Trump crashes once more with healthcare failure

With the defeat of the new, and improved health care bill from the Senate, it’s obvious that the Trump administration has deep problems crafting successful legislation, as the GOP, despite its federal trifecta, is unable to make good on campaign promises from last year’s election.

The travel ban was knocked down by appeals courts, has only been given a mild lifeline, of sorts, by the United States Supreme Court, as it extended the reasons for foreign visitors from predominantly Muslim countries, to their grandparents; something that probably irritates President Trump, even more than the media’s constant focus on Russian collusion, from he, and his family.

Awhile back, in the not too distant past, the House passed a health care proposal that, oddly enough, Trump ironically labelled as “mean,” in what was to be short lived euphoria, at least for the press, and its photographers.

Having a non-politician as chief executive, might have played well during the campaign, but it’s clear that this is not an asset in the Oval Office, as the president seems unaware of the great diversity, of thought, in the Republican party.

It was easy with President Obama, they could handily be the party of “no” - as they steadfastly said that to any, and all, proposals coming from the Obama administration, causing one wag to note, that he would be criticized by the GOP for making even a peanut butter sandwich.

Now that they are the ruling party, the effort to agree, or even speak with one voice, is problematic. Case in point the defections by Senators Mike Lee and Jerry Moran, who neatly pulled the political rug from the bill, and easily blindsided Trump, with their refusal to support it, and furthermore providing political cover for even more in the Senate.

It’s safe to say that Trump is no Lyndon Johnson, who could have mustered the votes with every bit of effort, be it a phone call, or an interview; but then he knew the Senate inside and out, the value of a seasoned politician, in the White House.

Providing legislative seasoning, on the other hand, was Mitch McConnell, who as majority leader did an old-school game: build the opposition platform and then throw a few bones to the dissenting dogs, in this case Lisa Murkowski and Shelley Moore Capito, for their large swaths of rural communities. Yet, this was not enough, as the endgame proved.  In fact, it was McConnell who had to walk up Executive Drive, tail between his legs.

The one option, now, is to work with the Democrats in a bipartisan effort, but this is political anathema to many in the party, and yet in a recent poll 71 percent of those polled want the Republicans to do just that.

Add to it their long term opposition to the Affordable Care Act, any work with the Dems might be seen as betrayal to their long standing opposition to the ACA, colloquially known as Obamacare; which ironically has its origins as a Republican compromise promulgated by Mitt Romney, as governor of Massachusetts.  It was certainly not the intent of the Obama administration to protect and preserve the nation’s health insurance industry. At that time, there was not as much support for the single-payer option that there is now, and as Obama said later, it would not have passed.

Sensing defeat, and the weak strains of reveille, the GOP in a last ditch measure tried to foster a repeal without replacement, an effort that went straight down the pipes, as it had no support, and the spectre of even more senatorial defections.

The White House chefs made a dream menu for lunch, the other day, and the president, assumed that culinary seduction might pry some sort of victory from the ashes, but even seasonal veggies and rosemary sauce made the effort sour, and now all that we hear from Trump is to let Obamacare fail, and then, to the press, “We’re not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you that the Republicans are not going to own it. We’ll let Obamacare fail, and then the Democrats are going to come to us.”

Somehow the image of Chuck Schumer, trudging to the North Portico, hat in hand is in doubt, but the president’s chutzpah, and naivety, bring a certain sort of charm to the dilemma.

To be fair, Trump did have some success, he led the U.S away from the Paris Climate Accord, and the TPP, but the latter was like a dying patient, so that required little effort, on his part. But, the defeat of Obamacare seems doomed, and he was “forced to certify that Iran continues to comply with the biggest foreign policy accord of Obama’s second term,” as the Chicago Tribune reported.

Deeply opposed to the DACA, by Trump the DACA is til intact with 750,000 recipients, and the tax hike on upper incomes is still on the books, much to the chagrin of its detractors. And, of course, the wall separating Mexico from the Unites States seems like only a distant memory.

