Should Medicare cuts be part of health care reform?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
The Senate has voted to cut almost $500 billion from Medicare as a way to help pay for health care reform. Is that an oxymoron?
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/12/04/art.medicare.gi.jpg caption="Health care reform supporters participate in a sit-in inside the lobby of a Manhattan building."]
Republicans tried to stop it - but failed. The esteemed senators apparently think they can cut that much from Medicare without hurting seniors. They better hope the seniors agree with them. They insist Medicare is already in trouble and needs to be fixed, "not raided to create another new government program."
Senator John McCain is recording a phone message meant for voters - urging against the proposed cuts in Medicare.
But Democrats say the Republicans are making false claims about the $460 billion in cuts and they insist there's a lot of waste, fraud and abuse that can be cut from Medicare. Keep in mind - they also need to find a way to pay for the nearly $1 trillion health care plan.
The Democrats say the bill won't reduce guaranteed Medicare benefits for seniors, and that it would extend Medicare solvency for another five years.
The AARP supports the proposed Medicare cuts over 10 years - thus giving the Democrats political cover in their push to cut back subsidies to private Medicare plans along with payments to hospitals, hospices, home health agencies and other providers.
Medicare is an extremely popular program among seniors. For some it's the only healthcare they have. Is it really a good idea to cut all this money out of a government-run health program that actually works?
Here’s my question to you: Should Medicare cuts be part of health care reform?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
How should Senate address abortion in regard to health care reform?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Abortion is the political hot potato that could derail health care reform entirely.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/12/03/art.reid.gi.jpg caption="Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid."]
It caused major disagreements in the House - and the Senate is now wrestling with how to address the issue. Democrat Ben Nelson says he will introduce an anti-abortion amendment... and that he won't vote for the health care bill unless this language gets added.
Nelson and others aren't satisfied with Majority Leader Harry Reid's current plan - that is to forbid including abortion coverage as a required medical benefit - but to allow a new government insurance plan to cover abortions and let private insurers that get federal money offer plans that include coverage for abortion.
In the House - a group of anti-abortion Democrats added restrictions that would forbid any health plan that gets federal money from paying for abortions - except in the case of rape, incest or to save the mother's life. Also under the House bill, a new government insurance plan couldn't offer abortions - and women would have to buy separate coverage for abortion services.
Women's rights groups are outraged - as they should be - and vow to keep similar language out of the Senate bill, with hundreds rallying on Capitol Hill yesterday to insist the bill allow coverage of abortion. Those opposed to the House's abortion language say it amounts to "the biggest rollback in a woman's right to choose in three decades."
Others point to the existing Hyde Law - which already prevents government money from being used for abortion, except for the cases mentioned earlier.
Here’s my question to you: When it comes to health care reform, how should the Senate address abortion?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
What can be done to create jobs?
(PHOTO CREDIT: Justin Sullivan/GETTY IMAGES)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
As the White House convenes what it's calling a jobs summit, consider this:
Almost 16 million Americans are out of work, and one-third of them have been unemployed for more than six-months. There are currently six workers competing for every open job. The government releases the November jobs report tomorrow, with unemployment expected to remain at 10.2 percent.
The White House affair is a meeting with business leaders, academics and other experts to come up with ideas on creating jobs.
But Americans have their own ideas on how to get people back to work. A new USA Today/Gallup poll shows 18 percent of those surveyed suggest the best way is to keep manufacturing jobs in the U.S instead of sending them overseas. 14-percent say lower taxes, 12-percent say more help for small businesses, and 10-percent say create more infrastructure work.
Other ideas include reducing government regulation, creating more green jobs, providing more stimulus money, and buying American or raising taxes on imports.
Meanwhile, there are some glimmers of good news:
The Labor Department reports that the number of first-time filers for unemployment fell last week to a near 15-month low.
Also an independent private job placement firm shows the pace of job losses slowing to the lowest level in two years.
But the fact is jobs are a trailing indicator and probably won't show any robust growth for awhile - despite other signs that the economy is in recovery. Also, many experts say a lot of the jobs that have been lost will simply never return.
Here’s my question to you: What can be done to create jobs?
Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Does W.H. owe explanation about how couple crashed state dinner?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Congress isn't satisfied with the answers they're getting when it comes to the White House "crashers."
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/12/03/art.salahis.gi.jpg caption="The Salahis are under investigation for allegedly crashing a White House state dinner."]
The Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee says the country is lucky the breach didn't end in a "night of horror." Congressman Bennie Thompson says they still need to talk to the Salahis - who attended the State Dinner without invitations - and to White House Social Secretary Desiree Rogers. All three of them refused to appear to today's hearing. Thompson says he's directing the panel to prepare subpoenas for the Salahis.
Republicans are accusing the White House of "stonewalling" in not letting Rogers appear. They want to subpoena her too.
