Trump Cabinet

Trump Cabinet

One can get an idea of what policies Trump will pursue by his cabinet picks. So far we are looking at a corporate defending monster. They share in common millions if not billions in the bank and lack of any government experience. This wealth laden cabinet lead by billionaire is not what I think most blue collar voters were expecting. Ok let's be honest nobody really knew what to expect. The real question is do these picks bode well for the blue collar middle class. That is hard to judge. It is no wonder that wall street and the market is responding with jubilance and market surge. Swamp monsters are being invited into the cabinet front door.

Attorney General With as many capable lawyers Sessions is an odd pick. One would think that a pick without the baggage of Sessions would be wiser. I am not sure what this means moving forward regarding the tenuous race relations in the country On the surface one would think it will make them worse. As far as immigration it would appear that he will be extremely tough in this regard.

CIA Pompeo seems to be very much a proponent of US interests. Regarding his claim that US Muslim leaders did not condemn the Boston bombing which they had is odd. One would think a congressman has better sources of information. I don't think torture should be a national policy and he does. I am not so naive that I think it does not happen. I would also contend it should not be celebrated. By all measures he seems competent. He looks to be tough on radical islam which is a good thing. His agenda though seems to be hawkish and the world appears fragile. This pick to me looks a bit dangerous.

Commerce Corporate Raider Wilbur Ross leading commerce. He has championed textile and Steel but in doing so made huge profits. Worker received less after the takeovers. But there is a good argument better than good really that those jobs would have been gone. So he comes in with a track record of saving jobs. It is interesting because this man both ruined lives through his corporate raiding and saved companies including the casinos of President elect Trump

Defence Mattis seems like a very good fit for the job. He has the experience and tools for the job. I think he walks in and has an air of respect about him. By all measures the man is a leader and knows the military. He is the one pick on the board and in an important post that will be respected by the US Military and the world.

Education DeVos is certainly capable. However the whole school voucher thing seems to benefit the rich and undermine the poor. If she pursues this and I am sure that she will based on her track record public education suffers. While those that go to private schools will benefit the most does not overall make schools better

Energy Rick Perry. So the guy that wanted to scrap the DOE is now going to head it. Another Oxy Moronic heavy on the moranic pick. Like EPA lead Pruitt one has to wonder how this is even released as a pick.

EPA Pruitt is beyond a bad pick. I can find no merits in this. The fox is not guarding the henhouse it is being set loose in it after starving for a week in a sunless box. Feathers are going to fly.

Interior Ryan Zinke This is an odd pick and a difficult one to really wrap your arms around. There is very little on the man as he is so new to politics. Former Navy Seal so strong military background. Very little Washington experience. This could be a very good thing.  From Montana he is pro drilling pro fracking Pro coal. But he also comes from Hunting country. I have noticed some of the greatest champions of the environments are the hunters. He is among them as a fellow hunter. So he is a real blend in that sense.

Health and Human Services Price walks in with a plan already. The plan he has I think needs work. I do not think HSA help most Americans whom cannot afford care now.Kind of crazy is you can tap into your retirement to pay for medical care at what they call no penalty but huge penalty to your retirement. Instead of HSA why not reform that makes care affordable.  I am a proponent of universal care and he is not. Block Grants for medicare seems like a breach of contract and it is obvious from House Speaker Ryan that the federal government wants out of Medicare. Should they try to pursue this path there will be blood in the streets. I am always shocked how the wealthiest most giving nation on the earth never seems to be able to find money for its own people.  The system is heavy in fraud and overcharging. I am not saying it does not need reform. But this social contract is one that will not be broken without a huge falling out. The plan also laces in anti abortion agenda. I do like the tort reform he proposed. I like the buying medications across national borders. I like the transparency. But I am wary of many of the proposals. He is competent and this is a space he has been in for a while. If they simply force this plan through as it sits now it will cause problems just like ACA did but in different ways. They should learn that bi partisan solutions are required on this type of legislation. This is the one item that caused many Americans pain. Get this wrong and the Republican party will suffer for years to come.

Homeland security. Kelly is a solid pick and one that should be a benefit to the Country.

