Mediaboss Marketing

The grinding battle over congressional redistricting is drawing to a close. And, contrary to expectations that the process would result in big Republican gains, the final House of Representatives map may well improve somewhat for Democrats.

The main reason is gerrymandering redrawing of district lines for partisan benefit. Republicans built on their existing gerrymanders to try to expand their House advantage, but Democrats fired back even more powerfully with gerrymanders of their own.

Basically, Democrats saved themselves by resorting to a tactic theyve previously denounced as not only unfair but downright unethical House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called gerrymandering unjust and deeply dangerous in 2019. But in the absence of national reforms banning the practice, refusing to gerrymander would have meant effective unilateral disarmament, ceding the GOP a significant advantage in the battle for control over the House.

Redistricting has proceeded like a tug of war. As state legislatures, judges, and commissions have approved new maps, creating more safe or swing districts in various states, the underlying partisanship of the median House district has been pulled in one direction, and then the other. The most powerful pulls came from either state legislatures that gerrymandered, or state courts that struck down certain gerrymandered maps, as this graphic shows:

This cycles Republican gerrymanders pulled the median district (which already leaned 2 percentage points to the right) another point further right. But state court rulings striking down North Carolina and Ohio maps effectively wiped out most of that net gain.

Meanwhile, Democratic gerrymanders in states like New York and Illinois pulled the median district nearly 3 points leftward, so it was actually close to neutral. (Joe Bidens margin in the median district would have nearly matched his national popular vote margin in the 2020 presidential election.) But an aggressive gerrymander in GOP-controlled Florida could soon shift things right again, if approved. Other state court rulings could shift things further, particularly in New York, where Democrats gerrymander is under scrutiny.

Currently, it looks like there will be close to an equal number of districts leaning left and right of the national average, with a slight edge to Republicans in the median district.

Now, its entirely possible, perhaps likely, that Democrats will still lose badly in House elections this fall the party has a small majority, President Biden is unpopular, and the historical pattern is for the incumbents party to struggle in the midterms. But unlike much of the previous decade, the underlying map may be at least somewhat less biased in Republicans favor.

The last national redistricting happened after Republicans won sweeping victories in the 2010 midterms, giving them control over many state legislatures and governorships. They used that power to draw lines that gave them a big advantage in the House.

By 2012, when that last redistricting was finished, the median House district leaned nearly 6 percentage points further toward Republicans presidentially than that years national popular vote. The results were clear: Obama won nationally by about 4 points in 2012, but he lost the median district by about 2 points. Whats more, 55 percent of the overall House districts (240 out of 435) leaned Republican, per the New York Times. That sizable advantage helped Republicans hold the House in 2012 despite Obamas national win.

But over the course of the ensuing decade, that GOP advantage significantly eroded. Changes in demographic voting patterns made many suburban districts less safe for Republicans. Meanwhile, courts struck down Republican gerrymanders in states like Florida, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. By the time the 2020 results were in, the median House district still leaned toward Republicans, but only by 2 points, rather than 6 points. And about 52 percent of districts (228 out of 435) had a Republican lean.

That was real progress for Democrats on reducing the bias of the House, but it was accompanied by disappointment. First, though Democrats performed well in the 2018 and 2020 elections, they fell short of retaking several key governorships and legislatures, meaning Republicans would have the power to gerrymander again in these states. Second, the party had hoped the Supreme Court would declare partisan gerrymandering unconstitutional, banning it nationwide, but Trumps appointees moved to the court to the right and the conservative majority ruled otherwise. Third, efforts to pass a nationwide gerrymandering ban through the Democrat-controlled Congress under Biden were stymied by the Senate filibuster.

So as 2021 began, Republicans had the power of line-drawing in several swing states, as well as red states where they hadnt yet maxed out their advantage. The GOP still had an advantage in the House map, and now it seemed they could entrench and expand it.

There are varying ways to estimate the underlying partisanship of a district or an overall map, but for now, Ill focus mainly on a simple one: how the district voted in the most recent presidential race, compared to the national popular vote. (The New York Timess Nate Cohn used this metric in his own recent analysis.)