The White House cites separations of power, saying there's a history of White House staff not testifying before Congress; and Senior aide Valerie Jarrett insists there's no need for Rogers to testify because "we think we've really answered the questions fully." Really?
As for the "crashers" – their publicist says they've already provided the committee with information and that there's nothing else they can do to help the inquiry. They claim they broke no laws... and are chalking the whole thing up to "honest misunderstandings and mistakes" made by all parties.
Meanwhile the head of the Secret Service, who did bother to show up at today's hearing, acknowledged mistakes were made - but insisted that the president was never at risk. He suggested that normal procedures were not followed.
After its own review - the White House says at future official events, they'll make sure staff are stationed alongside secret service agents to screen guests
Here’s my question to you: Does the White House owe an explanation about how two people crashed a state dinner?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Has your support for health care reform increased or decreased?
(PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
The battle lines are drawn - when it comes to health care reform. Senate Democrats now say the debate has practically stalled; and they're blaming Republicans for blocking votes. The Republicans deny it.
At issue: The 10-year, nearly $1 trillion bill that would require most Americans to carry insurance, expand Medicaid and require insurers to cover people regardless of their medical history.
That's what we do know about this bill... but buried in the thousands of pages of legislation are other things that people might not know about.
For starters - under the Senate's plan, the Secretary of Health and Human Services would be granted broad new powers - including the authority to decide what procedures insurers should cover and who should get them. I don't know about you, but that idea creeps me out.
Also - Critics say that despite President Obama's promise that illegal aliens won't get health coverage - hundreds of thousands of people here illegally could get just that under this legislation. That's because while the bills making their way through Congress either mandate or encourage businesses to cover all employees - there are no exemptions to screen out illegals, who usually get jobs by using fake identities.
Meanwhile a new USA Today/Gallup poll suggests that despite all the efforts of the president and Democrats to get this legislation passed, Americans are leaning against it - with 49-percent saying they would tell their member of Congress to vote against a bill - just 44-percent say they would want them to support it.
Here’s my question to you: Has your support for health care reform increased or decreased in the past 6 months?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Has scientific community been honest about global warming?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Al Gore called global warming "An Inconvenient Truth"... but suddenly a lot of people are asking what the truth really is. It's been dubbed ClimateGate.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/12/02/gore.climate.gi.jpg caption="Former Vice President Al Gore gives a speech about climate change."]
A climate scientist at the center of a growing controversy over hacked e-mails is stepping down from a British University's climate research unit under a cloud of suspicion.
Critics point to a thousand pages of leaked e-mails and documents between this scientist and others which they say prove that global warming is not a threat. They say researchers are ignoring data that questions whether global warming is real, and have conspired to discredit those who question the phenomenon.
Here in the U.S., some members of Congress are demanding a hearing into research done by the climate change panel of the U.N. to find out if it "cooked the books" on global warming.
This is all coming to light right ahead of the global climate summit in Copenhagen. What's the old expression? "Timing is everything."
The scientists who believe in global warming say their case is based on "all kinds of evidence," like what's happening to the ice in the Arctic. The White House insists that "climate change is happening," adding they don't think the science is "in dispute anymore" among most people.
But not everyone is convinced.... A recent poll shows the percentage of Americans who believe global warming is happening has dropped from 80 to 72 percent in the past year.
Here’s my question to you: Do you think the scientific community has been honest when it comes to global warming?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
How optimistic are you about success in Afghanistan?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
When it comes to Afghanistan, President Obama better be right. After months of meetings and criticism that he was "dithering" and "weak" on Afghanistan - he finally made what may be the most important decision of his presidency.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/12/02/art.obama.w.pt.gi.jpg caption="President Obama spoke at West Point last night. He laid out his plan for an increase of 30,000 troops in efforts to eventually begin to transition U.S. forces out of Afghanistan starting in July 2011."]
But the announcement to deploy 30,000 additional troops is cloaked in contradiction. We're going to rush more troops in so we can begin to rush them out in 18 months. The Taliban and al Qaeda will probably make a note of this timetable.
You don't suppose the decision to withdraw in July of 2011 would have anything to do with the President's 2012 re-election campaign do you?
There was no mention of how we're going to pay for this. The 30,000 additional troops will cost an additional $30 billion in the first year.
Where's that money going to come from? Some Democrats are calling for a so-called "war surtax." But With a fragile U.S. economy, an unemployment rate topping 10-percent, and a costly health care reform plan on the table - there may not be much appetite for that.
Meanwhile - a new USA Today/Gallup poll suggests the American public has just about gotten its belly full of Afghanistan. Only 35-percent approve of what President Obama is doing there. That's down from 49-percent in September and 56-percent in July. 55-percent disapprove… not the kind of numbers that are likely to lead to a second term. Can you spell Vietnam?