HUD I like Ben Carson. I think it an odd pick but at the same time this man cares. He has some rather bizarre ideas but at least you know where he is coming from well sometimes. I think he cares about the poor and HUD could be a good place for him. There is no question this space should focus on getting folks out of poverty and out of the projects. But there is more to HUD than just that. This is a tough job but with a bright leader it can make people's lives better. I am not sure what Dr Carson's vision is but I think he has the intellect to develop and pursue one.

Labor Pudzer is  a great pick for corporations. Not so much for the American Worker. As a leader in  the fast food industry he has made a living off underpaying employees while he maintains profits for investors, his board and himself. His standpoint against benefits for worker and minimum wage increases  flies in the face of those who want the gap closed in income. This is not a champion of the American worker this is a champion of the corporations.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson My god if you thought Trump had conflicts of interest they do not begin the scale that Tillerson brings to the table. Oil arguably the most important of all industries. So rich is its market it defies nationality  An industry that can stand outside of any government and wield power influence and corruption. And it has. I think that his negotiating skills are quite obviously superb. But how does the US look when an Oil Executive assumes the position SOS of the United States. Heavy ties to Russia will be a hard sell in the approval process.  

SBA Wife of Vince McMahon of World Wrestling Federation and very generous supporter of President Elect Trump. My only comment in my best Michael Buffer voice is  “ In this corner a cabinet pick with no experience in government or any small business….Lets get ready to pay back doneeers!!!!”

Transportation Chao seems like a solid pick. With her ties to industry and being the wife of McConnell it appears to be a political fig leaf pick. She is competent and should move around well in this space.

Treasury Steve Mnunchin So we have a Rothschild guy in Wilbur Ross and a Goldman Sachs guy in Mnunchin.  The man is young bright and know the financial world. How will he play a hand like this is the question. There is no doubt in my mind that this might be the toughest job on the  table. He walks into a field where there have been low interest rates and loose money. Both of which would appear to be changing as soon as he steps in office. The Stock Market has been floating what appears to be a lead balloon. Housing cost have increased primarily on low interest rates. Those rates going up will create an underwater environment the size of the Pacific Ocean. Who would even want this job? He needs to be able to provide the same magic he performed at Goldman Sachs to the US Treasury and steer this ship right. I hope he is up to the job.

UN Ambassador. She seems young and bright I wonder about her international experience. She has risen up the ranks and her resume is very impressive. But since the UN Ambassador is really a projection of what the President wants she should get experience and quick. This will be a tough and by all I have read she will be more than up to the task.

The confirmation process should be interesting.  Some  picks come in with outright hostility toward the agencies they are picked to lead. Some seem like good folks but without experience. Others are solid and have the knowlege to step in and do well. Many are intriguing and how they transition from private to government should be interesting.

The Fake news and Steve Bannon

Let me start by saying thank goodness for NPR here in San Diego and KPBS where I can still find news reported. I am not saying it is both sides all the time but at least I can get different viewpoints on the same subject. Try that just anywhere else. Good luck.

Now it made a big splash recently whereby Facebook and Google were going to make an attempt to ferret out the “fake” news. Bravo I say but there is a problem. Almost all the news print radio tv and internet comes at us with an agenda. We lack real news or accurate news

Faux News a puppet of the right. The Clinton News Network shameful as there was a time I felt it was good information delivered fairly. Creating Bothersome Stories the station of Cronkite has fallen quite a bit from the days that I never knew where Walter stood.  Needs Big Change sorry Peacocks the party's over. Always Be Cheating get a rumor and stick with it. Well it sells commercials anyways

All of the above stations have labeled Mr Bannon a white supremacist, anti Semitic misogynist gay hating Islamophobic probably even baby killing demagogue. Now don’t get me wrong here I know little about Mr. Bannon because well there really is little out there. I might end up disliking him as much as I do say John Bolton and John Kerry. Extreme views are not my thing. There is a very good chance his political beliefs will not align with mine as a moderate. More than a good chance actually.

But he stands accused of some pretty terrible stuff.

When the story broke that Bannon was a racist anti Semitic Islamophobic (man this guy really has it out for a lot of folks) gay bashing he man woman hating tool, I thought to myself gee wiz I should look him up.