A huge problem is that there is no one to deliver the message and do outreach in statesman like manner, (tweets don’t count), much like that first press conference where the president attacked one and all, shooting wisecracks, disclaimers and accusations, that seemed more reminiscent of something from ‘The Three Stooges.”

But, ‘so long as he remains more focused on unwinding Obama’s work than building [one] of his own,’ noted the Tribune, then these legislative failures will continue.

Repeal and delay for the health care proved disastrous, another myopic move by Trump, with the same objectors, this time joined by old-guard Republican Susan Collins of Maine. It’s as if he cannot learn from previous errors, or the consequences of millions of Americans losing their health insurance.

Trump has said, as if to bad employees, that their vacations have been cancelled until they pull up a solution in a rudderless ship. Yet, in true reality television style, he jabbed Dean Heller about him remaining in the Senate; perhaps he really wanted to uttler his, by now, infamous line: “You’re fired.”

It cannot be ignored that the White House has three goals in what is essentially a wealth transfer bill: decrease coverage, remove consumer safeguards (in the insurance business), and gut Medicaid.

The option remaining for the White House is to delete the ACA mandate, crucial to maintaining health insurance markets, since it encourages healthy people to sign up for coverage, since healthy people offset the cost of sicker people, which keeps premiums in check.  if that is loosened then the system would truly collapse, with the result of skyrocketing premiums, even more than it did last year for some people who bought insurance on the Obamacare marketplaces.

While it can be argued that the government wants to leave health care, can it also rob children of dedicated healthcare in over 220 children's hospitals, where 60 percent of American children receive their care? Can it ask millions of Americans to see, as the Congressional Budget Office, analyzed, 32 million people to lose their healthcare plans by 2026?

DeVos cuts to civil rights make college students less safe

Updated Sept. 9, 2017

In a few short weeks, the campuses of American colleges will be full of new and returning students, as they rush to and fro, from the student bookstore to their classes, pausing, no doubt, to check their text and email messages. There will also be parties (keggers in my day) and the inevitable exchange of gossip and evaluations on both their peers, and teachers. Yet, for many of them, the flirting between the sexes could take a nasty turn in unwanted sexual advances that could end in assault charges.

During the Obama administration many of these young women, and some men, had gained a measure of protection, but with the Trump administration, and the new education cabinet head, Betsy DeVos, of Michigan, they will be a lot less protected.

In what might regrettably fall into one of the many embarrassing moments in the lives of public officials, NPR reported last week that “Candice Jackson, whom DeVos appointed as the top enforcer of sexual assault cases at the Department of Education, seemed to agree with that position in remarks to The New York Times on Wednesday. Campus rape "accusations — 90 percent of them — fall into the category of 'we were both drunk,' " she said in part. She apologized later that same day, calling the remarks "flippant."

Amongst the many moments that President Trump and his cabinet members, and staff, may have wished that they had been drinking,when they spoke, this was one that seems the most regrettable, not to mention insensitive.  Yet, it also seems to be part of this administration's goals, not only to reverse anything that President Obama legislated, but also to be even less, than sympathetic towards women, than has been previously acknowledged.

But, if the proof of the pudding is in the eating, then putting her foot in her mouth was Jackson’s boss, De Vos, who in her remarks to reporters, sent a mixed message: "lives have been ruined" by allegations of sexual assault. She also added, in a remark that could be also be read in two ways: "No student should be the victim of sexual assault," she added. "No student should feel unsafe ... and no students should feel like the scales are tipped against him or her."

Here are the uncomfortable statistics: “11.2% of all students experience rape or sexual assault through physical force, violence, or incapacitation (among all graduate and undergraduate students). Among graduate and professional students, 8.8% of females and 2.2% of males experience rape or sexual assault through physical force, violence, or incapacitation. Among undergraduate students, 23.1% of females and 5.4% of males experience rape or sexual assault through physical force, violence, or incapacitation; and 4.2% of students have experienced stalking since entering college.”

