Sign up today

Sign up today
Softphone APP for Android &IOS

RG Richardson Communications News

I am a business economist with interests in international trade worldwide through politics, money, banking and VOIP Communications. The author of RG Richardson City Guides has over 300 guides, including restaurants and finance.

eComTechnology Posts

Our House Was a Very, Very, Very Fine House

Our House Was a Very, Very, Very Fine House Trump views the physical history of the White House much as he views the nation’s laws: somethi...

The man who helped roll back abortion rights-Leonard Leo

 https://www.npr.org/2024/11/24/nx-s1-5199049/federalist-society-conservative-supreme-court The man who helped roll back abortion rights now wants to 'crush liberal dominance'.

Leonard Leo may not be a household name, but odds are most people in the country know his signature achievement:

Leo was a key architect of the conservative supermajority on the Supreme Court that rolled back the federal right to an abortion.

The conservative activist advised President-elect Donald Trump during his first term on the nominations of Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. The three picks gave conservatives their 6-3 majority on the high court. And all of them voted to overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade abortion rights decision.

For decades, as a leading figure in the Federalist Society and other conservative legal groups, Leo identified and promoted the careers of lawyers and law clerks who shared his views of the constitution.

The Matt Gaetz Report Is a Reminder That Investigations Actually Matter

 Two damning investigations are a stark reminder of what we stand to lose. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/12/matt-gaetz-ethics-report-clarence-thomas-harlan-crow.html?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=traffic&utm_source=article&utm_content=twitter_share via @slate

New permit needed as of today for Canadians flying to UK, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland

 

New permit needed as of today for Canadians flying across the pond

A digital pre-screening requirement is now in effect for short-term travellers to the U.K.

Airplane at Charlottetown Airport.
Without an ETA, travellers could be turned away and sent back to Canada, says Wayne Smith, the director of the Institute for Hospitality and Tourism Research at Toronto Metropolitan University. (Jane Robertson/CBC)

Starting today, Canadians with short-term travel plans to England, Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland will need an electronic travel authorization — or an ETA.

Travellers planning to visit the United Kingdom for less than six months will be asked to submit information such as their passport details, dates of travel and modes of transportation, which will be reviewed by authorities.

The digital pre-screening is new for Canadians flying to the U.K., but a similar system has been in place since 2016 for people from several other countries who travel by air to Canada.

It's "kind of like doing a pre-approval for a credit card," said Wayne Smith, the director of the Institute for Hospitality and Tourism Research at Toronto Metropolitan University. 

Man on his porch.
'It allows all the governments to be more interconnected and talking to one another and sharing information,' says Wayne Smith. (CBC)

The system will run applicants' information through a worldwide database before granting approval, Smith told CBC P.E.I.'s Island Morning

"It allows all the governments to be more interconnected and talking to one another and sharing information," he said. 

"It creates a much more secure security blanket for everyone involved." 

A growing trend 

Electronic travel authorizations are becoming more common around the world.

"This will be prevalent globally in a few years," Smith said. 

Twenty-seven countries in the EU are expected to launch a similar system by the end of this year. Smith said he fully expects to see ETAs implemented in the U.S. during Donald Trump's presidency, too.

Union Jack flags hang in parliament square on February 1, 2020 in London, England.
The new ETA requirement to travel to the U.K. isn't the first of its kind. This country has had a similar requirement for people from several other countries flying into Canada since 2016. (Jeff J. Mitchell/Getty Images)

The system is meant to assist with concerns about immigration and refugee status, he said. 

"You could check if someone has, for example, gone to three different countries and claimed refugee status. Or you can check… if they've come and actually been denied visas in other places before, if people have overstayed their visas in other countries," Smith said.

"All those things will now be... caught before the person even leaves their home country."  

'The price of travelling'

The application costs £10, or about $18 Cdn. But there's no guarantee those prices will remain at that level. Since tourists are the ones paying the application fees, Smith said politicians can easily raise the costs. 

