Is Grover Norquist, Anyway?’

By Travis Waldron posted from ThinkProgress Economy on Jul 13, 2012 at 5:00 pm

Grover Norquist, the anti-tax activist who authored a no-new-taxes pledge popular among GOP politicians, has called Republicans who raised taxes “rat heads in a Coke bottle.” A former Republican president who raised taxes during his administration, however, is now challenging Republicans to set aside the Norquist pledge.

In an interview with Parade Magazine, George H. W. Bush, who broke his “no new taxes” election pledge, said he didn’t like the “rigidity” of pledges like Norquist’s. “Who the hell is Grover Norquist, anyway?” Bush added:

PARADE: During your presidency you gave in on your “no new taxes” pledge. You’ve been vindicated in many respects for that decision. I wonder how you view the “no new tax” pledge from Grover Norquist that seems to be requisite for GOP political candidates.

GB: The rigidity of those pledges is something I don’t like. The circumstances change and you can’t be wedded to some formula by Grover Norquist. It’s—who the hell is Grover Norquist, anyway?

BB: I think he ought to go back to Alaska. [laughs] Don’t quote me! [A reference to a comment Mrs. Bush made about Sarah Palin in a 2010 interview, in which she said, “I think she’s very happy in Alaska—and I hope she’ll stay there.”]

Bush isn’t the only member of his family to disavow the Norquist pledge — his son and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) told the House Budget Committee that signing the pledge was akin to “outsourc[ing] your principles and convictions to people.” Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman (R) refused to sign the pledge during his brief presidential campaign, and lately, even conservative stalwarts like Rep. Steve King (R-IA) have wavered in their support for the pledge. Dozens of candidates backed by the National Republican Congressional Committee, meanwhile, have declined to sign it.

NEWS FLASH

Bain Press Release Claims CEO Romney Is On ‘Part-Time Leave’ To Run Olympics | The Romney campaign has claimed that the former Massachusetts governor cut all ties with Bain Capital when he left to run the 2002 Winter Olympics in February of 1999, but a press release from July of 1999 seems to contradict this account. “Bain Capital CEO W. Mitt Romney” is “currently on a part-time leave of absence to head the Salt Lake City Olympic Committee for the 2002 Games,” the release, uncovered by Daily Kos’ Jed Lewison, states. The document announces the departure of two Bain managing directors. In 1999, Romney himself had stated that he would “stay on as a part-timer with Bain providing input on investment and key personnel decisions.”

NEWS FLASH

Zimmerman Attorney Makes Motion To Disqualify Judge | Judge Lester recently raised Zimmerman’s bond to $1 million, ruling that he purposely misled the court and was planning to flee the country. From the Orlando Sentinel:


In the motion, Zimmerman’s lawyer said Judge Lestor “makes gratuitous, disparaging remarks” about Zimmerman in his June 5 bond order.

Full text of the motion HERE.

Justice

Meet The Florida Man Who Was Threatened With Prosecution For Registering Voters

By Scott Keyes and Judd Legum posted from ThinkProgress Justice on Jul 13, 2012 at 3:00 pm

HOUSTON, Texas — All Sabu Williams wanted to do on Martin Luther King, Jr. weekend was register voters.

One can imagine his surprise, then, when soon thereafter he received a letter from the state supervisor of elections threatening him with prosecution.

The letter claimed Williams, president of the Okaloosa County NAACP, had run afoul of Florida’s new voter suppression law, which was passed by the Republican-controlled legislature last year. The law cut the state’s early voting period in half and enacted a host of new requirements on voter registration groups, including that they must turn in completed forms within 48 hours exactly or face a fine. (The 48-hour rule has since been blocked by a federal judge.)

After the rule was first put in place, the NAACP was the only group in Okaloosa County that braved the new pitfalls and continued to register voters. However, when they registered voters over MLK weekend, they were charged with submitting the forms an hour late on Tuesday, despite the fact that they were unable to submit forms on Monday because it was a holiday.