In one of those ironic, and straight from the pages of “Ripley’s Believe It Or Not” moments, it was also reported by Mic.com that “Jackson is the self-described "libertarian feminist" formerly best known for accusing 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton of being a "rape enabler." As the Washington Post noted, Jackson's connections with women who had accused Clinton's husband, former President Bill Clinton, of sexual misconduct "became an asset" for Donald Trump's campaign after video surfaced of Trump bragging about assaulting women.”

Perhaps even more disturbing is that despite definitive moves by the Obama administration to strengthen the hands of the Office of Civil Rights, “according to an internal memo issued by acting DOE office of civil rights director Candice E. Jackson, the [New York] Times wrote, investigators at the agency will no longer be required to "broaden their inquiries to identify systemic issues and whole classes of victims." They have also been instructed it is no longer mandatory to alert D.C. officials of "all highly sensitive complaints" like allegations of racial discrimination or failure to properly investigate campus sexual assaults.

President Trump's budget proposes cutting more than 40 jobs at the DOE civil rights division, and cut more than $ 2million, adds further fuel to the fire. And, to that effect, “Jackson also recently defended new policies on the rights of trans students after one employee told the Huffington Post "officials should investigate issues of discrimination just as they would have before the Obama-era rules were implemented.”

“During the Obama administration, the department's Office for Civil Rights named colleges that faced scrutiny for mishandling sexual assault; outlined protections for transgender students (which recently have been revoked) and identified patterns of discrimination in school districts and universities,” noted the Los Angeles TImes.

Key to the Obama policies was “that certain types of complaints could automatically trigger broader investigations that looked into more than just the particular instance of discrimination highlighted in a complaint.”

"It was something I created after resolutions that were insufficiently comprehensive, and realizing we needed to be more thorough," said Catherine Lhamon, who led the office under President Obama.

As most people are aware, the cost of a college education, at both private and public schools is rising, and with that most students need some form of financial aid to complete their degrees. For some, notably the more egregious for-profit schools, raiding the coffers of federal financial aid became a habit, much like the infamous episode at Corinthian Colleges, considered the poster child for fraudulent behavior.

The Obama Administration was aggressive in protecting students from schools like Corinthian (now forced to pay students delinquent loans) and last month, DeVos “walked back two Obama-era regulations aimed at protecting student borrowers. Beginning with two public hearings this week, in Washington, D.C., and in Dallas, the Education Department has reopened the "negotiated regulation" process, or "neg reg" as insiders call it.”

The "gainful employment" rule sanctions individual programs at colleges and universities based on how many students are able to payback their loans. Specifically, their "borrower defense to repayment" rule paved the way for students “to get their loans forgiven if their college is found to engage in fraudulent behavior, a situation that has befallen tens of thousands of students,”  at not only Corinthian Colleges but ITT Technical Institute, “among others, in the last few years,” noted National Public Radio.

The rollback by DeVos has sent waves of discontent among elected officials, and notably, “Several lawmakers and observers saw the department's withdrawal of the borrower-defense rule as unfairly tipping the scales in favor of for-profit colleges. Senate Democrats sent a letter to Ms. DeVos last week asking her to keep the regulations in place. "Delaying the borrower-defense rule would be a monumental dereliction of the duty you have to protect students and taxpayers," the senators wrote, "and would increase the risk of repeating the recent history of students left holding the bag while executives at collapsing institutions made away with millions in profits,” reported The Chronicle of Higher Education.

As reported, on this blog, and elsewhere in the media, DeVos has established herself as a clear and present danger to vulnerable college students. "At best, this administration believes that civil rights enforcement is superfluous and can be easily cut. At worst, it really is part of a systematic agenda to roll back civil rights," Vanita Gupta, the former acting head of the DOJ [Department of Justice] civil rights division under President Barack Obama, told ProPublica.

