Thursday, December 14, 2017

Gary Palmer review

Doug Jones won in Alabama Tuesday night. Full attention for those interested will now be turned to the 2018 mid-term elections. I am in #al06, and this blog entry shall serve as my review and critique of my representative Congressman Gary Palmer.

(For what Rep Palmer has to say about what he has done in Congress, see his press releases at https://palmer.house.gov/media-center/press-releases.)

Regulatory reform
I will start my review on a positive note of a leading active role that Rep. Palmer has taken on  regulatory reform.
Part of the "Swamp" is the bureaucratic regulatory apparatus in Washington DC that has its own conflict of interest between serving its own sense of self-importance through over-regulation and a lesser amount of fair and balanced regulation which better serves the interests of the American people.
Regarding Rep. Palmer's town hall this past February, I commented how most Americans had similar countervailing considerations that were in need of balancing in the regulatory regime but that the "system" failed Americans in that regard. See Town hall questions. In that blog entry, I asked Rep. Palmer these questions:
1. To what extent do you agree with the above analysis that most Americans are similarly situated and have similar interests relative to many important issues for the country, and that there is a political polarization that is not warranted in light of how most Americans are similarly situated on the important issues?
2. Do you believe there has been political polarization in recent years that has impaired Congress in doing its job properly for the American people?
3. Do you think the way Donald Trump conducted his campaign, and the way he has conducted his Presidency in the first month, if the same is continued going forward, will deepen the political polarization in the country? Or do you think the way Donald Trump has conducted his Presidency in the first month, if continued, will work towards lessening the hyperpartisanship in the country?
4. [added 2/23] Does the second set of Donald Trump's immigration executive orders unnecessarily exacerbate partisan division that will make the job of Congress harder, and could Congress help the situation by doing its job and passing comprehensive immigration reform (as should have been done during the Obama years)?
I did not hear answers from Rep. Palmer to my questions. Until he answers the questions, I would say that Rep. Palmer's constituents should count that as a negative against him in their voting decisions in 2018.

Taxes [added 12/16]
Taxes have been covered at length in three prior blog entries, to wit, AL experts re tax cuts (posted 12/1/17 with updates 12/13/17 and 12/15/17); Repubs all in with Trump (11/27/17); and Deciphering taxes (11/19/17). The takeaways from those blog entries about the Trump/Republican tax bill are:
1. the tax bill is another case of Wall Street doing a number on Main Street;
2. Wall Street ("capital") has much of its tax cut benefits already deposited in its stock market bank account, with more to be deposited shortly once the tax bill is enacted into law;
3. Main Street ("labor") must wait for uncertain benefits and bears much risk of deficits and higher national debt;
4. economic inequality has been a growing problem for the country since the 2008 financial crisis as Wall Street fared spectacularly and Main Street lagged, and that economic inequality has already increased and will be further increased by what Trump and the Republicans have done with the tax cuts bill;
5. Congress had other choices that could have been pursued regarding taxes and tax cuts for helping the middle class and increasing economic growth, but the Republicans' donors (Wall Street; capital) would have gotten a lot less deposited in the stock market bank account, which they told their Republicans was not acceptable;
6. out of political desperation, the Republicans have rushed through the tax bill, have refused to give any thoughtful consideration to the growing economic inequality problem of the country, and have gone wholeheartedly in with Trumpian type lying about the tax bill; and
7. Rep. Gary Palmer has been knowingly and purposefully complicit in the foregoing regarding the tax bill.
Accordingly, on taxes alone, voters in the Alabama 6th Congressional district should vote Rep. Palmer out of office in 2018.

Culture war [added 12/16/17]
On November 28th, I sent the below tweet to Rep. Palmer asking whether he wishes to reduce culture war or make it rage hotter
Given Charlottesville and other signs that the President of the United States wishes to stoke culture war, Rep. Palmer needs to tell his constituents whether Rep. Palmer wants to reduce culture war or whether he is in with Trump and wants to stoke culture war. If Rep. Palmer is so lacking in courage that he cannot answer that question to his constituents, Rep. Palmer should be voted out of office in 2018 for his spinelessness.

If Rep. Palmer answers the question, his constituents can decide how they want to take Rep. Palmer's answer into account in the 2018 elections.