Here’s my question to you: How optimistic are you about success in Afghanistan?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
More and more Americans seek day-labor jobs
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Remember the argument against cracking down on illegal immigration that went: "Illegal aliens come here to do the jobs Americans won't do?" Well, guess what? Americans are doing them... and in greater numbers than ever before.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/12/01/art.home.depot.jpg caption="Day laborers wait in front of a Home Depot in Los Angeles."]
USA Today reports that a growing number of American citizens are headed to street corners and parking lots of home improvement stores to find day-labor work - jobs usually done by illegal aliens.
A UCLA professor of urban planning says it's happening most often in areas where hot construction markets have collapsed - and there are lots of unemployed construction workers without stable work. He estimates that the proportion of American born day laborers has at least doubled in the last three years. Back in 2006, they made up seven percent of the day labor workforce.
Some of the places seeing an increase in U.S. citizens seeking day-labor jobs include Tucson, Arizona, Arlington, Virginia, and Los Angeles.
Experts say the day labor pool is becoming much more ethnically diverse. Whites, African-Americans and Mexican-Americans are all joining the ranks - competing for work painting, laying bricks or landscaping. And it's a trend that will only get worse once unemployment benefits run out and more people are laid off.
Nationally, the unemployment rate is 10.2 percent... and is expected to get worse before it improves. A recent report shows jobless rates increased in 29 states and the District of Columbia in October. Michigan leads the pack with over 15 percent unemployment, followed by Nevada, Rhode Island, California and South Carolina.
Here’s my question to you: What does it mean when a growing number of Americans are seeking day-labor jobs?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Why do celebrities who travel via private jet tell us to save the environment?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
The hypocrisy of some celebrities knows no bounds.
The London Times has a piece called "Taking the private jet to Copenhagen" - a reference to the upcoming international climate summit. This report highlights actors, musicians, politicians and other so-called "green" celebrities who have fleets of jets, multiple homes, and on and on - leaving carbon footprints as they travel through life that would put a dinosaur to shame.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/images/12/01/art.gwyneth.suv.jpg caption="Actress Gwyneth Paltrow is pictured behind the wheel of an SUV."]
For example:
- John Travolta has 5 private jets (including a Boeing 707). He once flew to London on one of them to encourage the British to fight global warming.
- Harrison Ford used to own a Gulfstream jet, but now makes due with a smaller Cessna Citation Sovereign eight seat jet, four propeller planes and a helicopter.
- Oprah Winfrey, who preaches about being environmentally friendly on her TV show, traveled in a 13-seat Gulfstream jet for years until she replaced it with a faster Bombardier Global Express.
- Tom Cruise has five planes, including a customized Gulfstream jet.
- As for the king of global warming preachers, Al Gore: It's been estimated his Tennessee mansion uses 20 times the electricity of an average U.S. home. And he spends $500 a month just to heat his indoor swimming pool.
- Meanwhile recent owners of gas guzzling SUVs include Gwyneth Paltrow, Barbra Streisand and Cameron Diaz.
All of the above mentioned celebrities are active to a greater or lesser degree in urging the rest of us to fight global warming.
Here’s my question to you: Why do celebrities who travel around in private jets want to tell the rest of us how to save the environment?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Should Republicans be trying to sell political 'purity'?
L to R: Newt Gingrich, Mark Foley, Larry Craig, Mark Sanford (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
It seems the Republicans can't agree on the party's proposed "purity test" which would bar financial support for candidates who don't meet 8 of 10 tests on social and fiscal issues...
These include:
- Supporting smaller debt and lower taxes, opposing President Obama's so-called "government run" health care plan, opposing amnesty for illegal aliens, opposing government restriction on gun ownership and supporting the Defense of Marriage Act.
Many Republicans - even some who claim they'd pass the purity test - say it's a bad idea because the party should offer a larger tent. With a Democratic White House that's growing more unpopular, and with Republicans hoping to pick up congressional seats next year, they say this purity test could just cause more inter-party fighting.
Plus it seems pretty hypocritical. Here are a few examples of Republican "purity":
- Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich admitted to cheating on his wife around the same time Congress was impeaching Bill Clinton for his affair with Monica Lewinsky.
- Former Congressman Mark Foley resigned after reports he sent sexually explicit instant messages to a male Congressional page.
- Idaho senator Larry Craig was arrested in an airport bathroom where an undercover cop accused him of soliciting sex.
- Or Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina who went MIA for several days over the summer, lied to his staff about his whereabouts - when he was really visiting his mistress in Argentina. His wife and kids left him, but he's still in office - although probably not for much longer.
These guys define Republican purity.
Of course - Democrats do this stuff too, but they're not the ones trying to sell political purity to the public.
Here’s my question to you: Do Republicans suffer a credibility problem trying to sell the idea of "purity"?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
@jackcafferty on Twitter
Recent Comments