Thursday’s news that Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has decided to rescind the basic principles of Title IX protection for sexual assault victims, and its adjudication, on American college campuses, and to go beyond the guidelines established by the Department of Civil RIghts, should, perhaps not come to the surprise of anyone, considering the statements that she made in July.

Now coming towards the beginning of a new Fall semester makes most, including students, parents and school administrators, look askance, at what might surely  damage to the process of adjudication.

"Every survivor of sexual misconduct must be taken seriously. Every student accused of sexual misconduct must know that guilt is not predetermined," she said.

Most observers, critics, and even pundits, recognize that this is a nod to a view that supports the male as perpetrator, and shoves the mostly female view to the side.

In the, by now, established, Obama trashing, the Secretary unequivocally stated The truth is that the system established by the prior administration has failed too many students," she said during remarks at George Mason University in Virginia.

"Survivors, victims of a lack of due process and campus administrators have all told me that the current approach does a disservice to everyone involved."

While claiming that there will be solicitation of public comments, that is an old Washington ploy, that fools no one and, and involves no one, and might include, at best a small hand picked sample, to which the press would be invited: in short a photo-op, or what used to be called a “dog and pony show.”

In the vein of many Trump Administration cabinet heads, she seems determined to kill the very institutions that she purportedly protects, much like Ben Carson at HUD, and RIck Perry at Energy.

As NBC News reported, “DeVos' announcement drew criticism from advocates for survivors, who feared any impending changes would roll back key gains made by the Obama administration to prioritize combating campus sex assault.”

“Alexandra Brodsky, a legal fellow at NWLC, told NBC News she felt DeVos made "false equivalencies between the experiences of survivors and the experiences of accused students" and "misrepresented" Obama-era guidance,”  in her reaction to the news.

Feeling elated were, “advocates who have argued that the accused do not always receive fair investigations under the previous administration's guidance welcomed DeVos' new approach, the station reported.

"One of the reasons why we've been so concerned about this is because the current approach has really badly undermined due process on college campuses," said Joe Cohn, legislative and policy director for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

"I think that here we have for the first time in my memory an education secretary who acknowledges that this is an issue that requires us to care about everyone on all sides of it," he added.

Huffington Post noted that “she did not announce any large policy changes to Title IX other than implying that the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter would be rescinded when she told the crowd “the era of rule by letter” has ended.

“The Obama-era Dear Colleague Letter, which was created by then-Vice President Joe Biden in 2011, is a comprehensive set of guidelines that essentially serve as a reminder to universities and Title IX administrators that schools need to follow the Title IX law.”

Echoing President Trump’s remarks in the aftermath of the Charlottesville violence, about blame on both sides, DeVos shared her own false dichotomy, since “Although just between 2 and 10 percent of reported rapes turn out to be false claims, DeVos devoted equal time to the stories of sexual assault survivors and those wrongly accused as if the group is the same size as survivors of sexual violence.”

“This campus official, who may or may not have any training in adjudicating sexual misconduct, is expected to render a judgment,” DeVos said, walking the crowd through the Title IX process. “A judgment that changes the direction of both students’ lives. The right to appeal may or may not be available to either party and no one is permitted to talk about what went on behind closed doors. It’s no wonder so many call these proceedings kangaroo courts.”

That term is used by certain men’s groups that claim, much like old-school gangsters that they were framed, or as Jackson noted, that it was a case of both students being drunk.

Another unknown fact is that since most sexual assault goes unreported, making most observers, who while not surprised, by her remarks, wonder why this emphasis on parity between victim and assailant?

Fed Chair Yellen gives rosy picture of U.S. economy

Fed Chair Janet Yellen gave a far rosier expected picture of the U.S. economy, than may had expected, as she cited “continued job growth” as a factor for a more stable economy, and expected increases in its benchmark interest rate, in her required reports to Congress.

