Bernie Sanders’s chances at enacting a “political revolution” represent but gone. But this doesn’t mean his policy agenda won’t remain to be felt within this election or future Democratic platforms…
Source: Do you believe that a single-payer health Care would probably still be expensive?
Laws that regulate whether transgender people can use the facilities
The recent introduction of laws that regulate whether transgender people can use the facilities that align with their gender identities has brought the issue of bathroom sex segregation to the forefront of national conversations. Some have proposed that the solution may lie in gender-neutral facilities, while others worry in what the consequences may be. But , whilst attempts to prohibit gender intermingling in restrooms took on a new concentrate, the roots of the debate day back over a century.
Although first sex-segregated toilets had been established in Paris in the 1700s, regulations requiring that American men and women use individual restrooms got their begin in the late 1800s. The first regulation requiring distinct toilet facilities for men and women was passed in 1887, when Massachusetts needed the establishment of distinct privies in businesses. “Wherever male and female persons are employed in the same factory or workshop, a significant number of separate and distinct water-closets, earth-closets, or privies shall be provided for the use of each sex and should be plainly designated, ” the law reads. In the next line, mixed use of such facilities is prohibited. Over the course of the next three decades, nearly every state passed its own version of that law.
But the rules that govern who pees where in public spaces were not created due to physical differences among women and men that affect just how bathrooms are used. “You can think that it makes sense, that bathrooms are separated by sex because there are fundamental biological variations, ” says Terry Kogan, a statutory regulation professor at the University of Utah. “That’s completely wrong. ”
Kogan, who did extensive research on days gone by history of sex-segregation in public areas restrooms, tells TIME that the guidelines came into being as a total consequence of social anxieties about women’s locations in the world.
Social norms of the time dictated that the true residential was a woman’s place. As women entered the place of work even, often in the brand new factories which were being built at the time, there was a reluctance to integrate them fully into public life. Women, policymakers argued, were inherently weaker and still in need of protection from the harsh realities of the public sphere. Thus, separate facilities were introduced in nearly every aspect of society: women’s reading rooms were incorporated into public libraries; separate train cars were established for women, keeping them in the back to protect them in the event of a crash; and, with the introduction of indoor bathrooms which were along the way of replacing single-person outhouses after that, separate loos followed soon. The recommended layouts of bathrooms, says Kogan, were made to mimic the comforts of home-think chaise and curtains lounges.
“[Ladies’ rooms] had been used to create this shielded haven in this dangerous general public realm, ” says Kogan.
Today, despite the fact that society’s views on ladies have shifted largely, sex-segregated bathrooms remain the custom.
Why? Because major plumbing codes in the U. S. use a public building’s capacity to dictate how many restrooms should be built, and those codes specify that men and women’s facilities should be separate. The codes even mandate a minimum number of toilets and urinals per sex. Often , those formulas result in more facilities being made available for men than for females, despite famously lengthy lines for ladies’ rooms.
There were efforts to chip apart at the inequity facing the sexes in bathrooms-in 1987 California signed the Bathroom Equity Act, which stated fresh public projects had a need to include even more restrooms for females. Equivalent ordinances were used in metropolitan areas across the U. S., however in many places there exists a reluctance to neutralize bathrooms with regards to gender still.
As the debate over bathrooms offers shifted, a few of the arguments policymakers are using to guard the circumstances ring might ring familiar to those familiar with bathrooms’ history: the idea that separate facilities will protect women from harm remains. Two North Carolina lawmakers have said that eliminating separate bathrooms would “deny women their right to basic safety and privacy. ” Research does show that trans people may be at risk in bathroom situations-a 2013 survey by the Williams Institute found that 70% of trans people reported experiencing denial of access, verbal harassment or physical assault in an attempt to use the bathroom-but Kogan says the idea that all women are in increased danger in mixed or gender-neutral bathrooms doesn’t make sense, as predators “ aren’t waiting for permission to decorate like a woman to get into bathrooms. ”
Bernie Sanders’s chances at enacting a “political revolution” represent but gone. But this does not mean his policy agenda won’t remain to be felt within this election or future Democratic platforms…
Source: Do you believe that a single-payer health Care would probably still be expensive?
Bernie Sanders’s chances at enacting a “political revolution” represent but gone. But this doesn’t mean his policy agenda won’t remain to be felt within this election or future Democratic platforms.