Health care [added 12/16]
First, I will quote in full Rep. Palmer's May 4, 2017 press release
“Today the House of Representatives took the first step toward repealing and replacing the misnamed Affordable Care Act and restoring access to affordable healthcare for all Americans,” said Palmer. “The amendment that I authored on invisible risk sharing will drive down the cost of health insurance premiums and helps ensure that those with preexisting conditions have affordable coverage. The option for states to choose to receive Medicaid funding as a per-capita cap or a block grant will provide states with more flexibility to meet the needs of their Medicaid eligible people and will reduce the waste of billions of Medicaid dollars to fraud, inefficiencies and mismanagement. The AHCA also gives states the option to establish work requirements for able-bodied adults without small children. Together, these additions to the AHCA are the most substantial entitlement reform in 50 years.  Although states, as they should be, are provided the option to seek waivers from certain federal mandates, states must certify that pursuing a waiver is for the purpose of expanding coverage or reducing the cost of healthcare.  There is no underlying intention to exclude people from coverage, including those who have been previously sick, and it is important to note that this bill will not exclude people from coverage. There is a little known provision in the bill which defunds Planned Parenthood for one year and will protect this lives of the unborn. This bill is not the end of our efforts to dismantle Obamacare and repair the damage done to our healthcare system. It is the first major step forward.”

In this blog, I have discussed health care in numerous entries. In the blog entry Alabama expertise re health care, I give the below statement of my own views.
The provision of health care in the United States is a monstrously difficult problem.
The existing system is badly fragmented, and that contributes greatly to difficulty in solving the country's health care problem. Obamacare has done little for lessening the fragmentation. The American Health Care Act is not going to do much either.
The United States system is hugely expensive compared to what other countries pay for their health care. In the United States, health care is in the range of 20% of the total economy, whereas other countries do with much less, in the range of 9% to 14%. This disparity in national health care costs is in dire need of attention and is a large component of the difficult problem the United States faces regarding its health care.
Cost is not the sole consideration, but getting health care for less cost should be in the fore of what Congress is doing. In reducing cost, attention should still be paid to what is needed to provide adequate health care. With that in mind, consider the following:
A. Things that can reduce cost
1. If medical malpractice is reformed, and defensive medicine is reduced, that will help reduce the country's health care costs. An estimate of the amount of reduction is something that responders can usefully inform Alabama voters about.
2. The government can play a role in reducing health care costs by exerting control over prices. The biggest impact could be regarding drug prices, which might start with Medicare negotiating drug prices with the pharmaceutical companies. This is a controversial step, which may be part of steps 2 or 3 of the Republican plan. Any such control will have ramifications, including reducing availability of some drugs and lessening the development of new drugs.
3. If there is a reduction in total demand for health care, prices will fall and premiums and deductibles should fall. The American Health Care Act will reduce government funds for health care by means Medicaid cutbacks and replacing higher subsidies with lower tax credits, and this will translate to a reduction of demand. Under principles of supply and demand, the reduced demand should result a reduction of prices but the amount of such reduction is very problematic and may be negligible. It is probably the wildest of imagining by the Trump team that this reduction in demand by cutting back Medicaid and people dropping coverage will result in more than a small fraction of what is in their minds for reduced premiums and deductibles. Further the reduction in prices, premiums and deductible is not due to increased plan choice, but due reduced spending and reduced health services, drugs and medical equipment being obtained.
B. Increasing plan choice is chimera for reducing cost
If there is more choice in insurance plans, people may plan they don't want certain services, drugs and equipment to be covered under their plan. and that can allow the insurance company to charge them less in premiums and deductibles.
That creates a problem, however, that, if those people are allowed to do that, the people who need the services, drugs and equipment that the first set of people forego will have to pay higher premiums and deductibles to have the services, drugs and equipment covered by their plan. In other words, plan choice can reduce premiums and deductibles for some people but increase them for other people.
The same applies as regards the Obamacare mandate and what happens if it is eliminated.The elimination of the mandate will reduce premiums for those who choose not to have insurance coverage. As is well known, under Obamacare, the mandate results in healthier people having to buy insurance and pay premiums. If healthier people do not buy insurance, that will result in higher premiums and deductibles for the unhealthier people who buy insurance.
It should also be pointed out that consumers are unaware of the substance of their plan choice and and ostensible competition in premiums and deductibles. Under Obamacare, where there are standard benefits, insurance companies have competed on premiums and deductibles by reducing their "networks." Consumers cannot make a meaningful comparison of slightly higher or lower premiums compared to the "value" of a larger or smaller network. If there is more plan choice, comparison of premiums and deductibles will prevent genuine competition from happening.
[Ed. 6/5/17 For further discussion of the "chimera" of increased plan choice, see Maine and this discussion:
There is an argument to be put forth that Rep. Palmer's proposal will result in increased plan choice and increased competition among plans, and that such increased competition will get translated into reduced provider charges.
It is submitted that this is a chimera, and the insurance companies best understand why it is a chimera. The insurance companies are most informed about provider charges, and the contracts they negotiate with providers about charges, and consumers are without information or ability to make meaningful marketplace choices about insurance plans that will filter through to impacting provider charges. Further, insurance companies are practiced in navigating the provider marketplace, out of sight of consumers, with a view to higher insurer profitability, and with little concern about consumer plan choice translating into reduced charges.]
In connection with the Alabama Senate election, I thought a public symposium would be useful as a means to educate Alabamians about health care. See Health care symposium.