One factor in the upbeat report was that 180,000 jobs were added to the nation’s economy during the first half of this year, giving credence to her cautious, some say, dovish, path to Capitol Hill, in what is not always an enviable duty. Case in point, was her, by now, infamous tongue lashing by the House Financial Services Committee chair, Jeb Hensarling, the Texas Republican who, previously, and practically demanded a formula for the establishment of future rate increases and when she would begin to decrease the bond portfolio, that it had held during the Great Recession.

Much like a benevolent mother, she decided that she would give him what he wanted and in her advanced published reports, she gave several formulas that might be used to establish future increases. While this seemed to placate him, she also refused, gently, to commit the Federal Open Markets Committee to one that would be definitively used, a frequent Republican demand, noting that there would be “no clear way to decide which one would be better than others,” noted The New York Times.

Adding to the peaceful air was the June Jobs report which gave an unemployment rate of 4.4 percent, the lowest pre-recession figure, but one that is tempered, once again by weak wage growth, this time, only by 2.25 percent, ending in March of this year. This has been a trend for several months, and one that may not see a significant change.

More worrisome is that the African American unemployment rate is 7.1 percent, lower since April 2000, but still higher than the national rate, a mixed report but one that does offer some level of comfort.

Labor participation is still an issue with only 62.8 participation in the labor force, compared to 66 percent a decade ago.

Part of the Fed mandate is to monitor inflation, and as it has struggled beneath 2 percent, it does give cause, to some, that if not watched closely, any future increases could be skewed, incorrectly, and some observers are in agreement.

With the economy in its ninth year of expansion, most observers are feeling optimistic, if not cautious, about the future. And, in her later remarks to the Senate she said much the same, and that "the risk of inflation" was two-sides, and that the Feds would be monitoring the "inflation trends" that would "fall below" their 2 percent target, "even though price gains have slowed in recent months."

Some observers feel that it will not take them that much longer to get to a neutral policy stance, for neutral rate quotes. But, most agree that the next rate increase, even if it is lower, won't take place until December. And, most are certain, including the chair that a 3 percent overall, is unlikely despite President Trump's assertions.

Trump returns to U.S. after a weak stance with the G20

Donald Trump, America’s 45th president began his second trip abroad, with a successful visit to Poland, where he was enthusiastically cheered, and welcomed as a hero, but as many observers have noted, by a government that has increasingly become anti-immigrant, and even anti-European Union, led by President Andrzej Duda; fairly standard stuff with Trump. But, some have said that Polish workers were paid to attend, and even told that they could not go home until they were told to do so. If this is the truth, then it seems that the president may have found his element.

More importantly, he, like his predecessors before him, used a foreign stage to stake out a policy stance, and personal theme. Think Ronald Reagan, and “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” or John F. Kennedy’s famous Berlin Wall Speech, “Ich bein ein Berliner,” and others.

Trump likewise made his stance: western civilization, as we know it, is doomed to failure without enacting policies to protect it from a) immigrants and b) “radical Islamic terrorists”, thereby playing not only to his base back home in the United States, but also as a support to Poland’s increasing nationalism, and its unprecedented crackdown on journalists and judges, and a “refusal to accept more migrants”, noted The New York Times.

In his speech, Trump said, "The fundamental question of our time is whether the West has the will to survive? Do we have the confidence in our values to defend them at any cost? Do we have enough respect for our citizens to protect our borders? Do we have the desire and the courage to protect our civilization in the face of those who would subvert and destroy it?”

It was obvious to those listening that his speechwriters had used the occasion, not only to drive home the message, but also to polish his speaking style, and to give it the cadence of a statesman, and not that of a New York businessman, turned reality TV star, turned president. While there are those who might argue the opposite, it was clear that Trump was taking his message, to the world’s stage, using this time honored framework by U.S. presidents, and not that of a late night tweet.

Back in the U.S. things are not as neatly framed as the president would have it. He and most of his team have hired lawyers to help defend them against accusations of cronyism, at best, and “Russia’s stooge,” at worst, as Bob Muller assembles a dedicated, and professional team of investigators to help determine what has happened - did Trump and his associates know about allegations of pre-inaugural conversations with the Russians, and when did they occur?