One among his signature proposals is usually to move the country’s medical treatment system to a government-run, single payer system. A while back, Hillary Clinton nodded for the reason that direction, suggesting that she will be open to allowing Americans older than 50 to purchase into the government Medicare program that presently covers those 65 senior.
However, also a week ago, a detailed analysis of the Sanders health insurance plan from researchers at the Urban Institute showed that it will probably cost government doubles exactly what the campaign proposed. It is the second credible analysis to suggest the fact that the Sanders plan is more expensive than advertised. (The additional comes from the Emory health policy professor Kenneth Thorpe.)
The Sanders plan is light on some key details, but even in sketch form, it appears clear that it would require even bigger tax increases than the sizable ones the campaign has required.
If you do in fact go searching life, plenty of countries have single-payer systems. As well as all of them pay substantially less for health care than we do within the united states. I am reminded of the often, within the comments of an of my articles. How could a single-payer system here still be so expensive?
One reason would certainly Sanders plan covers excess of typical insurance plans within the United States — or abroad. The Sanders plan would charge no premiums, require no out-of-pocket spending and shall pay the bill for services like dental care and long-term nursing home stays. That which boost the total price tag.
However, imagine a universe where we managed to have a single-payer health plan that has been closer to normal insurance. Perhaps it would be a true “Medicare for all,” where all people have the same insurance the fact that the national currently provides to older people and the disabled.
That Medicare-for-all plan would still are more expensive than single-payer plans in other countries. Here’s why: Medicare rewards doctors and hospitals higher prices than single-payer systems do in other nations.
“The popular trend is that providers here make a great deal of more money than they do anywhere else, and in order in order to get in the ballpark of where these other countries are, you’d reduce payment rates to physicians too much, a lot lower levels,” said John Holahan, possibly one of the authors of a given Urban analysis. “That is just hard to practice.”
The Corporation for Economic Cooperation and Development, which looks for a category of free countries, has discovered that this America pays substantially higher prices for doctors, hospital stays and prescribed drugs in comparison to the whole group. Medicare pays under the USA average, although not enough less to make-up that difference.
Producing the American health care system noticeably cheaper would mean not just cutting the insurance companies away from the game and lowering the high administrative costs of the American system. It will also require paying doctors and nurses substantially lower salaries, using fewer new and high-tech treatments, and doubtless eliminate some of the perks of American hospital stays, like private patient rooms.
The typical family physician north america earns $207,000, in accordance with the Medscape Physician Compensation Report. General practitioners in Britain, which has a single-payer system, earn $81,000 to $122,000. The gaps in spend for specialists are a great deal larger.
The Urban Institute report presumesthat this Sanders plan would pay the bill for doctors substantially, though not by half. That is an acceptable assumption.
Plus we pay a bit more for drugs in comparison to the whole world, though many experts suppose that a single-payer health plan could push down drug prices because drug companies earn such high profit. The Urban analysis assumes that the country could quickly get to prices 25 % lower than what Medicare pays. (That shift assumes a political revolution, of course, because the pharmaceutical companies are a remarkably effective lobby.)
The Sanders campaign disputes many of the Urban Institute’s assumptions. The Sanders team thinks, for instance, that drug prices could well be pushed even lower. Therefore argues that the scientists overestimated the costs connected with administering the govt program. However, it does not debate that the prices paid to medical providers could be cut more sharply.
The very same problem exists for other attempts to reduce health spending in the United States. Efforts through Obama administration to pay doctors and hospitals differently are made to squeegee some waste from the system, by eliminating special care that may not help people’s health. However it has performed little to remove and replace the prices earn money for health care bills. That means that its best hope is usually to “bend the cost curve,” or lessen the rate that health spending grows.
Republican proposals to help make medical treatment into more of free of charge market also tend to assume that they will slow spending growth, not really reduce it.
The Sanders plan would require a huge reorganization of this very country’s health treatment system. Overnight, it would include the private insurance industry out of business, in association with lots of other companies that support it. It will shift vast amounts of dollars of spending from individuals, workers, and states into the federal budget. Doing that might well reduce some of the country’s medical treatment spending that is going toward insurer profits and paper-pushing.
However, more than 90 % of the dollars we currently pay for medical treatment go toward health treatment. Moreover, making big cuts all at once to doctors and hospitals could cause substantial disruptions in care. Some hospitals could go bust. Some doctors would default on their mortgages and student loans. Even when the United States decided that medicine should make you a more middle-class profession — not an understandable outcome, with the substantial public support for the medical professions — it may be difficult to accomplish the change directly.