Naval Officer, Harvard Business School, Investment banker with Golman Sachs, Biosphere 2, Seinfeld early investor, Breitbart News (i think of them as Bigbarf btw) . Led campaign for Trump. Ok lets move on

Ok lets look for the damaging information

Hmm Divorce proceedings indicate he is anti Semitic sexist ok well I toss that out as divorces are always ugly and generally not good and accurate information.

Disgruntled employee claims he did not want his kid at a school because there were too many Jews. Kids go to said school anyway okay that is a toss away for me

Renegade Jew comment oh whoops that was not him but another oh well look at this it's a conservative of the Jewish faith that actually said it. Bigbarf did report it and it was accurate as the source claims he said it.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has him on the watch list but does not divulge why. I wish they would shed some light on the subject.

He called liberal women a bunch of dykes. So here is our gay hating misogynist except hmm he was defending conservative women? Odd way to go about it but hardly misogynist. Off color to be sure. He oversaw the hiring of gays conservatives at Bigbarf? Has publicly denounced the anti gay narrative of him.

He is part of the alt right movement. Ok now we are getting somewhere is this not the Heil Trump guys? I frickin hate Illinois Nazis now we got the White Nationalist bastard. Oh but wait um He says he is not alt right and there really is no proof that he is.

So in conclusion the story seems to lean on innuendo rumor and little truth. Mr Bannon might be all the evil things that have been thrown about and he is accused of. But do we not as Americans require proof before we vilify someone. Or is it enough when his political views do not align with ours to for lack of a better word to slander the man. .

I would hope that CBS NBC CNN and ABC would take pause before running with the story or give both sides to it.  But they do not. What is shameful is that a free press is supposed to inform us bring forth points that are accurate. Be a watchdog of the Government for the people. A truly noble profession when performed to standards. But if they constantly slant their stories left (and sadly they do) they are not news stories but simply opinions. And sadly their standards appears to now be to fit the narrative into the direction they wish. Like the Bannon story for instance.

And for those that run to the defense of them saying suspected racist etc if that is your narrative consistently on all networks and part of the local news radio internet and newspaper headlines. What else are you doing other than pushing forward your agenda.

I have seen the press defend themselves as doing a good job. If that is true then why do so many Americans including myself not trust you. Where is your fact checking on this story on Bannon. If you cannot even see your shortcomings you will never improve. We need an impartial press for a strong free Democracy or really free Republic. One of the true pillars of a free people. Sadly we lack that in today's sensationalist journalism. I would not say it is dead but very hard to find.  I would hope that some of the press still wants to hold that pillar straight and true.

I welcome any and all networks to prove Mr Bannon a racist. If you do you do us all a great favor in rooting the man out. I cannot and will not tolerate racism.

That being said false accusations are repugnant as well and have no place in the news and by definition really is not news. And if you cant prove him a racist, don't we owe the man an apology.

Trump Healthcare Reform

With Donald Trump and a Republican Senate and House it would seem the days are numbered for ACA otherwise known as Obama care. Of all the many things Trump promised this is one he can deliver on. Not unlike when Obama delivered on his.

I believe that in a modern society that health care of all its citizens is important. It is interesting to me how much controversy this causes.  Health Care in the USA has been a problem here in the US  since well before Obama took office. Doctors since antiquity have sworn an oath to treat the ill to the best of one’s ability. Should we not have a system in place that promises that very same principle to its citizens here in the United States?

There might be some benefits I am missing. I do dot profess expertise in this industry. My opinions are general and  based I what I read. I understand that these are complex problems and like anything an attempt at a solution has a cause and an effect.  

Given that Trump did not say he was simply repealing it and he was replacing it. The question is what will this new proposal look like. He does have a mission statement online from during his candidacy. How this transforms into policy is yet to be seen,

First lets look at some of the good and bad points of ACA or Obama care. I do not think the ACA in its present form is the solution. It simply was an overlay of the current system with some tweaks. Cornerstones of ACA that I very much agree with are the following.

Elimination of pre existing conditions.

Elimination of annual and lifetime limits

Everyone is covered

Focus on preventive care

To say because you are ill you that cannot be covered or that issue will not be covered is just plain wrong. This is not car insurance where you can simply stop driving if your rates are too high due to multiple accidents. The model for car insurance should not be applied for health insurance.