In 2020, Biden won the popular vote by a margin of 4.4 percentage points. If he won by more than that in a given district, Im calling that a Democratic-leaning district. If he won by less than that, or lost the district, Im calling it a Republican-leaning district. This metric lets us look at the partisan lean for the median House district (the one necessary to give a party a majority), and also measure how many districts lean toward Democrats or Republicans overall.

Focusing on the presidential numbers wont be a perfect guide to House results. House candidates run with their own strengths and weaknesses, and some manage to defy their districts underlying partisan lean. But there have been fewer such candidates lately in 2020, only 16 out of 435 House victors won a district where the opposite partys presidential candidate also won.

Other analysts may have slightly different specific calculations for the maps overall lean. For this cycle, Ive used the Cook Political Report (an invaluable resource for anyone closely following elections), which calculated the presidential results in each new district. As an alternative, Cook also uses a metric called the PVI (Partisan Voting Index), which incorporates the past two presidential elections. FiveThirtyEight has its own partisan lean score. The Economists G. Elliott Morris argues it can be most predictive to look at the presidential election prior to the most recent one. Still, these different estimates will probably be roughly similar overall.

Lets start by looking at how Republican gerrymandering attempts fared this cycle. The GOP did indeed try to expand their advantage in key states, but their overall impact was hampered by a few factors.

In the finalized maps so far, then, Republicans have ended up with just a handful of new districts leaning in their favor. But thats compared to a map that was already favorable to them, and they managed to preserve or strengthen preexisting pro-GOP maps in key states.

However, one other state may soon give them a big assist: Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) and GOP state legislative leaders have been at odds for months on just how much the House map should tilt in Republicans favor, with DeSantis pushing for a more extreme gerrymander. And just this week, DeSantis appeared to win: The legislature said it would approve whatever maps he wanted. Florida alone could move the median districts margin one percentage point to the right.

Democrats, meanwhile, really went to town with gerrymanders of their own in states they controlled:

That amounts to wiping out 12 Republican districts and creating 11 Democratic districts an enormous impact on the overall map.

One caveat is that some analysts think Democrats may have spread themselves a bit too thin in some of these maps by creating several districts that lean Democratic, but not strongly so, such that Republicans could very plausibly win in these areas in a strong GOP year. This is the case particularly in Illinois, Nevada, and New Mexico. Still, in a Republican wave year, the GOP is quite likely to win control of the House regardless of what happens in these states. But the lean-Democratic districts tip the balance when theres a close national contest.

There were also states in which redistricting was handled by commissions (rather than state legislatures), or where power was divided. For overall partisan balance, these proved to be close to a wash for instance, commissions eliminated a Republican-leaning district in both California and Michigan, but created a Republican-leaning district in both Arizona and Colorado. (Some Democrats are rueing the lost opportunities to gerrymander Colorado and Virginia, states where they had full control in 2021, because redistricting authority had been given to commissions there.)

Overall, then, the 2022 redistricting wars turned out to come down to a battle of the gerrymanders and Democrats ended up being more impactful.

Democrats have spent the past decade deriding gerrymandering as unethical and immoral, and trying to get it banned across the country.

Yet the plain reality is that, if they had decided not to do any of it, Republicans would not only have retained their existing advantage in the House map, they would have expanded it.

Though some states havent finalized their maps yet and these numbers can change, its currently looking like around 218 districts will have voted more for Trump than the national average in 2020, and 217 districts will have voted more for Biden (per the Cook Political Reports numbers). Furthermore, Bidens margin of victory in the median district would be about 1 percentage point lower than his margin of victory nationally. Thats not perfectly balanced, but its pretty balanced meaning the map itself will likely only swing outcomes in the very closest of elections.

Contrast this to a scenario where Democrats agreed to unilaterally disarm and do no gerrymandering or where the blue states tied their own hands by adopting serious anti-gerrymandering reforms.

