Find
While DC Delays, States Move Forward on Health Care Reforms
While DC Delays, States Move Forward on Health Care Reforms
Thursday, January 28, 2010PERMALINK: http://www.progressivestates.org/node/24486
While DC Delays, States Move Forward on Health Care Reforms
As Congress delays moving forward on the passage of comprehensive health care reform, progressive state leaders from across the country have been demanding passage of reform as critical for families across the nation. But that doesn't mean they are waiting; state leaders are moving forward, laying the groundwork for how national changes should be implemented, and creating the momentum for other meaningful health care reforms in their states. Public Options and Universal Coverage: In Iowa, SB 2092 would establish the Iowa Choice Exchange -- a form of the public option -- to serve as an information clearinghouse where businesses and consumers could compare health insurance policies. This would be combined with IowaCare Plus, which would subsidize health care for working families fully up to 300 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) with help up to 400 percent of FPL for buying more restricted health insurance. Sen. Jack Hatch (Des Moines) emphasized the reality that "We cannot do this without a fair and appropriate partnership with the federal government." Connecticut, building on the enactment of their comprehensive health care reform plan SustiNet in July 2009, will be moving forward to phase it in by 2016. By 2014, it is estimated that 98 percent of Connecticut residents will be insured with a comprehensive benefits package. Sustinet will give every patient a medical home, ratings will not be based on age, gender or health status, and coverage will be guaranteed for chronic or pre-existing conditions. Other new coverage and insurance reforms include:
Implementing Federal Reform: Other states are establishing the framework for implementing whatever reforms are enacted by Congress:
Prescription Drug Campaigns: States across the country are also moving to introduce reforms to cut the costs of prescription drugs, many based on models from PSN’s Multi-State Agenda Rx Reforms campaign. Bills have been introduced in Arizona and Iowa while other states likely to introduce reforms include Alaska, Hawaii, New York, North Carolina, Washington, and Wisconsin, with bill introductions possible in a number of other states.
States Act to Limit Judicial Ruling Allowing Corporations to Spend Directly to Elect or Defeat Candidates
Portending a sharp increase in corporate political spending, the Supreme Court has ruled (Citizens United v. FEC) that corporations enjoy the same speech rights of citizens when it comes to advocating the election or defeating political candidates. Elected officials, including U.S. President Barack Obama, have denounced the ruling as striking at the heart of our democracy by putting corporations on an equal footing with real people when it comes to basic constitutional rights. Progressives who are trying to counter the oversized influence of giant corporations on our democracy have long viewed the granting of full first amendment rights to corporations as the moment when these creations of the state would end up rampaging on the political scene like Frankenstein's monster. That day has now arrived and a forceful response is being pursued by policymakers at all levels of government. Most States Don't Even Have Basic Disclosure Requirements: As expected, much of the early debate has focused on the ability of the federal government to write new rules which will stem the tide of corporate cash likely to flood the political landscape in the mid-term congressional elections and beyond. Yet, only 24 states currently prohibit corporations from spending their treasury funds to promote or attack a candidate for state or local office, and many lack the disclosure and disclaimer requirements that serve as a last line of defense for citizen control over our elections. And even if the federal government does respond forcefully, state and local elections will not be covered in federal statute, meaning that states must act independently to protect their own democratic processes. Given this, there clearly is an imperative for states to strengthen their campaign finance laws, placing limits on corporate spending where possible and allowing access to information on corporate spending to support or oppose which candidates. Using Corporate Accountability to Rein in Spending: Lawmakers at both the federal and state levels are developing and moving forward with a series of proposals that will seek to directly counter the impact of the ruling by protecting the interests of shareholders, remove tax benefits for political spending, prevent foreign-owned corporations from electioneering, and ban political spending by government contractors, among other things. These are in addition to measures to strengthen current disclosure and disclaimer requirements. The first state to act has been Maryland, where Senators Jamie Raskin and David Harrington, and Delegate Brian Frosh have introduced a package with the following measures:
Speaking to the critical need for these reforms Sen. Raskin commented that: "[a] strong democracy requires a wall of separation between corporate money and public elections, but five justices on the Supreme Court last week took a sledgehammer to that wall. In Maryland, we are beginning to explore ways to contain the damage of this devastating opinion. By assuring that corporate political expenditures only occur when two-thirds of the shareholders agree, that all such expenditures are disclosed, that state contractors not participate in partisan campaigns at all and that corporate political expenditures not be tax-deductible, we have started to spell out a program that can be used nationally to make sure that 'we the people' doesn't turn into ”˜we the corporations." Corporate Transparency in State Budgets as a Tool: Another key part of campaign spending accountability is making clear how different companies are benefiting from government spending, whether from direct subsidies, government contracts or various corporate loopholes. State lawmakers working with Progressive States Network on our Corporate Transparency in State Budgets campaign are seeking to make sure that key information on all of that corporate largesse from government is publicly available. Any time corporations are seen spending money on elections, information on the spending and tax deals they receive from state governments should be instantly available to voters to put any election claims in perspective. See here for model corporate transparency legislation and a resource page for the campaign. Challenging Judicial Bias Towards Corporate Power: In addition to his legislative response, Sen. Raskin and others are also working to generate pressure for a federal constitutional amendment through the website FreeSpeechForPeople.org. Several other groups are moving in the same direction as well (see here, here and here). And moving on another track are advocates from the Fair Elections Now Coalition who have brought together over 40 business leaders to denounce the corporate takeover of campaigns and pledge to not engage in political speech with corporate treasury funds. Members of this coalition are also emphasizing that while these are some basic rules we can lay down to reduce the flood of corporate cash, it is clear that without alternative, clean, funding mechanisms there is no way to free our democracy from the grip of corporate power.
