ThinkProgress Logo

NEWS FLASH

14-Year-Old Asks Maryland Lawmakers To Vote Down Same-Sex Marriage For Her Birthday | A 14-year-old girl celebrated her birthday with the Maryland’s Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee this afternoon and told lawmakers that it “would be the best birthday present ever if you would vote no on gay marriage.” “I really feel bad for the kids who have two parents of the same gender,” she said, “they have no idea what kind of wonderful experiences they miss out on.” “People have the choice to be gay, but I don’t want to be affected by their choice. People say they were just born that way, but I’ve met really nice adults who did change.” Listen:

Update

Please note that Sarah’s mother, Kathleen Kositzky Crank, has been actively engaging in our comments section. While we here at ThinkProgress LGBT disagree with her family’s point of view, we still welcome open dialogue in our comments area. Please keep your remarks respectful and focused on the issues.

Related Posts

Alyssa

Guest Post: Ticketmaster, Bruce Springsteen, And The 1 Percent

By Alyssa Rosenberg on Jan 31, 2012 at 5:23 pm

By Tara McGuinness

My colleague Alyssa has written about Bruce Springsteen’s new song “We Take Care of Our Own.” As usual, the Boss’ latest is a perfect and poetic anthem for a divided national conversation dominated by the question of whether our country and economy will work for most Americans or just the wealthy few—the 99. His answer? “We take care of our own… we take care of our own, wherever this flag is flown.”

Judging by this weekend’s sale of concert tickets for Springsteen’s April 1 show, it is clear that while the Boss reminds us we need a country that works for all Americans, Ticketmaster, his ticket provider, continues to take care of people who can afford $600 tickets on eBay.

Ordinary fans who got up at 10AM on Saturday morning when tickets went on sale were shut out, receiving notifications that tickets were unavailable just three minutes after the sale started. A pair of floor tickets for that show were listed for $624 even before tickets went on sale, and by Monday morning, there were more than 80 eBay listings for Springsteen at the Verizon Center, all costing hundreds of dollars. Some listed for more than a thousand dollars.

Springsteen, whose music champions the downtrodden and working man, had a similar problem in 2009, where Ticketmaste redirected some prospective customers to its own premium resale page, TicketsNow. After some people unwittingly bought tickets at multiples of face value, Ticketmaster apologized and said they would never do it again.

New York Senator Chuck Schumer even called for an investigation at a time Ticketmaster was seeking approval of its merger with Live Nation, which was completed in Jan. 2010. Springsteen spoke out against the merger, though it didn’t stop the U.S. from approving it. The new parent company—The Live Nation and Ticketmaster Entertainment is $2.5 billion company—that appears to be making excellent profits.

Unfortunately the last dust up didn’t prevent the Boss from using Ticketmaster for his next tour. Other artists, like Paul Simon, have combated scalpers with assorted programs. For a show at Washington’s 9:30 Club last year, all tickets were delivered through Will Call, and the purchaser could only pick up tickets on the way into the show, with no time to resell. Springsteen is perhaps the most powerful entertainment advocate for the American working class, so perhaps that is why we hold the Boss to a higher standard than anyone else. The $600 ticket is just another indicator of the growing disparity between the super rich and everyone else in the United States today, especially because in between the time Greetings from Asbury Park (1973) was released to the time Magic (2007) came out, there was a 10 point drop in average worker wages and a 219 percent increase in corporate profits.

No one captures the spirit of hard working Americans like Bruce Springsteen. But in sticking with Ticketmaster, the Boss’s tours are setup for the bosses—not necessarily everyone else.

NEWS FLASH

AARP Slams Virginia Voter ID Bill, Says ‘Seniors Will Choose To Stay Home’ Rather Than Vote | Virginia is joining the growing number of states attempting to pass a voter ID bill that could jeopardize the voting rights of millions of minorities, low-income voters, students, and seniors. Today, the AARP — a non-partisan non-profit organization for senior citizens — warned state GOP lawmakers that their voter ID bill could disenfranchise a great number of Virginia’s seniors. Noting that “a good percentage — about 18 percent of people 65 and older” don’t have a photo ID, the non-profit said the bill “could mean a lot of seniors will choose to stay home.” Though the bill allows for a provisional ballot if the voter lacks ID, the AARP says the bill “sends a negative message to a powerful block of voters.” “Older people want to stay connected. That is one of their greatest privileges is to be able to vote. We want them to know their vote counts and to encourage them to get to the polls,” stated AARP. Virginia General Assembly’s black caucus is holding a protect the vote rally today in opposition as well.

