Mediaboss Marketing

Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device.

4

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

ENGLEWOOD, Colo. - Colorados Republicans have a new state party chair.

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

Associated Press 8:56 p.m. MT April 1, 2017

Jeff Hays was elected the new chair of the Colorado GOP.(Photo: Jeff Hays)

ENGLEWOOD, Colo. - Colorados Republicans have a new state party chair.

Jeff Hays, a former El Paso County GOP chairman, was elected Saturday to lead the state party for the next two years, including the 2018 governors race.

Hays succeeds Steve House, who announced in January he wouldnt seek another term.

The Gazette reportsthat Hays defeated George Athanasopoulos at a Republican State Central Committee meeting in Englewood.

Hays won endorsements from most prominent Republicans, while Athanasopoulos campaigned against what he called party elites.

Athanasopoulos unsuccessfully challenged Democratic U.S. Rep. Ed Perlmutter last year.

More:Colorado lawmakers react to health care bill failure

Read or Share this story: http://noconow.co/2nss3Ij

1:44

4:18

1:41

0:41

3:50

2:02

0:56

1:14

0:52

2:10

0) { %>

0) { %>

Read more from the original source:
Colorado Republicans elect new state chair - The Coloradoan

Millions of Americans who rely on the Affordable Care Act for their insurance coverage dodged a bullet last week when Republican infighting killed a bill by the House GOP leadership to repeal and replace the health care law. So, thankfully, did Planned Parenthood. Embedded in the bill was a provision to bar federal funding temporarily for this well-regarded and crucial health care provider, which the GOP has tried, obsessively, to dismantle for years.

If only that were the end of it. Sadly, congressional Republicans may take another go at defunding Planned Parenthood in the omnibus spending bill (formally known as a continuing resolution) that must pass by April 28 to keep the government running.

So lets remind legislators, again, how short-sighted and harmful it would be to single out Planned Parenthood, not in an effort to improve health care, but in an attempt to punish it for also providing legal and safe abortions none of which are financed with federal dollars. (Congress routinely prohibits federal dollars from being spent on abortions.) And abortions comprise a tiny fraction of the services the organizations clinics perform; Planned Parenthood estimates that abortions represent only 3 percent of the care provided by the organization.

About 2.5 million people women and men are seen annually at Planned Parenthood clinics. They come for breast examinations and cervical cancer screenings, testing and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases and infections, contraception and family planning, urinary tract infection treatments and other primary care services. Many of the clinics patients are lower-income, and almost all of the federal funding that Planned Parenthood receives is through health programs aimed at low-income Americans: Medicaid and Title X Family Planning grants.

Planned Parenthood clinics in California get nearly 1.5 million patient visits each year. To help pay for those services, the organizations California branch received about $260 million in Medicaid reimbursements in the fiscal year ending in June 2016. Nationwide, the organization got about half a billion dollars in federal funding in the year ending in June 2015, the vast majority of it from Medicaid as reimbursements for services its clinics provided.

A February letter to lawmakers signed by nearly two dozen national associations of health care professionals and public health groups emphasized how essential Planned Parenthood clinics are to the network of health care providers in the country: More than 50 percent of Planned Parenthood health centers are in areas with health professional shortages, rural or medically underserved areas, the letter states. Policies that would exclude Planned Parenthood from public health funding would hurt millions of patients and undermine health care access in communities across the country.

Nor is the public crying out for Congress to freeze out Planned Parenthood. In fact, recent polls suggest that most voters support the organization and want its funding to continue. A Quinnipiac University poll conducted this month showed that 61 percent of registered voters opposed cutting federal aid for Planned Parenthood. (The number went up to 80 percent when it was explained that federal funding for the provider cannot be used for abortions.) According to Planned Parenthood officials, supporters made more than 122,000 phone calls to members of Congress over the last several months and organized more than 1,000 events across the country to demonstrate their support.

Finally, the effort to penalize Planned Parenthood through the continuing resolution seems sure to trigger another dysfunctional Washington meltdown that could hurt Republicans politically. Senate Democrats wont abide a move to defund Planned Parenthood any more than they did the House GOPs efforts to defund Obamacare in 2013. If the House GOP insists on including Planned Parenthood in the resolution, the near-certain result is another standoff that shuts down non-essential government services, to the detriment of the party that picks the fight. Thats you, Republicans.