Oddly enough, Trump said,"Well, I think it was Russia, and I think it could have been other people in other countries. Could have been a lot of people interfered,"  and even this - “nobody really knows for sure” on whether Russia hacked into the American electoral data system, despite evidence that they did exactly that, thus earning him the tag of dereliction of duty by former State Department, and former ambassador to NATO Nicholas Burns.

In no small measure, the president, has now come full circle in alienating the international intelligence community - not just long held allies, such as Britain, but that of his own country; a move sure to make his near six month presidency, a continuing nightmare. Some critics are saying, it is a nightmare, of unintended consequences. With the rejection of the Paris Climate Accord, and a possible tariff on imported steel, with a possible counterattack by European leaders, the label seems to stick.

Add to this a steadily eroding poll rating, currently with a disapproval rate at, or just above 55 percent, some have said, including former White House economic advisor, Robert Reich, that if he falls below 30 percent, he will be abandoned by the GOP. That has yet has to happen, and recent news that Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, instituted a dress code for reporters, especially women, including a ban on sleeveless dresses, (worn to combat the typical sub tropical summer heat of Washington, D.C.), suggests that Ryan is otherwise preoccupied.

With all eyes on the meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump, and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, claimed that he pressed Putin on the meddling, yet there was a conflicting report from the Russians, who said, "U.S. President Trump said that he heard firm assertions from Russian President Putin that it is not true and that Russian authorities have not meddled in the elections," Lavrov said. “[Trump] said that he accepts these assertions. That's it.”

“In response, White House officials are pointing to Tillerson’s briefing with reporters, in which he detailed how the U.S. and Russia appear to be at an impasse on the issue because Putin will not acknowledge wrongdoing,” reported the The Hill, a website acknowledged for its general “inside the beltway” reliability.

“The two leaders agreed that this is a substantial hindrance on the ability of us to move Russian-U.S. relationships forward and agreed to exchange further work 
regarding commitments of noninterference in the affairs of the United States and our democratic process as well as those of other countries,” Tillerson said. “So more work to be done in that regard.”

That meeting lasted over two hours, way beyond their scheduled thirty minutes, and First Lady Melania Trump was sent in to hurry them along, with no success, as the two leaders obviously enjoyed each other’s company, as shown in one Russian media video which had, Putin, pointing to reporters, and saying, to Trump, “Are these the ones that disrespected you?”

There is an old expression that the truth lies in the middle when it comes to conflicting reports, yet, with the continuing “bromance” between the two leaders, doubt remains, despite Tillerson’s assertion, that further contact and discussions will be ongoing. Whether this is restricted to a part-time ceasefire in Syria, fights against terrorism, remains to be seen.

When AIr Force one touches down at Andrews Air Force base, the president will confront a myriad of domestic issues, including growing dissatisfaction with his Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos who continues to chip away at standards set by the Obama administration to protect students from sexual harassment, unfair lending practices and current both staff and civil rights complaints by students.

Despite the failure of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to secure votes for the Senate version of the Affordable Healthcare Act, GOP lawmakers are now pessimistic about support with many backing away from the idea, and some, like Rand Paul, insisting that there should be a repeal, and then a later replacement of the Affordable Care Act, colloquially known as Obamacare; a move that is certain to create a backlash among voters, and a surefire way to erode the GOP in the 2018 mid-term elections.

Senate healthcare bill showed lots of heat, but little light

Mitch McConnell

In what has been a tumultuous week in Washington as the U.S. Senate revealed its revised version of the American Health Care Act, passed by the House several weeks earlier, amidst much protest for the cuts in Medicare affecting 24 million Americans, the Senate version differed little than the House, but received swift opposition by many of the nation’s most prestigious organizations: The American Medical Association, The American Diabetes Association, the American Heart Association,and the American Hospital Association and Federation of American Hospitals, to name but a few.