"Once they're in the system and they're paying for the system, all of a sudden I could see those things rising quite dramatically," he said. 

"People wouldn't necessarily blink at paying $50 for that — it's the price of travelling." 

Another possibility Smith said wouldn't surprise him is that the fees could take on dynamic pricing, with certain times of the year being more expensive to travel than others. 

Accessibility is also concern, said Smith. 

"I have a 78-year-old mother that hates technology in every single way, and so something like this would be a real barrier to her travelling," he said. 

"All these things can be very frustrating to a lot of people and make travel inaccessible." 

Smith said travel agents are making a comeback, and helping people submit their ETA applications is another service they could offer. 

A word of advice

Approvals for ETA applications can take as little as 10 minutes, said Smith, but that doesn't mean people should take the risk of waiting for their flight to land before submitting their application.

Without the authorization, travellers could be turned away and sent back to the country they came from, he said. 

"I would highly recommend anyone do this multiple weeks before you go, just like any other visas," Smith said. "Make sure you have everything, that you have copies of things, that you take a screenshot of your approval." 

Once an authorization has been approved, it will last for two years and can be used as many times as desired during that time. 

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Meta’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg - Thom Hartmann


Meta’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg (wearing a $900,000 watchannounced yesterday morning that across their over-7-billion-user-strong social media empire — Facebook, Instagram, Threads, WhatsApp — they’ll be dialing back on fact-checking. They’re also preparing to promote more “political” content (among other changes that support those two moves, like no longer filtering out trash-talking queer people or immigrants, and moving what’s left of their Trust & Safety team from liberal California to conservative Texas).

Here’s the problem: Republican politicians rely on lies, distortions, and falsehoods to sell most of their policies and candidates.

They must do this because the reality of their actual goals (cut billionaire taxes, increase pollution, gut worker and consumer protections, defund schools and medical care, privatize and cut Social Security and Medicare, subsidize oil companies, outlaw abortion, etc.) are so repellent to most Americans.

Read More

Alberta Insider: $1-billion spent on inactive well cleanup

Todd Korol/The Globe and Mail

A report released this week shows that between the oil and gas sector, the Alberta government’s site-rehabilitation program and the industry-funded Orphan Well Association, more than $1-billion was spent in 2023 on cleaning up inactive wells in the province.

Obviously, with a spend as large as that, it must have made a massive dent in the approximately 80,000 inactive wells in the province, right?

Well, according to the Alberta Energy Regulator’s annual liability monitoring report released Thursday, only about five per cent of Alberta’s inactive wells were rehabilitated.

Just an oil drop in the bucket.

Each year, the AER requires the oil and gas sector in Alberta to spend a certain amount on cleaning up inactive wells and pipelines. Last year, that figure was set at $700-million.

But one expert says not nearly enough is being spent by the industry to deal with the massive environmental liability, and he wants to see the AER force the sector’s hand.

“The point is the AER has no plan to get that money for those liabilities from profitable companies,” said Martin Olszynski, an associate professor and Chair in Energy, Resources and Sustainability at the University of Calgary Faculty of Law.

Speaking with The Globe’s energy reporter, Emma Graney, Olszynski pointed at Canadian Natural Resources Ltd., a company that he said is “making money hand over fist” right now, and is responsible for about 20,000 of the province’s inactive wells.

While the AER says the cost of cleaning up the hundreds of thousands of oil and gas wells in the province is about $33.3-billion, Olszynski believes that number is low. And internal AER documents themselves suggest the environmental liability could be nearly triple that estimate, coming in closer to $88-billion.

Thursday’s AER report comes just a week after the Canadian Association of Energy Contractors, projected a 7.3-per-cent increase in the number of oil and gas wells being drilled in 2025.

“Hope is making a comeback in the oil patch,” said association CAOEC chief Mark Scholz last week in Calgary.