What does the future hold for campaign laws? Likely more change is coming. The current court has taken every opportunity (and even created the most recent opportunity) to strike down restrictions on independent expenditures. In a case argued just yesterday, the DC Court of Appeals made clear that they will strike down the $5000 cap on contributions to political non-profits. This trend makes it even more important that states develop robust disclosure and disclaimer requirements, restrictions on government contractors, requirements for corporate accountability, and clean elections campaign finance reform.
Move Your Money: Investing Public Money in Local Banks and Credit Unions to Spur Growth
In an effort to stimulate local economic growth and free up credit markets, New Mexico Sen. Tim Keller and Rep. Brian Egolf introduced HB66, which would require the state to give preference to community banks and credit unions to manage the state's general fund operating cash depository account. Currently, Bank of America holds the $1.4 billion account. Rep. Egolf explained that he was particularly motivated by Move Your Money, an exciting campaign that encourages individuals to transfer their money from banks that are "too big to fail" and begin using smaller community banks that are much more likely to reinvest those funds in the community. The initiative is additionally a rebuke of the reckless actions of major financial institutions that led to the recession and the vast sums of government dollars that have flowed to these companies since the downturn began. As Sen. Keller explains, "[r]ight now national banks benefit from our state's taxes, every dollar of our state funds we deposit with local banks is another dollar available for New Mexican businesses and working families' mortgages and small business loans." Strengthening Pension Fund Accountability: In a similar vein, Sen. Keller has also introduced SB18 to reform New Mexico's Investments Oversight Committee. Partly in response to pension scandals and other instances of corporate abuse, Sen. Keller intends to prevent corruption and promote good government by strengthening accountability mechanisms. To do so, the bill would ensure that the decision-making power of the Oversight Committee is not centralized in the executive branch and mandates that public members, to be appointed by various legislative officials, join the board. The bill would additionally create an Alternative Investment Advisory Committee that would provide recommendations and review certain assets and investment choices of the state's retirement board.
Other States Moving Money: New Mexico is not alone in recognizing that investing in local banks and credit unions foster growth and assist working families:
The initiative is not likely to harm major financial institutions, but would have substantial impact as an engine of local growth. State lawmakers should explore the prospects of investing state funds in community banks and credit unions as a means to spur development, create jobs, assist state residents, and take proactive steps towards shoring up battered economies. Research RoundupShow Us the Stimulus (Again) - Some states are making dramatic improvements in websites designed to disseminate information about their share of the $787 billion ARRA recovery act, but others are still failing to make effective use of online technology to educate taxpayers about the impact of economic stimulus spending, according to this new Good Jobs First report. However, only three states - Kentucky, Maryland and Wisconsin - juxtapose the geographic distribution of spending with patterns of economic distress or need within the state. Policies to Aid State Fiscal Recovery:
The Three Faces of Work-Family Conflict: The Poor, the Professionals, and the Missing Middle - Americans report sharply higher levels of work-family conflict than do citizens of other industrialized countries, largely because public policy does so little to help working families, according to this Center for American Progress report. Part of the obstacle to building coalitions for work-family reforms is that public discussions too often focus on higher-income professional women, without a more comprehensive discussion of integrated policies to address the needs of "welfare-to-work" parents, middle-income parents and professionals. A range of policies are needed to address these conflicts for families at all income levels. The State of Opportunity in America - is an assessment of the country's progress in achieving opportunity for all by the Opportunity Agenda. It shows that the increase in unemployment in the recession has been significantly higher for African Americans and Latinos, that women are far more likely to live in poverty than men, and that racial and ethnic gaps in educational attainment persist. The report suggests use of Opportunity Impact Statements to better evaluate how public expenditures affect inequality and more direct programs to address that inequality of opportunity.
The Role of Human Services in Job Creation and Fiscal Recovery:
Poverty and Hunger Around the Nation:
Corporate Campaign Spending: Giving Shareholders A Voice - The Brennan Center for Justice has released a policy report on how corporate law can be changed to protect shareholder rights with regard to corporate political spending. Ensuring that Provisional Ballots are Counted - Project Vote has released a policy brief and model legislation regarding best practices for provisional balloting. Provisional ballots have been termed "placebo voting" by some advocates because poor practices have meant that in many states very few of these ballots are ever counted. This is the first in a coming series of election policy briefs from Project Vote in 2010. Please email us leads on good research at research@progressivestates.org ResourcesWhile DC Delays, States Move Forward on Health Care Reforms
Progressive States Network - State Leaders Weigh in on Final Health Care Reform Bill States Act to Limit Judicial Ruling Allowing Corporations to Spend Directly to Elect or Defeat Candidates
Citizens United v. FCC Move Your Money: Investing Public Money in Local Banks and Credit Unions to Spur Growth
Drum Major Institute - New York City Moves the Money 3 Steps Forward1. MD: Legislators Act to Limit Corporate Political Spending 2. OH: Gov. Ted Strickland Banking on Green Energy Jobs to Save Ohio's Economy 2 Steps Back1. KY: Senate Passes Ultrasound Abortion Bill 2. VA: Bill Stating that No One Can be Forced to Buy Health Insurance Advanced MastheadThe Stateside Dispatch is written and edited by:
Nathan Newman, Executive Director Please shoot us an email at dispatch@progressivestates.org if you have feedback, tips, suggestions, criticisms, or nominations for any of our sidebar features.
|
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
Printer-friendly version
Comments
Login or Register to comment.