Assuming something close to the 2020 maps remained in these states, around 230 of the overall new districts would have voted more for Trump than the national average, and the median district would have leaned nearly 4 points to the right of the national presidential popular vote.

A similar dynamic has arisen with other good-government reform issues, like campaign finance. Democrats spent a decade condemning conservative big money and dark money, and trying without success to rein in their influence. But the party thought it would be foolish to take the high ground by forswearing those practices. And eventually, by 2020, they arguably ended up mastering them more expertly than Republicans.

Republicans believe Democrats appeals to ethics were always situational. They point out that Democrats only began to complain about gerrymandering so loudly once Republicans got the chance to do so much of it in 2010, and that Democratic state parties have often been eager to gerrymander when theyve had the power to do so.

Still, all this does get at the difficulty of making reforms stick without a national solution. Theres a prisoners dilemma aspect to gerrymandering, in which agreeing not to get your hands dirty may well just mean agreeing to lose.

For Democrats genuinely concerned about good-government reforms, that poses a challenge. Without a national solution, is it worth it to try to keep reforming gerrymandering in blue-leaning states?

Or, if you do so, are you just a sucker?

Read this article:
Democrats gerrymandered more effectively than Republicans this cycle - Vox.com

Theres no way to sugarcoat it. The news for Pennsylvania Democrats is bad.

Both Gov. Tom Wolfs and President Joe Bidens approval ratings have taken another hit in the most Franklin & Marshall College poll.

About in one in three (33 percent)respondents to the poll of 785 registered voters said they believed Biden was doing an excellent or good job as president. The 46th presidents approval rating was similar to former President Donald Trumps and lower than President Barack Obamas approval ratings among Pennsylvania voters at the same point during their respective terms.

More, Bidens approvals ratings declined from 78 percent to 61 percent among Democrats, from 38 percent to 24 percent among independents, from 79 percent to 64 percent among liberals, and from 50 percent to 42 percent among moderates since August.

Wolf fared just as badly, with little more than a third of respondents (38 percent) saying hes doing an excellent or good job as governor. In July 2020, at the height of the pandemic, a majority of respondents (52 percent) answered the same way, according to the poll. Wolfs approval ratings were lower among all partisan groups than in July 2020, particularly among Democrats (78 percent) and independents (57 percent), pollsters said.

Zooming out, more than one in three respondents (36 percent) said they were worse off financiallythan they were a year ago, which was about the same as last months F&M poll. A quarter of Democrats (26 percent) and a plurality of independents (40 percent) also said they were worse off financially.

Pa.s 2022 primary is a race for the base of the base. Why thats a problem | Friday Morning Coffee

Only one in four (29%) respondents told pollsters they believe the state is headed in the right direction. Three-quarters of voters (75%) who said theyre they are worse off financially this year than last also say the state is on the wrong track, pollsters said. Unsurprisingly, concerns about the economy (21%), including unemployment and personal finances, topped the voters list of concerns.

In more bad news, more of the states registered voters said theyd support a Republican candidate for Congress, 44 percent Republican versus 39 percent Democrat, pollsters said. Thats a retreat from April 2018, the year Democrats retook control of the U.S. House, when Democrats held a seven point advantage in Congressional preference, 42 percent to 35 percent.

Wolfs numbers must be especially troubling for Attorney General Josh Shapiro, who is running unopposed for the Democratic Partys gubernatorial nomination.

Shapiro has backed most of Wolfs proposals, so hell have to walk a tightrope between supporting the governor and coming up with his proposals.

However, there is some good news out there for Shapiro and other Democrats running for office in 2022. They come from the results of F&Ms October 2021 poll, which focused more on issues.

According to that poll, 47 percent of registered voters identify themselves as Democrats compared to 39 percent who call themselves Republicans.

GOP candidates for governor and the U.S. Senate are eager to tie themselves to former President Donald Trump, but the poll showed that 56 percent of registered voters had an unfavorable opinion of Trump.