All of that signifies that bringing a government-run, single-payer medical treatment system could achieve the majority of the goals of the advocates: more equity, lower complexity and some reductions in cost. The United States would continue to possess the most high priced medical treatment system on earth. Moreover, we’d raise taxes high enough to cover it.
Author Resource Box:
Click and read for further information
In response to this article: The men and women in this country deserve honor for being brave enough to die for the United States. I give them praise for their dedication because they put their lives on the line daily. My question is why would Mr. Trump do such an act since he has not been to war? Family have lost love one’s that they will never see again. If they could many of these families would love to have their love ones home, but instead many are resting in their grave because they paid the ultimate price and that is they gave their life.
Senator John McCain of Arizona called on Donald J. Trump to make amends to veterans for his belittling comments about prisoners of war and suggested he would be unlikely to appear on a stage with Mr. Trump until that happened.
Mr. McCain has committed to supporting Mr. Trump as the Republican nominee for president. But in an interview that aired on CNN’s “ State of the Union” on Sunday, Mr. McCain expressed deep dismay at the tenor of the Republican presidential race, saying Mr. Trump make amends to “a body of American heroes” he had offended.
Mr. Trump mocked Mr. McCain last summer for having been imprisoned and captured during the Vietnam War, stating that he preferred “people who weren’t captured. ”
Mr. McCain, who was simply the Republican presidential nominee in 2008, informed CNN that this individual was indifferent to Mr personally. Trump’s ridicule but that he cannot abide the affront to veterans generally. Asked if he’d show up on the marketing campaign path with Mr. Trump, Mr. McCain said “ lots of things would need to happen” first.
“ I believe it’s very important to Donald Trump expressing his – not Steve McCain, but veterans who have been incarcerated as prisoners of battle, ” Mr. McCain said. “When he said, ‘I don’t like people who were captured, ’ then there’s a body of American heroes that I’d like to see him retract that statement – not about me, but about the others. ”
Mr. McCain’s comments add to the already extraordinary pressure on Mr. Trump to mend his relationships across the Republican Party and win over a range of party leaders he has alienated in the 2016 campaign. One of Mr. McCain’s closest friends in the Senate, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, has already announced that he will not vote for Mr. Trump under any circumstances.
Mr. McCain said it was incumbent on Mr. Trump to “heal many of the wounds” from the primary season. The senator said the “personalization” of the 2016 race was like nothing he had ever seen, “where people’s integrity and character are questioned. ”
Noting the rift that had opened in the Republican Party, Mr. McCain said the party’s leaders lost touch of numerous voters in Mr. Trump’s constituency – mainly, he said, old, white, blue-collar employees who see no working job prospects.
“ There is certainly some distance, if not really a disconnect, between party leadership and members of Congress, ” Mr. McCain said, “and lots of the voters who’ve chosen Donald Trump to be the nominee of the ongoing party. ”
Reference
It is getting hot in the Republican party!
New rifts surfaced Friday as part of the current shaky relationship amongst Republican front runners and presumptive presidential nominee Donald Trump, heightening problems that the party appears to be headed into a long period concerning civil war that imperils its opportunities as part involving the November elections.
A day after House Speaker Paul D. Ryan concerning Wisconsin took the unusual phase concerning refusing to support Trump, a steady list of other GOP notables joined in the opposition, particularly former Florida governor Jeb Bush, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham concerning South Carolina and 2012 presidential nominee Mitt Romney.
Trump, as part concerning turn, attacked Ryan and others for refusing to back him, even as he agreed to meet with Ryan next week to air out their differences.
And at the White House, President Obama waded into the opposition’s turmoil the very first time since Trump effectively clinched the nomination, listing concerns about…
View original post 174 more words
New rifts surfaced Friday as part of the current shaky relationship amongst Republican front runners and presumptive presidential nominee Donald Trump, heightening problems that the party appears to be headed into a long period concerning civil war that imperils its opportunities as part involving the November elections.
A day after House Speaker Paul D. Ryan concerning Wisconsin took the unusual phase concerning refusing to support Trump, a steady list of other GOP notables joined in the opposition, particularly former Florida governor Jeb Bush, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham concerning South Carolina and 2012 presidential nominee Mitt Romney.