In some form or fashion, Rep. Palmer, in connection with 2018 elections, needs to expand his engagement with Alabama health care experts and with his constituents about health care and decide whether his May 17 press release should be revised or expanded for the consideration of his constituents in how they vote in the 2018 elections.

Fears of Cong'l Republicans re Trump [added 12/16]
The Congressional Republicans, including Rep. Palmer, are currently all in with Trump. See Repubs all in with Trump. The Republicans are fraught with worry about what is going to happen to them in the 2018 elections.

The root of the worry should be the nature of Trump and the extent to which Trump cares only about himself and will wrongfully attack, damage, seek to destroy, and lie about, anything that threatens or opposes Trump, no matter what the legitimacy for the country. Or, in other words, the extent to which he is an autocrat or would be autocrat who wishes he had the power and control of a Vladimir Putin to do whatever he wants to do. Or, in further other words, the extent to which Trump does not wish to be subject to the rule of law.

Things are playing out and things are getting exposed. Let's describe what Congressional Republicans have to fear.

Trump ran for President championing the cause of a large segment of the population on the Republican side which thought they had been ignored by the establishment for a long time. (Bernie Sanders appealed to a similar segment on the Democratic side.) Trump promised many things, including more and better health care for everyone for less cost, and no cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and jobs, jobs, jobs.

Trump has done much since becoming President showing that he was not genuine and he was conning those who voted for him. The two best examples are what Trump was prepared to do about health care and what he is about to do concerning taxes.

The con man Trump who cares only about himself has no problem lying to his voters that Trump's health care and tax cut ideas are in furtherance of what he promised to them in the campaign.

Republicans in Congress, on the other hand, believe in Trump's health care and tax cut ideas, even though they are contrary to what Trump espoused to his voters in the campaign.

That puts Congressional Republicans in a terrible box.

Congressional Republicans have seen that Trump cares only about Trump, that Trump conned his voters during the campaign, that Trump's health care and tax cut ideas and actions, among other things, expose Trump's con of his voters, and that Trump lies as President in telling his voters that his health care and tax cut ideas further what Trump promised to them in the campaign.

The Republicans great fear is that, prior to November 2018, Trump's voters are going to come to a realization about Trump's con and his lies to them, they will turn against Trump, and, in turning against Trump, the voters will exact terrible retribution on the Republicans in November 2018.

That is a terrible box for the Republicans. They can't tell Trump's voters that Trump conned them and he is continuing to lie to them to try to keep them conned. The Republicans are going all in with Trump's lies. The more the Republicans are complicit in Trump's con and lies, the greater the retaliation will be if and when Trump's voters wise up.

The eleven months until November 2018 are going to have a lot of sleepless nights for Congressional Republicans. They will be thinking about how long it will take for those  who believed in Trump and voted for Trump to come to the realization Trump cares only about Trump, does not care about them, lied to them in running for President, and has lied to them for 11 months as President.

The foregoing is what Congressional Republicans have most to fear about Trump. They should be more fearing about the damage Trump is doing to the country, and what the country should be most fearing about Trump. That will be covered next.

Trump's harming of country [added 12/17/17]
Many believe that Trump has greatly damaged the country and its institutions in how Trump ran for the Presidency and how he has conducted the Presidency for eleven months. For these people, it is a manifestation of how Trump cares only about himself and Trump will wrongfully attack, damage, seek to destroy, and lie about, anything that threatens or opposes Trump and his personal interests.