The test for House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., is whether he can lead strong-willed members away from this trap, or if hell be led by them straight into it. One might say its a test for President Trump as well, but its hard to tell where he is on the issue. Over the weekend he blasted the intransigent Republicans in the House Freedom Caucus for having saved Planned Parenthood and Obamacare by withholding support from the leaderships repeal-and-replace bill. But on Monday his spokesman wouldnt say whether Trump wanted to take another crack at Planned Parenthood in the continuing resolution.

If hes as savvy as he claims to be, hed recognize a doomed mission when he sees it. Republicans should do the right thing and stop their crusade against Planned Parenthood. In the end, there is no political, economic, or public health gain to continuing it.

This editorial editorial appeared in the March 28 edition of the Los Angeles Times.

Read more here:
Los Angeles Times editorial: Note to Republicans: Drop the crusade against Planned Parenthood - Mason City Globe Gazette

There are basically two schools of thought on the purpose of the tax code. One is to raise revenue to fund the essential functions of government, whatever those may be. The other is to use taxes as a carrot and a stick, rewarding behaviors the government finds desirable and punishing those that it doesnt. Americas founders, the architects of the original tax code, would have found this second function, in which taxes are used for social engineering, unthinkable and against the very nature of the limited-government power structure they proposed. And yet controlling peoples behavior has become an increasingly important function of tax policy, despite its implications for individual freedom and independence.

This is the rationale behind the soda tax. It is asserted that America is undergoing an obesity epidemic, an insulting use of the term that falsely analogizes personal lifestyle choice to disease. It is therefore assumed that it is the responsibility of the government to cure the disease of people consuming too much sugar and fat.

This used to be an idea that was only proposed by meddling Democrats who think their mission in life is to tell other people what to do. Sadly, that appears to be the case no longer, as a soda tax proposal taking hold in West Virginia is being pushed by Republican lawmakers.

The proposed tax would charge five cents for every 16.9 fluid ounces of soda sold, a tax that would be split between consumers and retailers depending on how strong the demand. Five cents may not sound like much extra to pay, but consider that it represents a 400 percent increase on the rate at which soda is currently taxed. Additionally, two other bills have been introduced in the West Virginia legislature that would increase soda taxes a further one and two cents respectively.

One could argue that these incremental increases in price wont actually have an effect on consumer choices, but both logic and empirical evidence contradict that claim. At any price, there are presumably some people who are already paying as much as they are willing to pay for soda. Increase that price, even a little bit, and they will substitute a more affordable beverage. It is these marginal consumers who account for the changes in the quantity of goods demanded when prices change. Evidence in cities where soda taxes have been specifically levied has shown us that higher prices do result in less soda sold.

For example, in Philadelphia, where the government imposed a 1.5 cent-per-ounce tax on sodas, distributors reported a drop in sales of between 30 and 50 percent that would potentially force layoffs. If this sales shock seems disproportionate to the amount of tax levied, its important to remember that there is a psychological component to consumer behavior as well as a financial one. Where I live, in Washington, D.C., the government levies a five-cent tax on plastic bags used at grocery stores. Almost everyone can afford an extra nickel added to their grocery bill, but many people have changed their behavior anyway, not because of the money, but because they dont like the idea of being taxed any more than they already are. The same phenomenon is no doubt in effect in Philadelphia and would be evident in West Virginia as well.

There are lots of reasons to oppose a soda tax. Personally, I object to a central authority trying to modify citizen behavior, as if we are rats in a laboratory cage. But for those more pragmatic than I, another objection is the cost to the economy of making consumption or, to be more accurate, the production that drives consumption more difficult. Even without changes in consumption, the proposed tax would suck $75 million out of the economy each year, according to the Tax Foundation. Combine that with the layoffs and general decline in economic activity, and youre looking at some serious harm to West Virginia, a state that already struggles economically.

Finally, theres the fairness argument. Soda taxes have repeatedly been found to be regressive, meaning that they fall hardest on those Americans with the lowest incomes. Tax the rich may be a persuasive populist sentiment, but since when is tax the poor an equally good substitute? How about instead, we live within our means and dont try to use the tax code for social engineering? Republicans in West Virginia need to get back to their roots and remember that conservatism is all about personal autonomy, limited government, and a nation in which individuals are free to choose.

Logan Albright is a researcher for Conservative Review and Director of Research for Free the People. You can follow him on Twitter @loganalbright73.

See more here:
Big nanny Republicans? West Virginia proposes GOP-backed soda tax - Conservative Review

By Terry McAuliffe By Terry McAuliffe March 31 at 12:22 PM

Republicans in Richmond have a choice to make. They can choose to stand up for health and opportunity for their constituents and a stronger Virginia economy, or they can allow divisive partisan politics to continue to hurt their commonwealth.