With near equanimity, they opposed the nearly $800 million dollar reduction of Medicaid, a program that benefits prenatal women, up to and including the birth of a child, children’s health care, care for the indigent and for many older Americans, both low and middle income, that the bill contained.

The American Hospital Association and Federation of American Hospitals had this to say, “In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the AMA's CEO James Madara wrote, "Medicine has long operated under the precept of Primum non nocere, or 'first, do no harm.' The draft legislation violates that standard on many levels."

"We believe that Congress should be working to increase the number of Americans with access to quality, affordable health insurance instead of pursuing policies that have the opposite effect," Madara continued.

As this blog has noted, these bill proposals by the Trump administration have in actuality been wealth transfer bills, than true health care plans, yet the ruse has worked as a cover for the GOP as they attempt to maintain the appearance of moral purity, and insisted that the Senate version would provide REAL health care that is affordable and by retuning economic power to the states, and subsequently to the people themselves; yet, as we have seen nothing could be further than the truth as the Congressional Budget Office noted with its negative rating on both proposals, which aired on Monday, and found that the bill would leave 22 million more Americans uninsured by 2026 if enacted, noted CNN.

On the day of reckoning, Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell only had five reliable senators in approval as the rest peeled away their votes, under negative public reaction, as protesters across the country, were shown on televised news, in sit-ins, begging lawmakers to reconsider. And, certainly the sight of wheelchair bound activists across the country, in Denver, and in Washington, being arrested by police must have made an impact on their decision.

Now the hue and cry is for a bipartisan effort between the Republicans and the Democrats to act, in concert, something that no one has seen in recent years and that many doubt can happen. And, some far left Dems are urging, in retaliation, that the Dems not even come to the bargaining table, as they were shut out of the Senate deliberations. Yet, seasoned observers note that this helps no one achieve what the nation deserves - true and affordable health care.

As history has shown, those who try are often pilloried as socialist, communists, egoists and worse; as President Lyndon Johnson endured with Medicaid, and as First Lady Hillary Clinton was trashed in 1993, and of course, President Obama got the lion’s share with the Affordable Care Act, getting panned for putting his name on what was essentially a Republican plan, created by Mitt Romney as governor of Massachusetts.

But, a recent Marist poll found only 12 percent of Americans favoring the dead-on- arrival plan, and there are some efforts remaining to try, and try again. One option from the GOP is to retain one of the taxes on the wealthy to help stem the tide of opioid abuse.

Secondly, in a departure from precedent, they are willing to look at offering cheaper plans that are less comprehensive as long as there is one that contains the standards of the ACA, that meets consumer protection standards in the ACA, reported The New York TImes.

This would meet, while it was not in the House version, or even in the initial approach by the Senate, an opportunity to mute critics such as Republican Sen. Bob Corker, of Tennessee, who opposed the cuts, and Sen. Rob Portman.  

Yet, opposition, to even that has come from Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, and Democrat Senator Maggie Hassan who said the money for opioid treatment would be “a drop in the bucket,” with Collins wanting to distinguish between those taxes that increased premiums, versus those that didn’t, an unwelcome comment to those that want to cut deeper, and deeper, like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz.

it’s important to note that White House Economic Advisor Mick Mulvaney, in one of my earlier analysis said “The White House also needs the money from the repeal to help fund the tax overhaul and the tax code revision. In a sharp reversal from earlier statements from Trump, Mulvaney said that the president said he was going to do tax reform next, now says that has to wait. He said in an interview with Fox Business that if health care doesn’t happen “fast enough, I’ll start the taxes. But, the tax reform and the tax cuts are better if I can do health care first.”

Statements like these make it harder for those like Collins and Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, both with large expanses of rural areas, whose small network of federally funded providers, and many older residents facing a loss of Medicaid, revealing, once again, that this bill is not about health care, and these adjustments are mostly cosmetic adjustments to court opponents.