Furthermore to charge a covered patient beyond a limit and the subsequently cancel the policy because it cost too much when they became ill is absurd. We do not pick our illness nor have control over treatment costs for that illness.

By everyone being covered it should reduce costs. Without access to gain preventive care by regular visits often the uninsured use the Emergency Room as their health care plan This is far more costly than regular doctor visits. Furthermore the normal result  for the uninsured patient is the  inability to pay for emergency care rendered. Subsequently we whom are vested in the system  pay the unpaid costs. It is by order of magnitude cheaper to treat diseases early.

Two major issues that have not been addressed by ACA and need to be.

Tort reform or reining in Medical Malpractice

Lack of cost control in the industry.

Medical malpractice is a cost to the system and many of the suits are frivolous and others are grossly overpaid in litigation.  These factors make for increased cost for the whole and limited benefit for the very few. It also play a huge role in a litany of tests that need to be performed to avoid litigation. In other words part of treatment focus on not getting sued rather than treating the patient. The looming cloud of litigation is so intertwined with treatment that it raises costs and does not improve care.  I am not saying there should not be a vehicle for consumer protection but the current system is broken unfair and very costly.

Health Care costs are $ 8233 per person vs $ 3268 per person for the next 33 OECD countries averaged. That is means we have costs well over double of our peers or pay $2.50 for every dollar they spend for basicly the same service. These are well documented figures and statistics and cannot be denied. If the system is to become more affordable the most obvious is to get more for what we pay for now.

I was talking to a friend recently whose child was in need of a sonogram service. The procedure was going to be $ 7000 and his insurance was going to pick up $ 6000 leaving him with a $1000 dollar bill. He complained to the service and the woman on the phone told him to show up claim he did not have insurance and promise to pay cash on the spot. He did so. The procedure went from $ 7000 to $ 150. How do we accept this? Where is the other six thousand plus dollars going? This money is spread out in so many places it is difficult to point to one thing. But the industry as a whole  needs to shaken up.

From $325.00 EpiPens that have no competition. A product by the way that cost about 57 bucks before being bought by a new company in 2007. The cost is about $ 50 or less for the same product from the same manufacturer  in Europe right now. And to further sweeten the deal for EpiPen each and every school is required by law to have them on hand. So we the taxpayers are essentially being bilked every year from pure corporate greed.

Hospitals charging far above costs for the same procedures done in Canada, Mexico and Europe. Cost of prescriptions are way out of balance as we cross any border. Administrative costs often outpace actual treatment costs. What plan is in place to close these cost gaps?

Looking at the Trumps plan on his mission statement I see things I like and things that do not make sense to me. First I will start that Trump has mentioned he wanted to keep the no pre existing conditions. I applaud that. Here is the statement link below

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/healthcare-reform

Number 1 It starts by letting you opt out of the system with. I get why this is attractive but again I think the need for universal care  where where everyone pays in and is covered  is better overall.It is a model in other countries that have equal or even better care at less cost.

Number 2 letting companies cross State Lines. I am not clear on how that will lower rates. From what I can tell the major players are in all States now. Not sure how this “competition” will effectively lower rates. Most articles I found indicated it would not.   I wonder if states can simply impose regulation making a measure like this completely ineffective.

Number 3 allowing individuals to deduct insurance cost on tax return makes allot of sense to me. This is probably the number one cost reduction of the Trump plan. If we could combine it with lower overall costs this would be huge for those who don't have employer health care. I see this as good.

Number 4 Simply having HSA is crazy when the public is not earning enough to save now. We do not need an HSA we need affordable care across the board. This will help some but only in years they are not in need. Use your insurance or have a event and this money will disappear quickly. And one must ask the question to our government why are we the only first world nation citizens that are asked by our government to save for health.

Number 5 Transparency in costs. This is really amazing that it has not been about before. This is a great idea whereby a consumer can see what costs are. But the problem is you are often dictated by your insurance of where you can go. I still love the idea but do not know how it helps in the real world where we often have no control of our treatment facilities. It could provide more competition but shouldn't the insurance companies themselves already know these costs? Why is this not done now? Anyone that has ever been given a bill wonders what it all means. We would love transparency.