For the past 3 years, Virginia has been engaged in a discussion about joining the 31 states that accepted federal funding to expand Medicaid and offer more citizens access to quality health care.

If you are a taxpayer in Virginia, Republicans in Richmond have so far blocked your federal tax dollars from coming home, even as you have been paying for Medicaid expansion in West Virginia, Maryland and the District. They have offered a range of excuses, which, as the Affordable Care Act has been implemented, have all proved empty. The result is that Virginia has been prevented from reaping the benefits even as Virginians havent saved a dime in taxes.

Now, after President Trump and Republicans in Congress have failed to repeal the ACA and demonstrated clearly that Medicaid expansion will continue to benefit the states that accept it, the time for excuses is over.

On Wednesday, Republicans in Richmond will consider a budget proposal I have submitted to expand Virginias Medicaid program. Accepting it would be a victory for Virginias families, economy and health-care system.

If Republicans accept my amendment, we can expand health-care coverage to as many as 400,000 Virginians who are just one accident or illness away from financial ruin or death.

We can create 30,000 jobs.

We can save our state budget more than $73 million per year.

We can invest nearly $300 million to improve Virginias behavioral-health system and combat the opioid epidemic that is ravaging communities all over the country.

And we can throw a lifeline to hospitals, particularly in rural communities, that are struggling to stay afloat because of declining federal support for offsetting the care they offer to patients who cant afford to pay.

These benefits are awaiting Virginia if we expand Medicaid. In fact, we already are paying for them. Since the ACA became law, Virginia taxpayers have left more than $10 billion on the table that could have been spent covering our friends and neighbors and creating jobs. Every day we wait, we waste another $6.6 million.

Virginia Republicans have offered a litany of excuses for not accepting these benefits. First there was the concern that the commonwealth could not afford the 10 percent portion of the cost of expansion in order to get the federal government to cover the other 90 percent. That concern was alleviated when Virginias hospitals offered to cover the states share allowing them (and Virginia taxpayers) to bring the benefits of expansion home with zero risk or obligation to the commonwealths budget.

Then Republicans fretted that leaders in Washington would repeal or change the plan in a way that would put Virginia at risk. Trump, House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) and the Republican-majority Congress eliminated that concern when they wrote a health-care bill that did not do away with the expansion and then failed to pass anything at all, preserving the program in its entirety.

Even if these excuses were grounded in reality, they would not justify denying 400,000 Virginians access to lifesaving care for which they are already footing the bill. Some of the most conservative governors in the country, including Vice President Pence when he was governor of Indiana and Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R), expanded Medicaid because it was the right thing to do. In the wake of last weeks failure with a replacement health-care bill, other conservative states are also moving in that direction.

If Virginia Republicans continue to obstruct progress on this important issue, it should be clear to their constituents that they are motivated solely by tea-party politics, not sound public policy. Virginians who lack access to health care are waiting. Families and communities coping with our mental-health and opioid crises are waiting. Virginia hospitals and health-care providers struggling with their bottom lines are waiting.

On Wednesday, Virginia Republicans can end the wait, put political excuses aside and bring billions of our own taxpayer dollars home to save lives, create jobs and make our commonwealth stronger.

The writer, a Democrat, is the governor of Virginia.

Follow this link:
Terry McAuliffe: Republicans are out of excuses on Medicaid expansion - Washington Post

J. Scott Applewhite, The Associated Press

Re: No repeal for Obamacare a humiliating defeat for Trump, March 24 news story.

For seven years, the Republican Party talked about repealing Obamacare but never developed an alternative plan. Likewise, seven years ago, the Democratic Party sold Obamacare to the public on false pretenses. Itis harming the public and getting ready to self-destruct, and the Democrats have done nothing to fix the problems. Both Republicans and Democrats with their selfish desires and political motivations have failed the American people. The problems with our health care system, including Obamacare, have always been in the hands of Congress, and not the president. If Obamacare was the mandated health plan of members of Congress, the current mess would not exist, as theywould put aside theirpartisan issues and take care of themselves first, which in turn would benefit the American people. We need a universal health plan that includes everyone and treats them equally.

Garry Wolff, Denver

It may be nave, but Id like to believe that the American Health Care Act bill failed because it was a bad idea and the American people knew it. Ultimately our representatives in Congress felt this pressure and, in this case anyway, reflected the will of the people. If the AHCA is the best Republicans could come up with, then it went down to a well-deserved defeat.

