Author Archives: AngelinMurdoch

The Pentagon Is Reversing Its Long-Standing Policy on Sex Reassignment Surgery

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Starting next week, the Pentagon will pay for gender reassignment surgery for eligible soldiers, a change that comes after the military lifted its long-standing ban on transgender service members earlier this summer.

Soldiers will be eligible for the surgery if they have a medical condition related to their gender identity, such as gender dysphoria, that has hindered their ability to serve, a Defense Department spokesman told USA Today. The military will also cover hormone therapy for eligible soldiers.

“The Secretary of Defense has made clear that service members with a diagnosis from a military medical provider indicating that gender transition is medically necessary will be provided medical care and treatment for the diagnosed medical condition,” Air Force Major Ben Sakrisson, a Pentagon spokesman, told Stars and Stripes.

Out of a total force of about 1.3 million active-duty service members, an estimated 1,320 to 6,630 are transgender, according to a recent study by RAND Corp., which analyzed the health care needs of trans soldiers at the request of Defense Secretary Ash Carter. But “only a small portion of service members would likely seek gender transition-related medical treatments that would affect their deployability or health care costs,” RAND concluded. It estimated that 25 to 130 active-duty soldiers would have gender reassignment surgery annually, while 30 to 140 soldiers would begin hormone treatment every year. That would translate to an additional annual cost of between $2.4 million and $8.4 million, or a 0.13 percent increase in current spending.

Critics of the new policy worry that too many soldiers will be unqualified for deployment for long periods of time because of gender reassignment surgery. But RAND estimated that only 10 to 130 active-duty service members would have reduced deployability every year, and it described this amount as “negligible” compared with the 50,000 active-duty soldiers in the Army who are nondeployable.

For decades, the military had discharged soldiers who received medical treatment for a gender transition. But in June, the Defense Department announced it would allow openly transgender people to serve, and that soldiers would be allowed to transition genders during their service. “We can’t allow barriers unrelated to a person’s qualifications to prevent us from recruiting and retaining those who can best accomplish the mission,” Carter said. But at the time of the announcement, it wasn’t clear whether the Pentagon would agree to pay for gender reassignment surgery as a medically necessary procedure, or if it would instead treat the surgery as an elective, cosmetic procedure.

In September, the Army agreed to provide gender reassignment surgery to Chelsea Manning, a transgender soldier serving a 35-year prison sentence for leaking classified documents. Days later, the Defense Department announced it would begin covering the surgeries for eligible active-duty soldiers, too, starting in October.

“I am unendingly relieved that the military is finally doing the right thing,” Manning said of the Army’s decision, which came after she attempted to commit suicide and went on a hunger strike. “I applaud them for that. This is all that I wanted—for them to let me be me.”

Read article here:

The Pentagon Is Reversing Its Long-Standing Policy on Sex Reassignment Surgery

Posted in FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Pentagon Is Reversing Its Long-Standing Policy on Sex Reassignment Surgery

When Is a Tax Not a Tax? When It’s a Fee to Keep the Highway Trust Fund From Going Broke Next Month.

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Good news! The Senate has come up with a compromise 6-year highway funding bill. It’s 1,030 pages long, so no one really knows what’s in it, and it only specifies funding sources for three years. But let’s not be picky. It’s a bill. So where’s the money coming from?

Under the Senate agreement, Congress would raise $47.1 billion to cover three years’ worth of spending through a combination of spending cuts and tax increases. Lawmakers came up with $9 billion of the total by agreeing to sell 101 million barrels of oil from the nation’s emergency stockpile over a seven-year period through fiscal 2025. Another $16 billion would come from lowering to 1.5% from 6% the dividend paid to all but the smallest banks that are members of the Federal Reserve system.

Seriously? Tax increases? Mitch McConnell agreed to this? Maybe it’s in the $22 billion that’s mysteriously absent from the Wall Street Journal’s report. Let’s see if The Hill has more:

“The bill is fully offset with spending reductions or changes to federal programs,” three Senate sponsors said. “It does not increase the deficit or raise taxes.”

….The proposal calls for generating $16.3 billion from interest rate changes, $9 billion from sales of reserved oil, $4 billion from customs fees, $3.5 billion from the TSA fees and $1.9 billion from extending guarantees on mortgage-backed securities that had been scheduled to start declining in 2021. Other funding sources in the measure include approximately $7.7 billion in tax compliance measures.