Number 6 Block Grants for Medicaid.  I am not sure that each State has more than it needs or not as stated. I am sure that my State California is especially poor at policing fraud and cutting costs. So I do not see how that will help as stated . This simply seems like the federal government trying to reduce their burden and I fail to see how it helps the public.

Number 7 remove barriers for prescriptions. I see nothing but good in this proposal.

Why not tort reform? Is it because most of Congress has a law degree? Is it because they rank amongst the most powerful lobby that contributes heavily to both sides of the aisle? How is it we need. I am not sure the cost of “defensive medicine” or a litany of tests that might not be needed and performed to avoid litigation are factored. Or is it because it has little to do with cost?

To be fair I have found articles that claim the cost to be 2% or less. This depends on State and specialty. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3048809/

I found a list of cost for California which is more than ten years old and it paints a much different story

http://www.cunninghamgroupins.com/historic-medical-malpractice-insurance-rates/california/

As with anything it is difficult to drill down and find the real answer. But there is an added cost with dubious benefits few but costs all of us in the end.

I see no real plan on how to reduce actual cost of treatment. This laissez faire approach has led us down the path where we are now. Paying more and receiving less than other Countries. The costs are out of control. While points 5 and 7 steers in that direction I am not sure it takes us toward the desired destination of lower costs. Without a clear plan toward lower costs overall we all suffer with a burden that cannot be met by many. The question must be asked is why to we spend so much more per capita and overall visit health professionals less. This inequity must be addressed.

The insurance companies who claim Obama Care will kill them somehow have managed to beat the S&P 500 by a wide margin since ACA implementation in 2010. During which time paying shareholders dividends. CEOs  also paid  themselves and upper management generous bonuses. Does that sound like an industry in trouble? If these are our stewards can we not demand better stewardship. Are they part of the solution or are they part of the problem. There must be more accountability on their part as they have the keys to the treasury.

There is no better way to make healthcare more affordable than reducing costs.Trump has a legacy of doing well in business. I think he would agree overpaying for anything is bad business.  I would hope part of his efforts would address this glaring need. I do not think this need to translate into sacrificing care. There are many examples of our peers doing just that. They have systems that work.  Why are we not doing not the same or even better?

Red Summer 1919

I recently read a book “On the laps of Gods” By Robert Whitaker that in around about way is a tribute to one Scipio Africanus Jones attorney at law from Little Rock AK or Judge Jones as he was sometimes affectionately called. Scipio somehow fell through the cracks and yet is one our greatest heroes in American history. Through a chance google search I ran across the Red Summer of 1919. I had never heard this tale.

The summer of 1919 is an ugly part of American history. So ugly it was hard to examine but in my opinion well worth it. A turning point in the sense that this was not the first time that whites had attacked blacks. What was different is there were black battle hardened WWI soldiers and it marked one of the first times that some decided to fight back.

There were also in some of the South deep in Jim Crow country near Helena AK that were not well read nor knew much of the outside world and while Red Summer raged. They had took notice of the rising price of cotton. They decided to form a Union and sought demand legally their fair share of the profits  be divided amongst them as per the agreement as a sharecropper. They organized and went so far as to pool their meager salaries and hire an attorney.

The power structure of this feudal town of Helena AK in turn of the century America wanted none of it. One fateful night during the Red Summer of 1919 the sharecroppers of Hope Spur had a Union meeting at the Church. Some boys from town decided to give visit with guns and attempted to scare the Unionist by shooting at the Church full of the sharecroppers. What they did not know is that the Union had set some guards and they shot back in self defense. Killing one of the townsman and wounding the other.

This led to an unbridled evil actions by white men toward of black men as what is now known as the Elaine Massacre . The numbers are hard to pin down but most agree more than 100 black men were gunned down in cold blood. The State Guard were brought in to put down the “rebellion” and rather than protect citizens they saw fit to slaughter them instead.

Trumped up charges came forth a hundred of sharecroppers were convicted and 12 sentenced to death or the Elaine Twelve as they would become known.

Enter one Scipio Africanus Jones. Born into slavery as a child, a sharecropper as a youth but one whom was quite obviously not destined to remain one in occupation but never forgot where he came from. He took classes gained a college degree and apprenticed at a law firm. He took the bar and passed on his first try.  Jones was long an advocate for the black man he was also quite successful in his own right as a lawyer in Little Rock.  He move easily between the two societies of his time and was well respected. He faced racism with a smile and fought it with far more than just a little intellect and profound skill in the law.