By Tanya Somanader on Jan 31, 2012 at 5:10 pm

NEWS FLASH

North Carolina Groups And Leaders Resolve To Fight Inequality Amendment | Over the past few weeks, numerous North Carolina groups and leaders have spoken out against the proposed constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage, civil unions, and domestic partnerships. On Friday, Lt. Gov. Walter Dalton (D) announced his opposition to Amendment One, a reversal of his 2005 cosponsorship of a similar amendment in the state senate. He admitted, “Perhaps I was wrong back then.” Among other groups that have come out against the measure are the Episcopal Diocese of North Carolina, North Carolina Advocates for Justice, and the student senate of North Carolina Central University, one of the state’s 11 historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs).

Climate Progress

AMS Certified Meteorologist Mark Johnson Claims ‘Earth Hasn’t Warmed In 15 Years’

By Brad Johnson on Jan 31, 2012 at 4:30 pm

Climate denier Mark Johnson, an AMS Certified Broadcast Meteorologist

Cleveland television meteorologist Mark Johnson, one of the anti-science weathermen exposed by the Forecast the Facts campaign, is now claiming that the “earth hasn’t warmed in 15 years.” Johnson, the chief meteorologist for ABC affiliate WEWS-TV in Cleveland, OH, is an American Meteorological Society Certified Broadcast Meteorologist.

Cribbing from a mendacious Daily Mail article, Johnson deliberately misrepresents the findings of the UK Meteorological Office that show the 2000s are the hottest decade on record:

Last week, the UK Met released its latest global temperature data to the world. It shows that the Earth has not warmed in 15 years. The warming ceased after the great super El Nino of 1998. The numbers are based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations around the planet. The data was quietly released last week without fanfare and it confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.

In line with projections by climate scientists, the 2000s were significantly hotter than the 1990s, which were hotter than the 1980s, reflecting the steady rise in carbon dioxide emissions. This consistent increase in average temperature is partially masked by natural variability on short time spans. Johnson’s nonsensical claim rests on that deliberate misinterpretation of temperature data, as this infographic from Skeptical Science shows:

According to the American Meteorological Society, the Certified Broadcast Meteorologist program certifies that the “holder meets specific educational and experience criteria and has passed rigorous testing in their knowledge and communication of meteorology and related sciences needed to be an effective broadcast meteorologist.”

The AMS statement on climate change, last updated in 2007, concludes that “there is adequate evidence from observations and interpretations of climate simulations to conclude that the atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; that humans have significantly contributed to this change; and that further climate change will continue to have important impacts on human societies, on economies, on ecosystems, and on wildlife through the 21st century and beyond.”

Update

This morning, the American Meteorological Society forwarded a debunking of the Daily Mail article to its members in its “News You Can Use” email.

Health

How To Ensure That Essential Health Benefits Are Sustainable Over The Long-Term

By Guest Blogger on Jan 31, 2012 at 4:20 pm

Our guest blogger is Topher Spiro, the Managing Director of Health Policy at the Center for American Progress.

The Affordable Care Act includes a requirement that new health insurance plans offered to individuals and small businesses cover “essential health benefits.” The law requires coverage of benefits within 10 broad categories, including maternity and newborn care, mental health benefits, and prescription drugs. Today, many of these benefits are not typically offered by individual health care plans and employer coverage may eschew wellness services and pediatric oral and vision care. The 10 categories, therefore, go a long way to ensure that insurance provides access to needed care. But otherwise, the law tasks the Secretary of Health and Human Services to define the essential health benefits (the “EHB”).

On December 16, 2011, the Secretary did just that. The Department of Health and Human Services released an “Essential Health Benefits Bulletin”—its proposed framework for defining the EHB. Under that approach, states can choose a benchmark plan from among the largest small employer plans, Federal Employees Health Benefits Plans, or state employee plans, or the largest HMO plan offered in a state.

In evaluating this proposed approach, it’s important to remember the purposes of the EHB. First, the EHB should ensure that coverage provides access to essential health care. Second, the EHB should minimize abuse in which insurers design benefits to attract healthier individuals and deter less healthy individuals. And third, the EHB should provide some degree of standardization to make it easier for consumers and small businesses to make apples-to-apples plan comparisons. On this last point, the Congressional Budget Office concluded that standardization is a key element in enhancing competition and lowering premiums.

HHS’s proposed approach has the potential to meet these objectives in the short term, but would require substantial review and oversight—which could in turn require some modification. Based upon further review and analysis, HHS may need to reduce the number of potential benchmark plans.

Research indicates that the potential benchmark plans cover substantially similar benefits. But insurers might impose a dollar limit, frequency/visit limit, and/or other nonmonetary limits (prior authorization) on a specific benefit. Insurers could use such limits as loopholes that undermine the ACA’s prohibitions on lifetime and annual limits and the EHB itself. Substantial review and oversight is therefore needed to ensure that no benchmark plans—in particular, small employer plans—impose limits that are inconsistent with medical practice or that undermine the ACA’s important consumer protections.