Trump, as part concerning turn, attacked Ryan and others for refusing to back him, even as he agreed to meet with Ryan next week to air out their differences.
And at the White House, President Obama waded into the opposition’s turmoil the very first time since Trump effectively clinched the nomination, listing concerns about the mogul that he said Republican voters must seriously take into account.
For Trump and GOP elites, it amounted to another awkward chapter in their uneasy alliance — not the celebratory moment many had hoped would arrive when the GOP contest was settled.
GOP establishment splits over supporting Trump
Speaker Paul Ryan has backed away from his pledge to support whoever becomes the nominee, saying he’s “not ready” to endorse Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. Other GOP heavyweights, including the Bushes, are also not giving endorsements.
Trump’s outsider candidacy and outsize persona — and his extreme positions on issues including immigration and Islam — have alarmed broad swaths concerning the GOP establishment that fear the party is headed for a wipe-out as part of the fall if Trump is not contained or kept at arm’s length. For his part, Trump argues that his brash campaign triumphed over the rest concerning the GOP field fair and square, and he has suggested he is unlikely to budge on his positions to please Republican leaders.
Reference
Trying to make sense of the election.
In response: I know that Trump is winning, but I have many questions.How much does he know about the global affairs? What is his experience in politics? What is his plan, he keeps on saying “Let’s make America Great, again” and how will he achieve this? I noticed he makes all these promises. What happens when he does not keep his promise and the country finds out that the emperor does not have no cloths on? I disagree with his politics, but I agree that all have the right to run for the highest office in the country. Politics is not a joke, it not a fashion show, it is the lives of millions of people. I want someone who will represent all people and not just a few angry people.Stirring anger only makes the country look like we are a country of thugs in the media, not a country…
View original post 1,305 more words
In response: I know that Trump is winning, but I have many questions.How much does he know about the global affairs? What is his experience in politics? What is his plan, he keeps on saying “Let’s make America Great, again” and how will he achieve this? I noticed he makes all these promises. What happens when he does not keep his promise and the country finds out that the emperor does not have no cloths on? I disagree with his politics, but I agree that all have the right to run for the highest office in the country. Politics is not a joke, it not a fashion show, it is the lives of millions of people. I want someone who will represent all people and not just a few angry people.Stirring anger only makes the country look like we are a country of thugs in the media, not a country that is a leader in the world. Think about it and think hard. In stead of a leader taking us into the future, we might be headed into the twilight zone.
Donald Trump’s march to the White House experienced fierce level of resistance from his own party Thursday as senior lawmakers hesitated to promote him, party luminaries said they’d skip his nominating convention and others considered the possibility of a third-party bid.
House Speaker Paul Ryan said he’s ” not ready” to aid Trump, becoming the best elected Republican official to improve concerns about Trump since he became the party’s likely standard-bearer this week.
Within an interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, Ryan said he wants Trump to unify “all wings of the Republican Party and the conservative movement” and run a campaign that may allow Americans to “have a thing that they’re proud to aid and proud to become a part of. ”
“And we have methods to go from here to there, ” Ryan said.
Trump dug in. Hours after Ryan’s announcement, Trump proclaimed in a statement that “I am not prepared to support Speaker Ryan’s agenda. ” He added, “Perhaps later on we can interact and come to an agreement in what is best for the American people. They have already been treated so badly for such a long time that it’s time for politicians to place them first! ”
Trump continued to highlight Ryan’s reports on Friday morning.
“So many great endorsements yesterday, aside from Paul Ryan! We should put America and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN first! ” Trump tweeted.
On morning Friday, Trump confirmed he designed to meet with Ryan next week, but wasn’t sure what they’d talk about.
“I have absolutely no idea, ” Trump told Fox News’ “Fox Friends” about the conversation topics. ” There are a lot of days before that. ”
The developments reflect the growing split in the GOP in the days since Trump’s commanding victory in the Indiana primary, which forced his remaining Republican rivals out of the race. The resistance underscored how far he has to go to unite the party before the November general election.
CNN reached out to 16 Republican elected officials, leaders and major fundraisers associated with former Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush and former Vice President Dick Cheney. Speaking on background, none of them said they were planning to go to this summer’s Republican convention. They didn’t say they would vote for Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton. But they said they were not yet supporting Trump.