“We’re here the very first day that you’re open at 2 o’clock in the afternoon and you’re saying that we’re an hour late?” Williams asked. “You’ve got to be kidding me.”

He soon received a letter from the state supervisor of elections. “We appreciate you going out and registering voters,” the letter read. “However, you were late for two of those and if you’re late anymore we’re going to turn this over to the Florida Department of Justice for prosecution.”

Watch highlights from his interview with ThinkProgress:

Health

STUDY: Obamacare Will Help The 43 Percent Of Women Who Skipped Health Care Because Of High Costs

By Annie-Rose Strasser posted from ThinkProgress Health on Jul 13, 2012 at 2:05 pm

Women tend to have higher medical expenses and lower incomes, leading them to often forego expensive medical needs that might be a drain on their insurance policies. A new study from the Commonwealth Fund reveals that 18.7 million women in the United States between the ages of 19 and 64 were uninsured in 2010. That’s an increase of nearly six million women in just ten years.

Of those who were uninsured, 77 percent said they actually skipped care because of the cost. Tragically, 26 percent of women found themselves in recent medical debt because of high premiums and copays.

But relief is on its way. The Commonwealth Fund report shows that Obamacare will dramatically decrease (PDF) the cost of care for women, and thus drastically lower the rate of women who skip the doctor or don’t have insurance:

The health law will require insurance companies to provide contraception free of charge; ensure that pregnancy is no longer a ‘pre-existing condition‘; offer maternity care in all new plans; protect women from out-of-pocket payments for preventative care; and expand the eligibility guidelines for Medicaid, of which women are a majority of recipients.

Security

Media Barred From Photographing Romney With Cheney At Fundraiser

By Ben Armbruster posted from ThinkProgress Security on Jul 13, 2012 at 1:14 pm

MItt Romney with Dick Cheney in 2002

Dick Cheney hosted a fundraiser for Mitt Romney last night at his home in Wyoming. Donors paid $1,000 to attend a reception, $10,000 for a picture with Romney and $30,000 to eat dinner with Romney and Cheney in the former vice president’s home. While reporters were on hand to cover some of the events, media were not allowed to take photos of Cheney and Romney together. The Los Angeles Times explains:

Because of the unpopularity of Bush and Cheney, Romney has kept his distance — never appearing publicly with either man during his 2012 campaign. Though both leaders are admired by many in the Republican Party base, any perception of closeness with Romney could be harmful as the unofficial Republican nominee seeks to draw in independent and moderate voters.

Indeed, it seems that Romney has been playing a double game this campaign season in an effort to draw away any attention to his neocon-inspired foreign policy. In public, he either chooses to ignore national security issues or he and his advisers don’t distinguish the presumptive GOP nominee’s foreign policy from President Obama’s too much.

Behind the scenes, however, it’s quite a different story. As Bush administration Secretary of State Gen. Colin Powell noted recently, Romney’s foreign policy advisers “are quite far to the right.” Many of them advocated for the Iraq war and now want war with Iran.

And the ones who want war reportedly have Romney’s ear as one top Republican operative told Reuters recently that the moderate camp inside Romney’s foreign policy team “are very concerned about the fact that if Romney needs to call anyone, his instinct is to call the Cheney-ites.” Another Romney aide, Vin Weber — who has received scrutiny for lobbying for countries with poor human rights records — told the Washington Post that “it’s inevitable” that the Bush-Cheney alumni advising Romney on foreign policy are going to “have some influence.”

Cheney praised Romney last night as the “only” candidate to make what he thinks are the right foreign policy decisions as commander-in-chief. In fact, Romney shares Cheney’s views on a number of national security issues, as Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA) observed in an article in Foreign Policy yesterday: “A Romney presidency promises to take us back to something all too familiar: a Bush-Cheney doctrine — equal parts naïve and cavalier — which eagerly embraces military force without fully considering the consequences.”