F&M poll shows Fetterman leads in Democratic U.S. Senate primary, Republican race remains wide open

Only 39 percent were favorable to Trump, down from a high of 44 percent in June of 2021.

Also, the poll showed only 34 percent of respondents considered themselves Trump Republicans, down from 50 percent in June of 2021. Forty-six percent labeled themselves as traditional Republicans, up from 30 percent in June of 2021.

Meanwhile, the poll showed that 88 percent of respondents said it would be bad for democracy in the U.S. if the events that took place at the capitol on Jan. 6 happened after every election. Only five percent said it would be good.

The poll also showed support for many Democrat proposals. More laws regulating guns were backed by a 54-42 percent margin.

Those not owning guns outnumbered those owning guns 58-42 percent.

The poll showed 36 percent backing legal abortion under any circumstances, 51 percent backing legal abortions under certain circumstances, and 11 percent in favor of making abortion illegal in all circumstances.

Eighty-one percent oppose the recently passed Texas law which allows private citizens to file lawsuits against anyone performing or helping another person get an abortion. Only 14 percent favored the law.

The number of those favoring making legal under any circumstances was the highest percentage since the question was first asked in June of 2019. Back then only 18 percent favored making abortion legal under any circumstance.

Finally, the poll showed that 60 percent of respondents favor legalizing marijuana. This could be a helpful issue for Democrats next fall as Shapiro along with the top party candidates for U.S. Senate, Conor Lamb, and John Fetterman favor legalization while its widely opposed by the GOP candidates in those races.

The numbers show strength for legalization in almost every region of the state. Philadelphia led the way with 83 percent in favor. Northeast was next at 70 percent, followed by Southeast and Allegheny at 67 and 56 percent, respectively.

In Central Pennsylvania, there were 49 in favor and 44 against while there were 49 in favor in Southwest Pennsylvania and 48 percent against.

The only region against legalization was the Northwest where 49 percent were against legalization, and 46 percent were for it.Its interesting that state Sen. Mike Regan, R-York, has come out in favor of legalizing marijuana for recreation.

Regan, a former U.S. Marshal, who chairs the Senate Law and Justice Committee, said he had seen saw organized crime and drug cartels get rich from selling unregulated marijuana during his law enforcement career. He said it would be much better if the marijuana could be regulated with the proceeds going to Pennsylvania residents.

Further, Regan said Pennsylvania needed to act with New York and New Jerseys recent moves to legalize marijuana while other surrounding states of Delaware, Maryland, and Ohio are discussing it. He said that will undoubtedly lead to cross-border sales with Pennsylvanians contributing to the tax base of those states.

Its estimated that legalizing marijuana could bring in between half a million to a million dollars in new revenue for the state if its done soon.

Regan has circulated a bill that would allow marijuana use by adults 21 and older. He intends to include language in it to decriminalize marijuana and seek to expunge the records of those with non-violent low-level cannabis charges.

The only Republican senator to come out for legalizing marijuana, Regan said he will work to rally support from his fellow senators.

Regan told PennLive.com that when he was serving in the House of Representatives and medical marijuana legislation was first proposed, that, the nos were more visceral than the nos are for this. And I think part of that is because of medical marijuana. People have seen there are 600,000 users out there and the world hasnt imploded. I think thats important.

People are starting to realize the polling on this, Regan added. Its 60-plus percent across the state. I think some people who think they maybe would receive negative feedback from their constituents are now maybe thinking they wont.

See the rest here:
Democrats can win on the issues. But they need to sell them | Mark O'Keefe - Pennsylvania Capital-Star

The Brooklyn Democratic Party submitted paperwork with at least two forged signatures to the city Board of Elections as part of a bid to knock fellow Democrats off June primary ballots, a grassroots political organization alleges.

On Thursday, Rep Your Block, a volunteer organization, lodged a complaint with the board, citing sworn affidavits from two registered Democrats in Brownsville and East New York who said the signatures on ballot challenges to candidates filed in their names werent theirs.

