News_Articles

Challenged on Medicare, G.O.P. Loses Ground In the entitled article, “Challenged on Medicare, G.O.P. Loses Ground” talks about one of the most coveted indpendent voters in the heavy retiree state of Florida can’t say whether or not she will vote Republican or Democratic, since she is not in favor of either parties decisions, when it comes to Medicare. The article goes on to state, that the Republican party had managed to blame Obama and the Affordable Care Act on cutting $716 billion from current Medicare recipients to take care of a government health care take over. Another point in the article, the Democratic party states that the Republican party plans for “voucherizing Medicare” and soon they will also seek to alter Social Security. The article also talks about how Democrats usually have an advantage on Medicare voters, but voters are also raising doubts when it comes to the Republican party. Although, there is little truth to both sides, the way Medicare stands today it is on a downward spiral. Most Medicare recipients as it stands today can not afford the out of pocket expenses one inccurs even with secondary private health insurance. And, that is a luxury if you can afford it. With two ailing parents who have secondary health insurance, this is a luxury they can not afford to lose, because pretty soon Medicare may not cover most of their health care cost. If this happens they will then have to dip more into their retirement savings to pay for medical care costs. Calmes, Jackie. "Challenged on Medicare, G.O.P. Loses Ground." New York Times 15 Sept. 2012. 15 Sept. 2012 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/us/politics/in-poll-obama-opens-medicare-edge-over-romney.html In Prosecutors, Debt Collectors Find a Partner The article talks about how local debt collectors are pairing up with district attorney’s office in an attempt to collect a debt from a consumer for a bounced check to a retailer. What they fail to mention to the consumer is that the county prosecutors are in essence lending their signature and the counties seal to go after debtors in turn for a fee and without the district attorney’s office determing whether this was an accident on the consumer’s side or in fact fraud. The story talks about a single mother in California who may face up to a year of jail time if she does not pay back the amount of the bounced check, as well as court and administrative fees, but she must also pay for a “financial accountability” class. The article also states that some of the programs have been challenged by consumer lawyers, especially California based American Corrective Counseling Services, who faced multiple class action law suits for their practices and in 2009 filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. So in essence, what it seems like is that whether or not you have made an honest mistake of bouncing a check or you intentionally defrauded a retailer we are going to send you a threatening letter that you are in fact a criminal and if you don’t pay all these fees and fines were going to jail you. Don’t worry that the debt collection agency who is harassing you filed for bankruptcy. You’re the criminal and you need to pay or face jail time. How many Americans are affected by the emotional distress by the letters they receive in the mail stating that they will be prosecuted for non payment' And, how many Americans are wrongly accused for debts that have been paid off' Granted, if you wrote a bad check then yes pay it off, but don’t be intimidated that if you don’t you’ll go to jail. The US is 16 Trillion in debt. Are we going to send Washington to jail' Silver-Greenberg, Jessica. "In Prosecutors, Debt Collectors Find a Partner." New York Times 15 Sept. 2012. 20 Sept. 2012 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/business/in-prosecutors-debt-collectors-find-a-partner.html'pagewanted=all City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant lot The article focuses on a local business developer in Philidelphia who owns a coffee shop located next to a piece of land that is vacant that had at least 40 tons of garbage, in which the city of Point Breeze owns under eminent domain. The developer tried numerous times to get in touch with the Philidelphia Redevelopment Authority. After seven written requests and twenty four phone calls the agency denied the developer’s offer to clean up the mess himself. And, even though he was denied, the developer still went ahead and spent $20,000 to clean up the space by removing the trash, leveling the soil, adding cherry trees, fencing, park benches and repaving the sidewalk. The story also goes on to say, that in August of 2011 the developer had received a citation from the city for liter on the same lot that the city states is not his property. And, that the city is considering legal action against the developer if he does not return the property to it’s previous condition. Although, the article is a little one sided. I don't suspect the city cared about the developer removing the trash as much as the fact that he landscaped the property by adding cherry trees, putting up a new fence and park benches as well as repaving the sidewalk. No telling what the city had planned to do with the property. In all honesty, it sounds like the developer was (and probably is) using the revitalized lot for his own business use with his coffee shop patrons. Such a wonderful government we have. They not only refuse to clean up their mess, but then threaten to sue you if you clean up their trash. And not only that, were going to send you a citation for not cleaning up the property, even though you don’t own it. The city owns the property. I wonder what would happen if someone tried to clean up Washington and the government that inhabits its city with all its waste' Pfeiffer, Eric. "City may sue developer who spent $20,000 to remove 40 tons of trash from vacant lot." Yahoo! News. 19 Sept. 2012. Yahoo! 