2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney declared he’d skip the convention, joining at least three prior Republican nominees — John McCain and both Presidents Bush — in declining to attend the event.
Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake told CNN’s Manu Raju that ” some of Trump’s positions” make it ” very difficult for me ” to aid him.
Meanwhile, Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse continued an extended Facebook diatribe against Trump and conservative blogger Erick Erickson said some members of Congress have joined his effort to recruit a third-party candidate.
Regardless of the day’s tumult, Trump gained some allies, including former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, his one-time rival in the 2016 race.
“He is not really a perfect man. But what I really do believe is that he loves this national country and he’ll surround himself with capable, experienced people and he’ll pay attention to them, ” Perry told CNN’s Dana Bash.
Bill Cole, a Republican candidate for governor in West Virginia, appeared onstage at a Trump event there Thursday and embraced the true estate mogul’s method of politics, drawing a comparison even.
“You go through the things that I really believe Donald Trump’s brings, and I’m that business guy, too. I’m one that will go in and make those tough decisions, ” Cole said.
Jokes fly about Trump’s potential vice president 02: 03
Taking center stage in the entire days ahead could be the divide between Trump and Ryan. The speaker’s move may help his party’s members deflect questions about Trump — but it additionally, means discord will continue before an over-all election where control of the Senate, several governorships and blue-state House seats are also at risk.
The gulf between Ryan and Trump now means Ryan, who as House speaker will chair the Republican National Convention, is months away from coronating a nominee he — so far — doesn’t officially support.
The first effort at détente between Trump and Ryan, Republican National Committee spokesman Sean Spicer told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Thursday evening, could come the next week. The RNC is attempting to set up a meeting between Trump and Ryan. The speaker’s spokesman tweeted that he’d be ” happy to attend. ”
Among the problems: The two aren’t on the same page in terms of policy.
On free trade, taxes, immigration, the minimum wage and more, Trump has broken from conservative orthodoxy — a problem for Capitol Hill Republicans who have prized purity in recent years.
Ryan laid out what he wants to see from Trump in his interview with Tapper.
“Saying we’re unified doesn’t in and of itself unify us, but taking the principles that we all believe in actually, showing that there surely is a dedication to those, and owning a principled campaign that Republicans could be proud about and that may actually appeal to most Americans — that, if you ask me, is what must be done to unify this ongoing party, ” the speaker said.
What 2012’s electoral map shows us about 2016 03: 30
Ryan’s comments about Trump quickly became a political football, with Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign highlighting the speaker within a “growing set of conservatives rebuking Trump” within an email.
A Republican strategist involved with Senate races told CNN that he’s worried Ryan has create a situation which will be problematic for him to eventually escape.
” What exactly are the conditions where Ryan will ever endorse? I have no idea how this ends, ” the strategist said. “What would make him reach a yes on Trump? I’m uncertain what Trump can do, apart from change his positions. ”
The speaker’s move may help House Republicans — particularly those facing competitive general election races — giving them cover to break from Trump, or delay a stance on whether they’ll support him in November.
But many Senate Republicans, including Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, and endangered members like New Hampshire’s Kelly Ayotte and Ohio’s Rob Portman, had already declared on Wednesday that they might keep their commitments to support the party’s nominee by backing Trump.
Eric Trump talks about his father’s Cinco de Mayo tweet 01: 22
Looming over it all is the prospect of a third-party campaign by a conservative intent on hewing closer to traditional Republican principles than Trump.
Erickson, the conservative blogger, told CNN — without naming them — that members of Congress have joined influential Republican members of the Trump movement in seeking out a candidate.
“Planning is continuing for a third-party, ” he said. “I don’t necessarily read this as Ryan endorsing a third party, but it gives motivation to people who want a third party to continue down that track. I have had several congressmen reach out to me to encourage a third party because they are worried about turnout in (November) because they want an alternative to Trump. ”
The candidate many conservatives view as ideal is Sasse, the freshman Nebraska senator. He has rejected overtures far thus, pointing to his young family and saying like-minded Republicans have to look for a candidate who can devote enough time essential to campaigning.
However in a Facebook screed in the first Thursday early morning, Sasse wrote: “Why shouldn’t America draft a genuine leader who’ll concentrate on 70% solutions for another four years? You understand… a grown-up? ”
Reference
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/05/politics/paul-ryan-donald-trump-republican-resistance/
The Dantzler Report! 