Of course, all good news in the industry these days is tempered by the shadow of the looming oil and gas emissions cap proposed by Ottawa and the 25-per-cent tariff U.S. president-elect Donald Trump has threatened to impose on imports.

Premier Danielle Smith has promised that her government intends to fight Ottawa over the proposed cap, which would limit emissions from the oil and gas sector to 35 per cent below 2019 levels.

Last week she announced a legal challenge and a sweeping list of proposed actions intended to press Ottawa into scrapping the emissions cap, including seizing data that Alberta oil and gas companies collect about greenhouse gases at their facilities, barring entry to energy facilities by federal officials and ensuring that no provincial entity helps Ottawa implement or enforce the cap.

This is the weekly Alberta newsletter written by Alberta Bureau Chief Mark Iype. If you’re reading this on the web, or it was forwarded to you from someone else, you can sign up for it and all Globe newsletters here.

e.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith to attend inauguration of Donald Trump - MAGA God King

 Alberta Premier Danielle Smith to attend inauguration of Donald Trump | CBC News

Premier Danielle Smith will attend the second inauguration of U.S. president-elect Donald Trump in January, her office has confirmed.

The move comes in the wake of threats from Trump, who has said he would impose 25 per cent tariffs if Canada and Mexico do not enact measures to tackle illegal immigration and drug smuggling into the United States.

Smith will be attending and hosted at several events leading up to the inauguration, according to press secretary Sam Blackett.

Mitch McConnell’s lamentable legacy

Mitch McConnell’s lamentable legacy

During Mitch McConnell’s first race for the Senate in 1984, President Ronald Reagan came to Kentucky and endorsed his good friend, “Mitch O’Donnell.” Vice President George H.W. Bush identified McConnell, incorrectly, as the mayor of Louisville.

Over the following four decades, no politician, Democrat or Republican, would make such a mistake again. And this week, McConnell stepped down as the longest-serving and one of the most historically important Senate leaders in history.

During his tenure as leader, McConnell secured passage of important bipartisan legislation. He negotiated compromises with the Obama administration that prevented a default on federal government debt; extended the George W. Bush-era tax cuts; and bailed out the financial services industry during the Great Recession. He worked with President Biden to get the Infrastructure Bill, the CHIPS Act and military aid to Ukraine through the Senate.

That said, as Michael Tackett implies in his new book, “The Price of Power: How Mitch McConnell Mastered the Senate, Changed America, and Lost His Party,” he has also caused considerable damage to democratic norms, practices and institutions.

While he was in college, McConnell wrote that the American government should insure “the BASIC RIGHTS OF ALL citizens, regardless of race, creed, or national origin.” He voted for Lyndon Johnson because Barry Goldwater opposed civil rights legislation.

In 2019 and 2020, however, McConnell refused to hold hearings on, let alone bring to the Senate floor, the Voting Rights Act passed by the House restoring the Department of Justice’s authority to “pre-clear” state voting laws that allegedly discriminate against people of color. McConnell insists that “nobody’s votes are being suppressed anywhere across America, in any of the states.” But in 2021, the Brennan Center for Justice identified 253 bills introduced, pending or passed that restrict voting access in 43 states.

In an op-ed published in 1973, McConnell claimed that “the lack of an overall limit on spending is an open invitation for special interests” to unduly influence candidates. We are “close” to being a “bought nation,” he added. He advocated excising the “cancer” of money in politics by publicly financing elections, limiting campaign contributions and mandating full disclosure by donors.

Two decades later, McConnell made an argument that, according to Tackett, became “the heart of his political identity”: Campaign spending is an act of free speech. He launched an all-out assault on the McCain-Feingold campaign finance bill. And he played a pivotal role in court challenges that resulted in Citizens United v. FEC, the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision that paved the way for virtually unlimited and often undisclosed “dark money” political contributions from millionaires and billionaires in political action committees, operating under the fiction that they are not coordinating with candidates or political parties. Read More

Interactive City Travel

Interactive City Guides that are never out of date. R.G.Richardon has authored over 305 Interactive Worldwide Interactive Travel Guides for restaurants, hotels, transportation, historical sites, sports and events. Restaurant Guide – pubs, dining, fast food, take out, ethnic Beverage Guide – spirits etc. Career Guide – job search, permanent, part-time, career.