The filing of these objections with your agency amounts to the criminal act of filing a false instrument, the complaint to the BOE states. These objections and any resulting specifications should be dismissed by your agency.

Rep Your Block, which aims to get more residents to participate in the boroughs Democratic party, also communicated to THE CITY concerns about the validity of at least a half dozen other signatures submitted on formal objections to candidates ballot petitions filed with the board.

They point to a similarity in the handwriting among the signatures, obvious discrepancies between the submitted signatures and voter signatures already on file at the Board of Election, and even misspellings of some of the names.

We just want to be a part of our own political party. It shouldnt be that hard. And to have to go to a criminal end to block us is just shocking, said Maggie Moore, campaign director for Rep Your Block. Its really, really unfortunate and disappointing.

The flagged challenges were among dozens linked to the Brooklyn Democratic Party targeting the ballot petitions of nearly 200 candidates who are seeking party positions.

Both opponents and allies of the party leadership described the wave of objections to candidates, mostly for low-level party posts, as part of an effort to consolidate power under county party chair Rodneyse Bichotte, who is also a state Assembly member.

The organizations attorney, Ali Najmi, said the alleged fraud constitutes a crime and calls into question the validity of all the challenges submitted by the Brooklyn Democratic Party which he asked the Board of Elections to toss.

Here theyve committed actual fraud on multiple ones, said Najmi, an election lawyer. They should strike them all.

The ballot challenges in question all listed Anthony Genovesi Jr., an attorney who serves as law chair for the Brooklyn Democrats, as a contact person.

Genovesi Jr., who is also a partner at Abrams Fensterman, a law firm with close ties to Mayor Eric Adams and the Brooklyn Democratic Party, did not respond to an email seeking comment. A call transferred via Genovesis office directory was disconnected after a reporter for THE CITY identified himself to the man who answered.

Adams chief of staff, Frank Carone, is also a former partner at Abrams Fensterman and the former law chair of the Brooklyn Dems.

Bob Liff, a spokesperson for the Brooklyn Democratic Party, said in a statement on Friday after this storys publication: Claims that the Party knowingly filed a false instrument are fallacious, and frankly libelous. Any allegations of fraudulent activity should be investigated through the proper legal channels.

Michael J. Ryan, executive director of the citys BOE, did not respond to requests for comment.

John Booker is one of the two Brooklyn residents who swears his signature was forged on ballot objection forms.

The 66-year-old makes a living selling hats, handmade bead strings and other knickknacks outside the Broadway Junction train hub. After years of pushing a cart with his merchandise, Booker injured a finger on his right hand, making it difficult for him to write.

So when the street vendor saw his name written in elegant cursive on a ballot objection form, he knew it was a fraud, he said.

I couldnt possibly sign this neatly, Booker told THE CITY on a hot afternoon standing next to his table. My signature is more of a scribble.

Booker insisted that he did not and could not have accidentally signed the form on April 6, the date that appears next to the signature. He said he is always careful about what he signs, and would have no interest in a blind effort to kick fellow residents off the ballot.

Because I dont know these people. I dont know what they represent, what their platform is, he said. So I wouldnt, you know, I just would never do this. April 6th? Wasnt that like last week? No, no, believe me, this is fraud.

The other voter who signed an affidavit stating that the signature on the petition challenge wasnt his is an 85-year-old retired maintenance worker who originally hails from Guyana, and who asked that his name not be published.

He confirmed to THE CITY that an electronic copy of the signature shown to him by a reporter wasnt his.

Moore, of Rep Your Block, said she found something fishy among the objections in the 55th Assembly district that includes Brownsville and East New York because all six of the Rep Your Block-aided candidates petitions for county committee had been challenged.

That district has 208 county committee seats in all for the coming term.

Challenges of petitions for those posts are often difficult to secure because the objector needs to be a registered Democrat who lives in the same small election district typically the size of a few blocks as the candidate.

Najmi said he commissioned a former NYPD member now working as a private investigator to track down some of the alleged objectors. The investigator found that two, including Booker, had registered their voting address at a self-storage site near Broadway Junction.