Also, allowing insurers to substitute benefits or limits could undermine the purposes of the EHB. Insurers could use this flexibility to design benefits that attract healthier individuals and deter less healthy individuals—in other words, to “cherry pick” enrollees. Moreover, too much flexibility could exponentially increase the number of plan designs offered through the exchange—making it more difficult for consumers and small businesses to compare and enroll in plans.

All in all, given practical realities, a state-based approach is sensible for the short term and will help ensure a smooth implementation in 2014. Over the long term, however, a state-based approach would not be sustainable, and HHS should adopt a national benchmark as soon as possible. That benchmark should guide both the scope of covered services as well as limits on those services. It should also ensure that the package is equivalent in value to the benefits that members of Congress receive. Such a benchmark would be clear, consistent, and ensure a degree of comprehensiveness that is widely acceptable.

You can read CAP’s full comment letter here.

Climate Progress

Al Gore on the Story of Rising Seas: From Antarctica to Bangladesh

By Climate Guest Blogger on Jan 31, 2012 at 4:17 pm

Zee Evans, National Science Foundation

by Al Gore, reposted from the Climate Reality Project

After crossing the legendary Drake Passage, we came in sight of the Antarctic continent. It is a majestic, otherworldly place. The Antarctic Peninsula, which juts northward toward South America, is lined with ice-covered mountains and surrounded by abundant wildlife in the sea. But even on this continent that looks and feels pristine, a troubling process is underway because of global warming.

The ice on land is melting at a faster rate and large ice sheets are moving toward the ocean more rapidly. As a result, sea levels are rising worldwide. Most of the world’s ice is contained in Antarctica – more than 90 percent. The West Antarctic Ice Sheet, which lies south of the Peninsula, contains enough water to raise sea levels worldwide by more than 20 feet. Part of the ice sheet, the Pine Island Glacier ice shelf, is among the many in Antarctica that are shrinking at an accelerating rate. This has direct consequences for low-lying coastal and island communities all over the world – and for their inland neighbors.

In analyzing the relationship between melting ice and sea level rise, it is important to distinguish between two kinds of ice: the ice on land and the ice floating on top of the sea. When floating ice melts, sea level is not affected, because its weight has already pushed the sea level upward. But the melting of glaciers and ice sheets resting on land does increase sea level rise. So far, the melting of small mountain glaciers and portions of ice sheets in Antarctica and Greenland has been the main contributor to sea level rise from the loss of ice. (As the oceans warm up, their volume naturally expands, and this too has been a contributor to a small portion of the sea level rise that has occurred in the age of global warming).

Read more

Alyssa

The 10 Best Movies I Saw At Sundance

By Alyssa Rosenberg on Jan 31, 2012 at 4:08 pm

Sundance is an overwhelming event, and I heard from some veterans of the festival that this was a somewhat difficult year to encapsulate, despite Robert Redford’s call to watch serious movies for serious times. But most of the best movies I saw at Sundance had a certain joy to them, even when discussing difficult ideas or events, and the very best had a marvelous sense of humor. I haven’t published full reviews of all of these movies yet, though I’ll catch up in coming days, so bookmark this page if you want a guide to the best independent movies that will be coming to theaters this year.

DOCUMENTARIES

Under African Skies: It says a lot about how wonderful I thought the music-making part of this story about Paul Simon’s Graceland, and his return to South Africa decades later, that I’m willing to forgive its less-than-stellar work on the cultural boycott of South Africa. It’s a debate about the responsibility artists owe politics that’s too heavily weighted in one direction. But the video footage of the recording sessions is amazing, as are the interviews with South African musicians about everything from what it was like to have this strange Paul Simon dude show up and want to work with them to what it was like to be able to go to Central Park without a pass.

The Invisible War: There’s nothing particularly stylistically innovative about Kirby Dick’s documentary about the epidemic of rape in the U.S. military. But the movie falls with the force of a sledgehammer, exposing as ineffective and dishonest the brass in the armed forces responsible for keeping women and men safe, and making it clear that an epidemic of sexual assault is hurting both men and women, and driving out of the armed forces exactly the people the Pentagon should most want to keep there.

The Atomic States of America: Based on Kelly McMaster’s memoir of growing up in a town on Long Island polluted by atomic runoff, the movie is the story of an agency captured by powerful interests and backed up by powerful presumptions of authority, and the ordinary citizens who have fought back against the industry they believe is poisoning their communities. I’d have been curious to hear more about how citizens in other countries that are more dependent on atomic energy than we are, but it’s amazing looking into our past romance of the peaceful atom—and thinking about what it means for our uncertain energy future.