Justice

EXCLUSIVE: NRA Threatens Senators Who Support Campaign Finance Disclosure

By Josh Israel posted from ThinkProgress Justice on Jul 13, 2012 at 11:19 am

NRA Lobbyist Chris W. Cox

NRA Lobbyist Chris W. Cox

In a letter opposing the DISCLOSE Act of 2012 — a bill to allow citizens to know what corporations and wealthy donors are paying for the “independent expenditure” attack ads enabled by the 5-4 Citizens United ruling — the National Rifle Association (NRA) is warning Senators it will score the issue in its legislative scorecard for this Congress.

The NRA opposes the measure — arguing that its “provisions require organizations to turn membership and donor lists over to the government” and would unconstitutionally abridge the right of citizens “to speak and associate privately and anonymously.” The legislation would merely require groups that opt to run outside political ads to tell voters which donors funded those efforts. By setting up a separate bank account for independent political spending, a group like the NRA would be able to keep its membership list private and would need only disclose the large money donors paying for the group’s campaign ads. Far from being unconstitutional, this sort of disclosure was explicitly endorsed in Justice Anthony Kennedy’s Citizens United majority opinion as “the less-restrictive alternative to more comprehensive speech regulations.”

In 2010, after supporters of the DISCLOSE Act agreed to exempt just the NRA from the bill, the group dropped its opposition. Now, without those special protections in the 2012 version, the group is taking no chances and is issuing a strong message to any Senator who might support political transparency. The NRA letter warns:

Due to the importance of the fundamental speech and associational rights of the National Rifle Association’s four million members, and considering the blatant attack on those rights that S. 3369 represents, we strongly oppose the DISCLOSE Act and will consider votes on this legislation in future candidate evaluations.

In other words, vulnerable Senators facing re-election may face secret-money attack ads should they back transparency for secret money attack ads.
Read more

  • Comment Icon

Security

Defense Budget ‘Would Still Be Larger Than It Was In 2006′ After Sequester, CBO Finds

By Ben Armbruster posted from ThinkProgress Security on Jul 13, 2012 at 10:02 am

President Dwight Eisenhower warning of a "Military Industrial Complex"

A new report out this week by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office projects that if the Budget Control Act’s automatic spending cuts take effect, the Pentagon’s budget, in 2013 dollars, will still be larger than what it was in 2006, a finding that undermines claims that sequestration will be “devastating” to the military and the defense industry:

Accommodating those reductions, in particular, could be difficult for the department to manage because it would have to be done over only nine months. Even with that cut, however, DoD’s base budget in 2013 would still be larger than it was in 2006 (in 2013 dollars) and larger than the average base budget during the 1980s.

The automatic spending cuts would amount to about a $500 billion reduction in military spending over the next decade. Much of the hyperbole about the cuts has come from Republicans on Capitol Hill, the defense industry and even Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who once said the cut “invites aggression.”

“We’re moving dangerously close to not being able to guarantee the security of the United States of America,” said Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA) about the cuts. And big military contractors like Lockheed Martin and Northrup Grumman overhype the cuts as well, warning of massive job losses (despite the fact that military spending is not meant to be a jobs program) and a severe downturn in the economy if the cuts are allowed to take place (experts have pushed back on those claims). Republicans even proposed cutting 25 percent from programs directly benefiting the poor in order to stave off the military spending cuts.

But the new CBO study undermines all the fearmongering. “The comments from many — but not all– Republicans, most defense manufacturers and the secretary of defense that they regard a budget well above Cold War averages to be a catastrophe is consciously constructed, misinforming hysteria,” said defense budget expert Winslow Wheeler of the CBO’s calculation.

Bloomberg News notes that the CBO’s new finding “buttresses the view of some independent budget analysts.” Indeed, one such analyst is CAP’s Lawrence Korb, who has been saying for many months what the CBO report concluded this week. Referring to the $500 billion in military spending reductions President Obama instituted and the sequester’s $500 billion cut, Korb wrote nearly a year ago: “Even if the defense budget were reduced by the entire $1 trillion, or about $100 billion a year over the next decade, it would amount to a reduction of about 15 percent. This would, in real terms, allow the Pentagon to spend at its 2007 level for the next decade.”

  • Comment Icon

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up