Booker told THE CITY he uses the storage site as his mailing address.

The objection signature submitted in Bookers name was one of nearly 70 residents signatures filed last week with the Board of Elections and linked to Genovesi Jr., targeting nearly 200 Democratic candidates for offices across the borough.

About half of those political hopefuls are running to join the ranks of the roughly 4,000 Democratic county committee members, who serve for two-year terms as party representatives.

While the positions are unpaid, county committee members serve critical functions that shape the party agenda and influence which Democrats get elected into state offices in Brooklyn.

They help pick nominees in special elections that take place following sudden vacancies in the state legislature, often giving county-backed candidates a leg up by putting their names on the party line in low-turnout elections in a borough where Democratic voters dominate.

Historically, the Kings County Democratic Committee has been able to maintain significant majority control of county committee members, limiting the ability for dissident opinions to be heard.

But as groups like Rep Your Block have boosted their organizing work, and with majority control of county committee members increasingly up for grabs, those races have become a key point of struggle inside the Democratic party.

In a 13-hour Zoom meeting held in December 2020, for the first time in recent memory a vote by more than 2,000 county committee members swung in favor of reforms pushed for by dissident members of the Kings County Democratic Committee including rule changes intended to decentralize power within the party.

That rare victory was short-lived, however, after party leaders nullified the vote in a continuation of the adjourned meeting a week later. A judge tossed a lawsuit challenging the reversal based on a technicality.

The petition challenges are just part of a ground game by the partys top leadership to push out critics. Last month, Bichottes communications and legislative aide at the state Assembly, Sabrina Rezzy, petitioned to run for the post of district leader in Bay Ridge despite living miles away in Brooklyn Heights.

While running for the seat out of district is allowed because of pending changes to district lines, the move was viewed by incumbent district leader Joanne Seminara as an attempt to punish her for sometimes bucking the partys wishes.

Its really an obvious move by County to choose a district leader for our district, which is backwards, Seminara told THE CITY earlier this month. Its the people of our district who should choose their district leader.

Seminaras petitions were among those challenged in the batch linked to Genovesi.

Bichotte herself challenged petitions for two candidates in her 42nd Assembly District, including an opponent for her district and legislative seats, Victor Jordan.

Targeting the Opposition

Miriam Robertson, a county committee member from Brownsville, was taken aback on Thursday when THE CITY informed her that a ballot objection filed against her included an alleged forgery.

You just chose somebody, put their signature, and said Oh, we object!, she said.

The objection petition reminded the 57-year-old of why she was inspired to first run for county committee back in 2020: the feeling that people in back rooms were making the real decisions.

At her day job running a cultural center inside the Stone Avenue Library, Robertson could help her fellow residents find their voices: acting in plays, performing in jazz concerts and producing stories in writing workshops.

But outside, when she would attend community and school council meetings, she saw proposals about public renovations, city contracts and space decisions in schools being rubber-stamped.

So when a friend of a friend reached out about running for county committee, saying Brownsville needed more grassroots representation in the Democratic party, she was in. She collected signatures and won her election.

As a county committee member, Robertson had to participate in long Zoom meetings where she and fellow members voted on new rules proposals. Despite how chaotic and tiring it could feel, she says it was important to participate.

I believe when we are really sitting at the table, being part of decision-making policies, it really does improve the quality of life, she said. You begin to see the changes in the community.

Though showing up to meetings was hardly a radical course of action, Robertson says she believes the party moved against her because they prefer members who sit back and follow orders.

They want to keep things the status quo, she said. They dont want change. They say they want change, but at the end of the day they want things to stay the way they are.

The apparent forgery, she said, added insult to injury, assuming that people in Brownsville wouldnt notice.

You think were a bunch of idiots, that we dont know anything. Were so wrapped in our daily lives that, Oh I dont have time to worry about that, she said. And thats why we got to change the culture. We have to stop saying, Oh thats just the way things are. No, thats not how things are. We have to stop and take a stand somewhere.