On hearing of the Elaine Twelve Scipio began planning for the defence of the all the sharecroppers. He went straight to his Southern Democratic friend and fellow Attorney at Law Mr George W. Murphy. Jones knew he would need a white lawyer to team with and Murphy was a powerful attorney of the time in Little Rock and former Confederate Officer. They  issued a joint statement of how well the State did to restore peace. Neither Jones nor Murphy believed this but the area was a powder keg. They did not want a mob to take justice in their own hands.

The NAACP was in it infancy and took notice of the Elaine Massacre and decided to act. Hiring the same attorney George W. Murphy. Scipio Jones was not the choice of the NAACP but Murphy never let Scipio know this and let him continue with the case.  If any question whom the lead was of the monies received from the NAACP for the defence of the sharecroppers Mr Murphy only kept 250 dollars and the remaining rather large sums went straight to Jones. He defended from contributions NAACP, local and state charity solicited by Scipio and went deep into his own pockets. This went beyond pro bono.

When Jones goes in the story it was painted as a negro uprising that the white defending person and property had to quell the rebellion. Blood would be had for this insurrection as if enough had not already spilled and a lesson taught and taught well. The trial in this picturesque town of Helena AK while a farce was normal for the South at that time.

The glory of the passing of the 14th and 15th amendments along with the Civil Rights Act of 1866 post Civil War was essentially decimated by the Supreme Court. The Slaughterhouse Cases followed by Reese and Harris and the Federal Courts and therefore the Federal Government essentially left all  power the States and the great reconstruction was blown to hell. Each individual State would decide its own fate on how to govern its people. They did and did not govern kindly in the South. East, North or West but it was particularly hard in the South. The Jim Crow laws were now in effect and the Black Man less than a second class citizen and any trial a joke. If you were rich, white and in power you were the law.

The State court of Arkansas would not protect the sharecroppers  and the Federal courts were to unable to based on their own design. A lesser Man than Scipio Jones would see the folly and in fact George W. Murphy did. It was not the Jones was ignorant far from it he was simply unflappable and sought justice .Jones began his investigation and began legal maneuvering. Even though the road was a hard one Jones was more than a capable lawyer and a master of finding a loophole. In the end after four long years Scipio Africanus Jones was able to change the narrative completely and forever. And on his way accomplish much more.

This was a peaceful assembly of sharecroppers was fired upon with no provocation. It was followed by three days of a vicious murderous mob that under the pretense of law and order murdered law abiding black citizens. Rounded up others and with no due process and a mob mentality convicted more than one hundred and sentenced twelve to die. He wrote an argument so complete that it was altered little if at all before it was heard before the Supreme Court but not presented by Mr. Jones. It was beyond a landmark decision, Moore vs Dempsey.

He secured the release of 6 of the Elaine Twelve and freed the other 100 prisoners. The other six he had plea bargained with the Governor. To let the State save face they pleaded guilty but their execution was to be stayed by the Governor and was. Furthermore before the Governor's exit he was to pardon the six men. The existing Governor had last minute regrets or outside pressures and was not performing on the bargain which he had promised. The incoming Governor promised as soon as he took office the Elane Six would be put to the chair. Scico went to work and gathered no less than 700 signatures from power brokers of Little Rock and beyond and hand delivered them to the Governor. The Governor relented and the last six were set free at almost the very last hour. He gained the freedom of all the wrongfully accused and condemned men in the end.

Moore vs Dempsey is the precedent for if the State is violating your rights, the Federal Government can and will step in. It restored due process of the 14th had promised which had been gutted in the past. It effectively paved the way for the death of Jim Crow Laws and every important Civil Right case victory that followed after. This made America not only more just for the Black Man but for every Man Woman and Child. It is the most far reaching decision for habeas corpus decision and arguably the most important  that the Supreme Court bench has ever ruled on during that time.

How this great Man has only a Post Office in Little Rock AK to remember him by and is otherwise forgotten is a travesty. We all owe much to this great American. Thank you Mr. Scipio Africanus   Jones for making all Americans more free.