My Mephetic Life
The Texas GOP Just Nominated a Gay-Hating Conspiracy Theorist for US Senate "No suprise there…”
“Every resident of the U.S. must, by law, be enrolled in an adequate health care plan to cover major health care costs. This requirement would imply a compact between the U.S. government and its citizens: in return for the goverment’s accepting an obligation to devise a market-based system guaranteeing access to care and protecting all families from financial distress due to the cost of an illness, each individual must agree to obtain a minimum level of protection.”The Heritage Foundation: A National Health System for America (PDF)
Now, of course, the Heritage Foundation writes of the mandate:

It Is an Unconstitutional Violation of Personal Liberty and Strikes at the Heart of American Federalism

Heritage is clearly envisioning a national system—so it doesn’t seem concerned about implications for either personal liberty or federalism. How do we reconcile Heritage’s vehement opposition to its own idea?
It’s not so hard. The 1989 piece was written for the purpose of offering an “alternative” to rumblings about a proper single-payer system. It wasn’t an an idea that was actually supposed to happen. And it definitely wasn’t an idea that democrats were supposed to get credit for.
Now that their idea has become a reality, Heritage wants a new alternative.
In case you didn’t learn the first time: Beware of Conservatives Bearing Alternatives.

Every resident of the U.S. must, by law, be enrolled in an adequate health care plan to cover major health care costs. This requirement would imply a compact between the U.S. government and its citizens: in return for the goverment’s accepting an obligation to devise a market-based system guaranteeing access to care and protecting all families from financial distress due to the cost of an illness, each individual must agree to obtain a minimum level of protection.”

The Heritage Foundation: A National Health System for America (PDF)

Now, of course, the Heritage Foundation writes of the mandate:

It Is an Unconstitutional Violation of Personal Liberty and Strikes at the Heart of American Federalism

Heritage is clearly envisioning a national system—so it doesn’t seem concerned about implications for either personal liberty or federalism. How do we reconcile Heritage’s vehement opposition to its own idea?

It’s not so hard. The 1989 piece was written for the purpose of offering an “alternative” to rumblings about a proper single-payer system. It wasn’t an an idea that was actually supposed to happen. And it definitely wasn’t an idea that democrats were supposed to get credit for.

Now that their idea has become a reality, Heritage wants a new alternative.

In case you didn’t learn the first time: Beware of Conservatives Bearing Alternatives.


 Damning report against republican record: Voted 247 times to dismantel environmental and public health laws in 2011. Votes favored oil and gas companies. 

Report shows Republicans voted in favor of stripping environmental laws to help the oil and gas industry.
“Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Henry A. Waxman and Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Ed Markey released a new report that provides an updated analysis of the anti-environment record of the House of Representatives in the 112th Congress. In 2011 and in the first half of 2012, the Republican-controlled House voted 247 times to dismantle environmental and public health protections.
The report, prepared by the Democratic staff of the Energy and Commerce Committee, found that the House averaged one anti-environmental vote for every day the House was in session in 2011 and in the first half of 2012.  Nearly one in five of the 1,100 legislative roll call votes thus far this Congress – 19% – were votes to undermine environmental protection.
The report also found that the oil and gas industry has been the largest beneficiary of this anti-environment record in the House.  The House has voted 109 times on legislation that would enrich the oil and gas industry.  This includes 45 votes to weaken environmental, public health, and safety requirements applicable to the oil industry, 38 votes to prevent deployment of clean energy alternatives, and 12 votes to expedite review of the Keystone XL pipeline.
The full report is available here.A comprehensive list of all anti-environment votes in the 112th Congress is available here. A list of all votes related to the oil and gas industry is available online here._______________________________________________________________________Never has the dividing lines been clearer when it comes to the Democrat and Republican views on Corporations and our environment. The Republicans want Corporations to be completely unfettered in their actions as they impact the overall health and care of our environment. The Republicans consider any environmental considerations to be deemed an impediment toward Corporate interests, namely profits.  Barry A. LevinMMLwww.mobuki.tumblr.com
Damning report against republican record: Voted 247 times to dismantel environmental and public health laws in 2011. Votes favored oil and gas companies.

Report shows Republicans voted in favor of stripping environmental laws to help the oil and gas industry.

“Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Henry A. Waxman and Natural Resources Committee Ranking Member Ed Markey released a new report that provides an updated analysis of the anti-environment record of the House of Representatives in the 112th Congress. In 2011 and in the first half of 2012, the Republican-controlled House voted 247 times to dismantle environmental and public health protections.

The report, prepared by the Democratic staff of the Energy and Commerce Committee, found that the House averaged one anti-environmental vote for every day the House was in session in 2011 and in the first half of 2012.  Nearly one in five of the 1,100 legislative roll call votes thus far this Congress – 19% – were votes to undermine environmental protection.

The report also found that the oil and gas industry has been the largest beneficiary of this anti-environment record in the House.  The House has voted 109 times on legislation that would enrich the oil and gas industry.  This includes 45 votes to weaken environmental, public health, and safety requirements applicable to the oil industry, 38 votes to prevent deployment of clean energy alternatives, and 12 votes to expedite review of the Keystone XL pipeline.

The full report is available here.

A comprehensive list of all anti-environment votes in the 112th Congress is available here.

A list of all votes related to the oil and gas industry is available online here.

_______________________________________________________________________

Never has the dividing lines been clearer when it comes to the Democrat and Republican views on Corporations and our environment. The Republicans want Corporations to be completely unfettered in their actions as they impact the overall health and care of our environment. The Republicans consider any environmental considerations to be deemed an impediment toward Corporate interests, namely profits. 

Barry A. Levin
MML
www.mobuki.tumblr.com