Sign up and get the latest stories from THE CITY delivered to you each morning

See the original post here:
Brooklyn Democratic Party Filed Forged Signatures to Knock Rivals Off Ballots, Fellow Dems Allege - THE CITY

DENVER (CBS4) Imagine being able to go online and shop around for health care like you do anything else. Under a federal rule that took effect last year, hospitals should be posting the prices they negotiate with insurers online, but many have dragged their feet.

Some state lawmakers say if fines dont get their attention, maybe litigation will.

Representatives Patrick Neville, a Republican, and Daneya Esgar, a Democrat, are sponsors of a bill thats aimed at hospitals that have refused to post prices to protect profits greater than the federal penalties they face.

Their bill would allow people to sue and have their bill dismissed if, on the day they received care, the hospital wasnt in compliance with the federal rule. The hospital would also have to pay a penalty and the patients attorney fees.

Neville says, After three or four lawsuits, theyll all come into compliance and well probably never use this bill again.

Look no further than Mason Kochel of Avon to understand how a little price transparency can make a huge difference, in his case, a $15,000 difference. David Kochel says his son went to an emergency room with a severe allergic reaction and left with an Epi-pen that, he says, the hospital posted online for $600, but billed him for $15,000.

It was outrageous, egregious, maybe fraudulent. They called it a glitch in the billing system but thousands of Coloradans every year experience glitches like this.

Removing the secrecy around hospital pricing is one of the few issues where Republicans and Democrats are on the same page. The federal rule was written by the Trump administration and implemented by the Biden administration.

Neville says price transparency is the best way to drive up competition among hospitals and drive down prices for all of us.

This also gives employers the ability to go back and look and shop and say man, my employees are going to be paying a lot less if I choose this policy or this hospital so its like true negotiating power for employers, even the labor groups, the state government could probably save a ton of money with this, said Neville.

Kochel supports the bill that he hopes makes hospitals think twice before billing 15,000 for an Epi-pen, In our case, the story has a happy ending. Thats not the case for most Coloradans, many of who would not know how to go about challenging the bill and many of whom would have just paid it, so I think its really important that hospitals are held accountable.

The Colorado Hospital Association says it supports transparency but the bill, it says, needs work including a clear definition of what it means for a hospital to be in non-compliance. It argues federal regulators, not the courts, are best positioned to decide that.

The Hospital Association says based on a survey it conducted, 90% of hospitals here are in compliance with the federal rule. Deciphering the data, however, can be difficult, if not impossible, for consumers.

A federal rule taking effect this summer will enable tech companies to aggregate the data and develop apps that allow people to easily compare prices for individual procedures.

Neville suggests that will be a game-changer, Theres a lot of companies out there developing apps, so just like you can go to Gasbuddy.com and find the best gas station, youre going to have different companies out there developing these apps so, if you want to go shop for service, you can hop on there and see oh, if I drive another 10 miles I can save $3,000 on my MRI and guess whats going to happen? Youre going to go save $3,000 and then the company thats charging $3,000 more is going to look at losing all that business and say I need to lower my prices.

Neville says one study found 30% of hospital costs are negotiated with insurance companies and 20% of insurance company costs are negotiated with hospitals.

The bill passed the House Health and Insurance Committee unanimously and is now headed to the floor.

More:
Republicans And Democrat Want To Empower Patients To Sue Hospitals That Dont Post Prices - CBS Denver

MUNCIE, Ind. Special Judge Gail Dues, of Jay County Superior Court, granted a motion Thursday to dismiss an appeal from three would-be Democrat precinct committeemen candidates over their removal from the May 3 Delaware County primary ballot.

According to Ralph E. Dowling, the attorney representing the three,her ruling camea little more than an hour before he was set to argue the case at a hearing that had been repeatedly rescheduled. Later Thursday, Dowling filed a motion to reconsider the dismissal.

The motion to dismiss the appeal contended the election board was within its rights toremoveHeather Williams, Jayne Beilke and Molly K. Robertson from the ballot at a Feb. 20board hearing, and that the issue was now moot, because early voting in the primary has already started.