Hmmm. I guess “fees” don’t count as taxes? And apparently neither do “tax compliance measures”—though I’ve certainly heard Republicans claim in the past that efforts to get rich people to actually pay their taxes were little more than a stealth tax increase.

Tomayto, tomahto. Best not to be too fastidious about these things. For example, “tax compliance measures” seems to include a provision that blocks Social Security payments to individuals with felony warrants. That’s a tax compliance measure? Sure, I guess. Whatever.

Amusingly, the money from customs fees comes from indexing them for inflation. And that’s OK with Mitch McConnell. But indexing the gasoline tax to inflation? That’s a tax increase. Absolutely out of the question.

Anyway, the House has its own highway bill, which only runs for six months but would supposedly give them time to come up with a real, honest-to-goodness, fully-funded 6-year bill. That’s very optimistic, considering that Congress has been haggling over this for seven years now and has never been able to do more than pass a quick fix that kicks the can down the road for a few more months. And that might happen again. McConnell and the other sponsors of the Senate legislation want their bill voted on quickly and then approved by the House before the August recess, since that’s when the Highway Trust Fund literally goes broke. But plenty of senators aren’t on board yet, and House leaders are skeptical too. If we end up with yet another 90-day fix, don’t be too surprised.

Originally posted here – 

When Is a Tax Not a Tax? When It’s a Fee to Keep the Highway Trust Fund From Going Broke Next Month.

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on When Is a Tax Not a Tax? When It’s a Fee to Keep the Highway Trust Fund From Going Broke Next Month.

If the GOP Actually Repealed Obamacare, Here’s What Would Happen

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Tuesday, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives plans to vote once again to repeal the Affordable Care Act. It will be the 55th time House GOPers have voted to eliminate or impede the health care reform law, but the very first opportunity for freshman Republicans to register their opposition to Obamacare in the congressional record.

But with each repeal vote, the politics of rolling back the Affordable Care Act become more fraught. After all, the law is now enmeshed with the US health care system. “Talk of repealing the Affordable Care Act is like talk of repealing the interstate highway system,” says Timothy Jost, a health care law expert at the Washington and Lee University School of Law. “I mean in theory you could do it. Nobody would want to live with it.”

Continue Reading »

Read More:  

If the GOP Actually Repealed Obamacare, Here’s What Would Happen

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on If the GOP Actually Repealed Obamacare, Here’s What Would Happen

Big Greens Are Spending Big Green In 2014 Midterms

green4us

How Tom Steyer is trying to make climate a winning political issue. Tom Steyer. Karl Mondon/MCT/ZUMA First there was a pickup truck. Then there was an ark. The vehicle of choice for drawing attention to the NextGen Climate Action Committee has been, well, vehicles. The climate change super PAC, funded by billionaire investor Tom Steyer, recently rolled a truck filled with fake oil barrels into New Hampshire to chide Republican Senate candidate Scott Brown. A few days later, the group began touring Florida with an ark to taunt climate change hedging by Gov. Rick Scott (R). The ark campaign was meant to draw attention to Florida’s vulnerability to the impacts of climate change, like rising sea levels, but also to highlight Scott’s unwillingness to talk about the causes of climate change. At its launch, organizers accused Scott of letting only “special interest campaign contributors” buy a “ticket on Scott’s Ark.” The truck and the ark, said NextGen chief strategist Chris Lehane, are part of the group’s “disruptive” approach to advocacy. “We want to be on the offensive as much as possible, force the other side to respond,” said Lehane, a Clinton administration veteran known for, as The New York Times put it, “his own extreme brand of performance politics.” Read the rest at The Huffington Post.

Original source: 

Big Greens Are Spending Big Green In 2014 Midterms

Related Posts

Spending $100m To Save the Planet Is a Bad Thing
Why’s This Tea Party PAC Going After a Top Tea Partier?
National Briefing | South: Florida: State Plans Suit Over Water
Scott Brown Urged GOP Senators To Kill Jeanne Shaheen’s Energy Efficiency Bill
Why Do Conservatives Like to Waste Energy?

Share this:

View post: 

Big Greens Are Spending Big Green In 2014 Midterms

Posted in eco-friendly, FF, For Dummies, G & F, GE, LAI, Monterey, New Chapter, ONA, OXO, solar, solar power, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Big Greens Are Spending Big Green In 2014 Midterms