Love Free or Die: Bishop Gene Robinson’s story has been told before, and the first openly gay Anglican bishop is hardly a retiring figure. But Macky Alston’s wonderful documentary isn’t just about him. It’s about the difficult process of organizing within the Anglican church, which shut Robinson out of the Lambeth Conference, to make it a more welcoming and affirming institution for the gay people who have kept faith with it. And the movie argues that a gay rights movement without the faith community is leaving power and influence on the table, and risks making gay people choose between love and faith.

The Queen of Versailles: Tons of ink and miles of film have been devoted to chronicling American excess in a recession age. But it’s hard to imagine that anything will do better than this story about David and Jackie Siegel, who built an empire selling time-shares to people who couldn’t afford them and then pushed themselves to the brink of financial ruin by building what would have been the largest house in America. Whether it’s expertly breaking down the housing crisis’ role in the crash or chronicling the horrifying wastefulness of the Siegel’s consumer spending, The Queen of Versailles is funny, biting, and utterly American.

FICTION
Read more

Justice

All Voters Deserve To Be Treated The Way Nevada Treated Casino Billionarie Sheldon Adelson

By Ian Millhiser on Jan 31, 2012 at 4:00 pm

Casino czar Sheldon Adelson is the sixteenth wealthiest person in the world, with a net worth of $21.5 billion. He also lavishes much of his wealth on far right Republican candidates. In the current election cycle, Adelson and his wife have already spent $10 million to buy the White House for Newt Gingrich.

Adelson, however, is also an orthodox Jew, and this fact inspired his home state to provide a special polling place that will allow voters who observe a Saturday Sabbath to participate in next Saturday’s GOP caucus:

A special non-Sabbath voting session for observant Jews and Seventh Day Adventists in the GOP primaries will be held Saturday evening at an educational center built by Sheldon Adelson, who backs Newt Gingrich, and challengers are upset.

The voting is scheduled for the Sabbath, but Adelson, a casino magnate who made billions in Las Vegas and elsewhere, voiced his concern that Jews observing the Sabbath – and who presumably back Gingrich – would not be able to vote. Seventh Day Adventists also observe the Sabbath on Saturday

The word spread quickly that Adelson was upset, and the state decided to allow a special polling station after the Sabbath ends on Saturday.

Much about this arrangement is shady — including the fact that this special caucus is being held at a center owned by Adelson — but there should be no doubt about one thing: Sheldon Adelson is an American citizen and he has the same right to vote that any other American enjoys. Nevada did exactly the right thing by ensuring that Adelson will not have to choose between exercising his most fundamental right or obeying the tenets of his faith.

The same cannot be said, however, for the hundreds of GOP lawmakers who have spent the last few years devising more and more creative ways to make it harder for people who do not own billions of dollars worth of casino investments to vote. It is wrong to deny reasonable accommodations to religious voters, but it is no less wrong to enact Voter ID laws that target minorities, students and low-income voters for disenfranchisement. Or to prevent voters from registering. Or to enact laws that restrict early voting and thus make it harder for people who cannot get off work on election day to vote.

America cannot have one set of rules for billionaires and another for everyone else. All Americans deserve the same access to the polls that Sheldon Adelson enjoys.

LGBT

NOM’s Rebuke Of Starbucks Over Marriage Equality Is Blatant Hypocrisy

By Zack Ford on Jan 31, 2012 at 3:55 pm

The National Organization for Marriage does not stand on any set of principles, but is guided solely by what it thinks will help defeat marriage equality for same-sex couples. In Washington, for example, NOM’s Brian Brown came out swinging against Starbucks for supporting the same-sex marriage bill:

BROWN: Americans should be able to drink a peaceful cup of coffee without worrying that a portion of the company’s profits is going to be used to push gay marriage without a vote from the people. This is a gratuitous leap into a hot button culture war issue; respect for diversity touted by Starbucks ought to include respecting the diverse views of all its customers and employees.

For Brown, “diversity” counts when it’s limited to only his views on marriage. Besides that, it’s a farce for NOM to act like it wants businesses to stay out of LGBT issues when it engages with them all the time. As Jeremy Hooper pointed out yesterday, NOM has repeatedly defended Chick-Fil-A for opposing LGBT rights. In fact, NOM now has a “Corporate Fairness Project” that bullies companies into staying affiliated with any employee or contractor who speaks out against marriage — regardless of how offensive their comments might be. Keep in mind too that NOM was on the front lines of the Proposition 8 fight, standing hand-in-hand with ProtectMarriage.com as it threatened businesses that were opposed to the discriminatory amendment.

It’s unclear why NOM targeted a Starbucks cup of coffee rather than a Nike shoe or an Internet search on Google or Microsoft Bing, as it would have to similarly boycott them all for supporting marriage equality in Washington. NOM’s duplicity is by no means surprising, but given the organization continues to commit millions to fighting marriage equality or retaliating against its supporters, its role in fights like Washington’s cannot be discounted.

Older

Newer

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

Sign Up