Election 2022: Find more local primary election coverage here

Delaware CountyDemocratic PartyChairman Ana Quirk Hunter had asked the board to remove thethree candidates based onmatters such as errors on election filing forms, address changes and lack of proofregarding past voting..

Hunter had originally requested 16 committeeman candidates be removed. All of them, Dowling said, were members of a group called theNew Democrat Coalition, which is opposed by the establishment wing of the county party organization.Nine of thosecandidates were kept on the ballot after candidates discussedtheir individual cases before the board,made up of sitting Delaware County ClerkRick Spangler, Republican PartyrepresentativePete Drumm andDemocratic Party RepresentativeAshley Nichols.

Democratic precinct committeemen are selected by Democratic primary voters to help run the county party organization and elect the county central committee.

The appeal on behalf ofthree of the people removed from the ballotwas filed weeks ago in Delaware County Circuit Court 3, where Judge LindaRalu Wolf presides. Dowling said Wolf had recused herself from the case, which involves local political and elected officials. The appeal went before two other area judges; one was rejected by the defense and another chose not to hear it,before the case camebefore Dues.

Earlier: Several would-be Democrat committeemen axed from Delaware County ballot

Donald K. McClellan, the attorney who is representing theelection board, said he made his motion to dismiss as soon as he reasonably could ahead of the hearing set by Dues for Thursday afternoon.

In his motion to reconsider, Dowling noted the hearing had been set for 1 p.m. Thursday.

"At 11:22 a.m., Respondents filed a motion to dismiss the appeal," Dowling wrote in his motionafter discovering the decision. "…At some point before noon, the Court issued an order dismissing the appeal. It is currently 12:08 p.m. and the undersigned has not been served a copy of the order and has learned of it only because court staff was courteous enough to call to tell us the hearing, set less than an hour from now, was not taking place."

Dowling said the dismissal was made without giving his clients any chance to respond to the motion to dismiss.

"The dismissal violated the Petitioner's due process rights under the Indiana and U.S. constitution," his motion read.

McClellan said that little in this case has gone as usual, given the time constraints and the effort to find a judge.

STAY INFORMED AND SUPPORT LOCAL JOURNALISM: Subscribe today using the link at the top of this page.

Dowling argues that the respondents delayed the case.

"When the first judge on this case recused herself, Mr. McClellan refused to return a call… to discuss (or) agree on a special judge, which led to an eight-day delay in the appointment of a special judge, until April 1."

A hearing was then set for April 5, he said, but the attorney forthe election board waiteduntil April 4 to request a change of judge. Then Judge Dale Arnett, Randolph County Superior Court, declined jurisdiction in the case on Tuesday, sending the matter to Dues on Thursday.

"Having successfully delayed the hearing from April 4 to April 14, Respondents now claim that April 14 is too late for relief," the motion to reconsider said.

In addition to the issue of the appeal having to be considered after voting has begun, McClellan says Dowling's argument in his appeal seeks to have the court essentially redo what the election board already did, which is considerwhether the people involved should be placed on the ballot.

An appeal of the matter, he said, shouldbe based on whether the election board correctly followed its procedures, not on the final determinations it made.

The appeal document states efforts of the New Democratic Coalition are to rid the county organization of "insidiouscorruption" and said the decisions made by the election board were "unreasonable, lacked factual support, and were inconsistent with the law,"

Dowling is asking the court to rescind its dismissal and set an immediate hearing on the merits of the appeal.

He said he doesn't know how soon to expect a response but the judge would have 30 days to study his motion. He also said that, ideally, the matter could be resolved before Election Day.

It mightbe, Dowling said, that the Democratic primary election would have to be conducted again just in the three precincts involved,which he characterized asan expensive remedy.

David Penticuff is the local government reporter at the Star Press. Contact him at dpenticuff@gannett.com.

See more here:
Without hearing, judge nixes appeal of Democratic reform candidates struck from ballot - The Star Press