If and to the extent Rep. Palmer agrees Trump is wrongfully damaging the country and its institutions, Rep. Palmer should say so publicly. If Rep. Palmer disagrees, and he does not think Trump has done such things that warrant criticizing by Rep. Palmer, Rep. Palmer should publicly and specifically address the things, one at a time, that others say Trump has done and is doing that wrongfully harm the country.

Trump's conduct extends over two years that include his Presidential campaign and eleven months of his being President. While millions of people were appalled by things Trump said and did during his election campaign, there was a possibility that Trump would change when he became President. Their view is that Trump did not change, Trump became worse, and, as President, what Trump has said and done is inflicting real damage, and it must stop or ways must be found to hold Trump accountable.

Below is a list of things as to which many believe Trump is wrongfully inflicting harm and damage on the country, and as to which great effort needs to be made to stop Trump from great damage to the country.
1. Trump's attacks on the free press as an enemy of the people, including Trump's lying and impairing of truth and facts;
2. Trump's attacks on the intell community;
3. Trump's attacks on the Russia investigation;
4. Trump's attacks on the FBI;
5. Trump's position that "conflicts of interest" do not apply to him as President, and he can personally profit from the Presidency; and
6. Trump's stoking of culture war and division in the country.

Rep. Palmer needs to address publicly each of the above and say either, yes, Trump is acting wrongfully and Trump needs to stop doing it, or, no, Trump is not acting wrongfully and he, Gary Palmer, does not call on Trump to stop it and change what he is doing. Rep. Palmer should feel at liberty to give such explanations, reasons, and qualifications regarding his "yes" or "no" answers as he chooses.

If Rep. Palmer declines to say anything, that should be a reason to vote him out of office in 2018.

If Rep. Palmer gives answers, the voters can take the answers into such account as they choose in casting their votes in 2018.

The Swamp - Manafort; Flynn [added 12/17]
There has been a ton about the Swamp during the past two years. I have blogged a lot about the Swamp.

There is something current to say about the Swamp that Rep. Palmer should comment on.

I think most Americans, even cynical ones, were blown away by what they learned  Manafort and Flynn were charged with having done, a reaction of "my God, did they do that? Is that true?"

Reasonably followed by, "and to think those things may have never come to light if there was not the happenstance of involvement with Donald Trump and the Russia investigation that got started. Otherwise  Manafort and Flynn could have gotten away with it."

And further followed by, "and God, are Manafort and Flynn just business as usual in Washington DC? Are they the tip of an iceberg of horrors?"

And where has Trump been for the American people on this? Was Trump shocked by what he learned what Manafort and Flynn were charged with doing? Or was Trump not shocked because he knows a lot of similar things go on all the time in Washington DC?

Trump ran on draining the Swamp.

But Trump has made no comment to the American people, either that Manafort and Flynn are indeed shocking, but, based on in his personal knowledge and experience, and on advice from the Justice Department and the FBI, Americans should not view Manafort and Flynn as the tip of an iceberg of horrors, or, alternatively, Trump thinks that the American people should have concerns that Manafort and Flynn may be the tip of an iceberg, and that the Justice Department and the FBI need to bolster their efforts and resources to try to find out just how bad things may be.

But Trump has said nothing.

Rep. Palmer, can you say anything about the above to your constituents? Were you shocked by what Manafort and Flynn were charged with doing? Do you think Manafort and Flynn are a possible tip of an iceberg of horrors in Washington DC? Do you think the Justice Department and the FBI need to be bolstered to try to protect the American people against the likes of Manafort and Flynn?

Has Trump said nothing because he has skeletons lurking in his closet? Trump has been a wheeler dealer businessman for decades, who has done a lot of business in foreign countries. Who knows what all shenanigans he has engaged in.

Rep. Palmer, would you be shocked if, for example, Mueller came upon money laundering by Trump organizations? Foreign bribery? Other illegalities.

Frankly, it would not shock me one bit.

The country has no idea. Trump presumably knows if there are skeletons in his closet, but he is sure as hell going to do his best to keep them secret.

Millions of Americans don't believe a thing that comes out of Trump's mouth and would not trust Trump as far as they can throw him.

And so the country is mired in Russia.