With this failure of ideas, it is incumbent that Republicans now accept what the American people already know: the current system (yes, Obamacare) is working. President Donald Trump, cruelly, hopes for Obamacare to explode. But how does Sen. CoryGardner feel? He dodged a bullet by not having to commit, pro or con, to the AHCA. Will he now commit to all the people of Colorado by helping make sure our current health care system works even better in the future?

William Pincus, Denver

House Republicans did not fail their constituents regarding their effort to fix the disastrous Obamacare law they did exactlywhat our representatives are supposed to do. They read every word, every semicolon. They debated, and argued, and negotiated every provision of the bill. Unlike Democrats, the Republican Party does not speak with one voice. There are different groups, different political theologies, and quite different creative approaches that Republicans bring to problem-solving all in the interests of those they represent. That is precisely the way democracy is supposed to work.

The great Republican victoryin the current bills failure is that they showed, rather dramatically, they will not make new law unless it benefits every American and is financially efficient. There will be another Republican attempt to fix Obamacare. It will be met with the same rigorous, all-night debate and negotiation. And we will all be better for it.

M.V. Loucks, Cherry Hills Village

I am thrilled that the health care bill was pulled from a vote. Now I urge Sens. Michael Bennet and Cory Gardner to work to improve the Affordable Care Actin a non-partisan, cooperative way. To expand Medicaid. To encourage insurers to join the marketplace. And to improve access to mental health services, particularly for children.

If our representatives are reading this, I urge you to remember that every single one of your constituents deserves health care including those who are poor, disabled, elderly, pregnant or in need of mental health services. If a plan isnt good enough for your own family, dont try to pass it on to the public. Remember that you are in office to serve your constituents. Your job is to work together to solve problems for the public good, not find ways to give tax breaks to billionaires and strip services from the most vulnerable.

Sherry Knecht, Littleton

President Donald Trump said that the best thing is to let Obamacare explode after the Republicans failed to get enough votes in the House to repeal it. This is leadership? To hope that the program that has allowed 20 million Americans to have access to basic health care fails? The Republican leadership has worked for years to undermine the Affordable Care Act. Why? So they can replace it with a law that cuts Medicaid for the poor and use the savings for tax cuts to the rich? If the ACAhas problems, please give a detailed listing of what they are and how you plan on fixing them. Show some leadership, Republicans, and stand up for the American people instead of corporate interests.

Edward Dranginis, Centennial

Thank you to Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives who stood together to protect health care for Coloradans and all Americans.

President Donald Trumpnow says Democrats own Obamacare. Yes, and proudly so. There was not oneRepublican vote to pass Obamacare in 2010, so it has always been owned by Democrats. Imperfect though it is, at least we know that millions of our friends, family and fellow citizens still have Obamacare and the precious health care that it provides.

And to the many citizens who valiantly called, wrote and showed up to testify to the life-saving value of Obamacare through demonstrations and town halls, an enormous thank you. Without you, we would not have succeeded in protecting our health care.

But please know that all of us must remain vigilant to continue to protect the health care we have.

Vicky Henry, Estes Park

In his postmortem comments on the failure of the GOP plan to repeal the Affordable Care Act, Speaker Paul Ryan said it was the result of his members desire for the perfect and the perfect being the enemy of the good, or very good. The problem was, their plan was not even in the same time zone as the good, or very good.

Its time the GOP return from their outpost on the far-far-right of the political spectrum and admit to their constituents that the ACA is, in fact, a conservative approach to health care. A liberal plan would have been single-payer, a system that most FirstWorld economies have proven provides health care at lower cost and with better results. But the ACA was based on plan from a conservative think tank, the Heritage Foundation, put in place as a test by a Republican governor, and is still a market-based insurance coverage system.

Come on, GOP, come back to your ownhealth care plan, admit youve been playing politics for eightyears, and lets fix the current act to make it better, rather than create a catastrophic solution, which will only make things worse.

Martin Ward, Littleton

In my imaginary world, Republicans and Democrats would do the unthinkable and get together by defining the Affordable Care Actas stage one of health care and then progress to repairing some of its shortcomings. For example, a good starting point would be to consider incentives for insurers to cover low population-density areas and to reduce the impact on small businesses, which have widespread bipartisan support. In the process, both Congress and the White House would also significantly enhance their sagging popularity ratings. But dream on.

Vic Viola, Golden

Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.

More:
Republicans' decision to pull the American Health Care Act (8 letters) - The Denver Post