21 Sept. 2012 http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/city-may-sue-developer-spent-20k-remove-40-200922350.html Tax Penalty to Hit Nearly 6M Uninsured People The article points out that by the year 2014 every legal resident of the United States is required to carry health insurance or face a tax penalty, on the average of about $1,200 when the penalty goes into full effect by the year 2016. And, that the penalty will be collected by the IRS. It also states that there are exceptions to the rule. Exemptions would include financial hardship, religious objections and certain other circumstances, which the article did not go into detail. The plan would not affect people who are covered by their employers health insurance policy, or those that are on government programs like Medicare and Medicaid. Who it does affect is the middle class, who make up to or less than five times the poverty level, according to the article. But, it also states that the new law will provide government aid to help middle class and low income households afford coverage (Affordable Care Act). The article points out that the idea came from the Republican health care plans in the 90‘s for individual insurance requirements. However, most Americans will opt out and pay the tax penalty because it is still cheaper compared to paying for an insurance policy premium and deductibles, and that the mandate is unconstitutional. And finally, it briefly talks about the insurance mandates in Massachusetts and how almost all residents are covered and the number of people opting to pay for the tax penalty is dwindling down. If you’re a low income family who already gets free or reduced healthcare through state programs, or if you’re employed and choose to participate in your employer’s health care coverage, don’t worry. But, if you have an income that’s above the poverty level, and don’t participate in your employer’s plan, you must carrier health care coverage or face a tax penalty. Good thing I have health insurance from my employer, or I would be paying the tax penalty due to the high cost of health insurance along with the deductibles. And, even then you’re not 100% covered. Alonso-Zaldivar, Ricardo. "Tax Penalty To Hit Nearly 6M Uninsured People." News from The Associated Press. 20 Sept. 2012. 21 Sept. 2012 http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HEALTH_CARE_TAX_PENALTY'SITE=AP Arkansas Court Upholds Medical Marijuana Proposal The Supreme Court in Arkansas has upheld a proposal that will be on the November 6th ballot to legalize medical marijuana in Arkansas. If it is passed by voters, it would make Arkansas the first southern state to legalize medical marijuana. Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have legalized medical marijuana in some form. Massachusetts also has plans for voters to vote on this issue in the fall as well. There are stipulations to the bill. In order to use medical marijuana, you must have a qualifying health condition that include cancer, glaucoma, AIDS, HIV and Alzheimer’s. Also, minors who fall in one of the medical conditions listed above would be able to get medical marijuana with parental consent. The big kicker in the proposal is that if you live more than five miles from a dispensary you or a designated caregiver may grow marijuana for medical use. Conservative coalition members are not backing down from the fight and are ready for battle when it comes time to vote on the issue come November 6th. I don’t disagree with the use of medical marijuana at all. If one is in need of pain management, whether it be from marijuana or an opiate that is prescribed and dispensed by a licensed individual, then that individual should have the right to take care of their ailment. The part that I disagree with is, that an individual who lives more than five miles away from a dispensary may grown their own marijuana. If you can have your Xanax, Vicodin, Valium, Fentanyl, or other highly addictive narcotics mail ordered to you, then you should be able to receive your medical marijuana through the mail also. Who monitors the postal system and the dispensing of medically prescribed narcotics' The Government. Maybe the solution is to push for national law changes and get the FDA involved to regulate potency and dispensing to those in need. DeMillo, Andrew. "Arkansas Court Upholds Medical Marijuana Proposal." News from The Associated Press. 27 Sept. 2012. 27 Sept. 2012 http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_MEDICAL_MARIJUANA_ARKANSAS'SITE=AP