What are you going to do about it, Rep. Palmer? Get the country more mired with more investigations going off in additional directions?

Speak to your constituents, please, Rep. Palmer.

Improper governmental payments [added 12/24]
I listened to the 12/20/17 podcast of Matt Murphy with Rep. Palmer, which podcast can be found at http://www.talk995.com/podcasts/ Rep. Palmer variously mentioned $140 billion and $500 to $700 billion of improper governmental payments, which add to national debt and should be stopped. I think the first figure was an annual figure that Rep. Palmer thought could be cut in half, and the latter was possibly what could be saved over a 10 year period. Working on stopping improper payments by the government would seem to be something that Republicans and Democrats can do together. I would request that Rep. Palmer discuss this with Rep. Sewell, and see if they can report agreement to Alabamians. This matter can go on the plus side for Rep. Palmer if there is progress in 2018.

Guns [added 2/12/18]
On December 6, 2017 Rep. Palmer voted for the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act. He reported this in press release Palmer Votes to Defend 2nd Amendment Rights.
I think the United States would be a safer country if guns were outlawed.
While guns are not the only source of happiness in life, it would appear that many Americans receive psychological sustenance from owning gun. This needs to be weighed in the balance of what the United States should do about guns.
Here's what I advocate: Amend the Second Amendment so individual States could pass gun control restrictions as they chose, and a State may prohibit guns from being brought into the state that would violate its restrictions.
Those persons for whom gun ownership was an important source of happiness and well being could live in states that had no gun restrictions.
Those persons for whom gun ownership was unimportant and who thought they would be safer where guns were restricted could live in states with tight gun controls.
Whether a state had tight gun controls or not could affect company decisions about where they wanted to be located. States with lax gun control laws could suffer economically because companies would not locate their facilities in those states in the belief that their employees preferred states with tighter gun controls.
Let that play out as it may, and let people make their choices about how important gun ownership was to them and which states they decided to live in.
For more discussion, see Let's talk guns.

Update 5/26/18
Rep. Palmer made a presentation on April 4th at an Eggs and Issues breakfast forum. "Palmer Serves Up Meaty Topics at Recent Eggs and Issues Forum," Over The Mountain Journal, April 19, 2018, p.10; "Palmer gives Washington update at multi-chamber event," Village Living, May 2018, p. A8.
The articles report that at the forum Rep. Palmer referred to the health care bill that did not pass in 2017 and said there's still enough will among Republicans to make changes to the health care system. Also, Rep. Palmer said Congress is "broke" and it is in need of fixing.
On May 29th, Rep. Palmer is scheduled to give a "Legislative Update from DC" at the City Club in Birmingham, sponsored by the Birmingham Lawyers Chapter of the Federalist Society. https://fedsoc.org/chapters/AL/birmingham-lawyers-chapter. Also Rep. Palmer has tweeted that he will have a Town Hall in Columbiana on May 29th. At these events next Tuesday, Rep. Palmer should address, elaborate, and/or respond regarding one or more of the below items.
A. "Broke" Congress
Since 2014 I have been asking Rep. Palmer the question of whether Congress is "broke." See, e.g., Just answer the question, Gary Palmer. I don't know when Rep. Palmer decided that Congress is "broke," but he has now said it.
In 2016 the Republicans took over the Presidency and Congress, and that did not "fix" things. Democrats are now excited for a Blue Wave in November to take back the House and possibly the Senate. I do not believe a Blue Wave in November will "fix" things.
I'm with Joe Scarborough that it is time to "break apart the two-party duopoly that has kept Washington too divided, too dysfunctional and too directionless for too long." https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/tuesdays-election-proves-it-american-politics-are-a-disaster/2017/11/09/5ed37e84-c599-11e7-afe9-4f60b5a6c4a0_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6ccaae0a1eea
B. Trump
The Republicans in Congress continue abjectly supine regarding Trump. Rep. Palmer has voiced support for Attorney General Sessions, but he continues supine regarding Trump.
C. Health care
Rep. Palmer continues not to give any indication that he has thought about the reasons why he is wrong on health care.
D. Immigration; two sides not talking
Rep. Palmer has given no indication that he is willing to talk to the other political side about immigration, such as along the lines of Joint town hall script. Rep. Palmer seems culpable in the two political sides not talking generally. See Can the two sides talk?









[to be continued]
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)