The rancor in the GOP has also evolved to the point that a super PAC was ready to denounce Sen Dean. Heller, of Nevada, whose vulnerability in 2018, made him low hanging fruit for an attack, but one that was repelled by his colleagues.

If this donnybrook can produce anything meaningful, and helpful, for the country, it remains to be seen, with these secret meetings, shutting out senior lawmakers from the deliberations, such as Collins, and then producing mean retributive measures like the attack on Heller. Can hope spring eternal?

Feds up interest rates for the third time in 6 months

As predicted by most economists, and government observers, the Federal Open Market Committee of the Federal Reserve Board approved on Thursday a rate hike of 25 basis points from 1 percent to 1.5 percent, in a move that Fed Chair Janet Yellen attributed to growing confidence in the U.S. economy. And, an outlook for the GDP of 2.2 percent, far less than the one President Trump has as a target, with his budget proposal.

With many saying that this was on target, it is also expected to offer a bit of a bump to consumer debt in the form of, adjusted rate mortgages, and revolving credit card debt, and home equity loans.

Traditionally, the prime rate will also increase for baseline interest rates, following this rate increase.

The Committee noted in their statement that “Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in May indicates that the labor market has continued to strengthen and that economic activity has been rising moderately so far this year. Job gains have moderated but have been solid, on average, since the beginning of the year, and the unemployment rate has declined. Household spending has picked up in recent months, and business fixed investment has continued to expand. On a 12-month basis, inflation has declined recently and, like the measure excluding food and energy prices, is running somewhat below 2 percent.”

In a prudent, and cautious vein, characteristic under Yellen’s rein,  they felt “In view of realized and expected labor market conditions and inflation, the Committee decided to raise the target range for the federal funds rate to 1 to 1-¼ percent. The stance of monetary policy remains accommodative, thereby supporting some further strengthening in labor market conditions and a sustained return to 2 percent inflation.”

As has been often noted the Fed mandate is to reach the goals of maximum employment and price stability, a feat that in the last few years had proven to be difficult, and Yellen herself has chosen the prudent course. But, the sentiment of the FOMC does represent a slight departure from the traditional notion of an inflation target of 2 percent, they were, in fact, and were willing to look at one that was just below 2 percent; a change that may reflect a nod to an economy that has not always been on a predictable path, even among Keynesians.

Then there is the psychological beliefs of consumers, as Chris Gaffney, the president of EverBank World Markets noted: "You may start to see it weigh on consumer confidence in that they believe interest rates would continue to increase, which would make their [borrowing] more expensive.”

In a view not always held by other, he also said that "If we continue to not see any inflation, we could start to perhaps see it impacting their rate decisions going forward."

The Consumer Price Index was one blot on another wise rosy report, was weaker than expected, and caused some to side with Gaffney that this might be the last raise this year. In short the fault lay with weaker gas prices, and also costs for shelter, clothes and, vehicles. Personal consumption was only at 1.7 percent.

The job growth touted by the FOMC was moderate and added 100,000 jobs, but still reflected low labor force participations, just under 63 percent, and wages at 2.5 percent, hardly a cause for rejoicing, but one that seemed steady enough after the Great Recession,and okay for the Feds, as was the 4.3 percent unemployment.

But, the real news was the spin off of the heavily held balance sheet of market based securities and Treasury bonds, that many in Congress, especially GOP lawmakers objected to. While no deadline, was given, the Feds noted that they would start on a timetable that would begin to unwind, without reinvestment in the securities that they hold.

As Business Insider described it: “To shrink its nearly $5 trillion balance sheet, the Fed plans to gradually allow a fixed amount of the assets it owns to roll off, meaning it won't reinvest them. The Fed amassed bonds after the financial crisis to help keep interest rates low. Initially, up to $6 billion in Treasurys and $4 billion in mortgage-backed securities will be allowed to roll off monthly.

These caps will be raised every three months until they hit $30 billion for Treasurys and $20 billion for mortgage-backed securities. There was no indication of when this process would begin.