Influencer marketing doesn’t need more metrics — it needs more trust and collaboration between brands and influencers

Influencer marketing doesn’t need more metrics — it needs more trust and collaboration between brands and influencers

Influencer marketing has become one of the most important tools in brand strategy. Companies across various industries are increasingly turning to social media personalities to promote their products and services.

However, despite its widespread use and significant impact, influencer marketing is surrounded by uncertainties, ambiguities and controversies, both for practitioners and the general public.

Questions often arise: How do brands determine the effectiveness of an influencer campaign? How do influencers ensure that the brand partnership does not affect their relationship with their audience? Who controls the creative process during an influencer campaign?

In our recent research article in the Journal of Marketing, we discussed these ambiguities, focusing on two core areas relevant to both influencers and brands: How to determine the value of sponsored content and how to co-produce it.

Our study drew insights from a wide range of sources, including interviews with both influencers and influencer intermediaries, podcasts, media articles and third-party platform reviews. We conducted 21 primary interviews and transcribed 37 secondary interviews from podcasts. This sample included influencers specialized in the fields of fashion, food, cosmetics, travel, lifestyle, health and sexuality.

An Open Letter to Elon Musk

An Open Letter to Elon Musk

by Stephen Engelberg

ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.

Series: A Closer Look:Examining the News

More in this series

Elon,

I know your relationship with ProPublica got off to a rocky start when we contacted you about a story we were writing about your federal taxes. You replied with a lone punctuation mark — “?” — and subsequently called the story that mentioned you “a bunch of misleading stuff.”

We can agree to disagree on that story and a lot of other things. But we thought it might be useful to reach out again in light of your role, along with Vivek Ramaswamy, as co-head of the Department of Government Efficiency.

Simply put: If you’re trying to identify wasteful practices and spending by federal agencies, you’ll find a wealth of actionable issues that our reporting has surfaced over the past 16 years. You and Vivek noted in your recent Wall Street Journal op-ed on your plans for DOGE that “the federal government’s procurement process is also badly broken.”

Our reporting over the years provides some powerful illustrations of that point. ProPublica’s work on the Navy’s cost overruns and design flaws in its ships is second to none. We recently disclosed how Microsoft boxed its competitors out of providing cybersecurity software to the biggest government agencies, including the Pentagon. (Microsoft defended its conduct, saying in a statement that its “sole goal during this period was to support an urgent request by the Administration to enhance the security posture of federal agencies who were continuously being targeted by sophisticated nation-state threat actors.”)

Perhaps the most immediate relevance of our journalism to your work arises from your reported interest in creating a phone app that most Americans could use to file their taxes.

No national news organization has been more focused on this subject than ProPublica. We have thoroughly documented why the United States is one of the only industrialized countries in the world that does not provide free filing to its citizens: Companies like Intuit that make billions of dollars selling tax preparation software have persuaded Congress to block free filing and keep their businesses alive.

I’d encourage you to take a look at the story “Inside TurboTax’s 20-Year Fight to Stop Americans From Filing Their Taxes for Free.”

You’re a busy person, so I’ll provide a TL;DR version: The tax prep industry has blocked free filing by organizing a bipartisan coalition on Capitol Hill that is anchored by House Republicans but includes Democrats like Zoe Lofgren, who represents Silicon Valley.

The industry also attracted support from longtime Republican figures like Grover Norquist, who has branded proponents of free filing as “big spenders in Washington, D.C.” who are trying to “socialize all tax preparation in America.”

As you know (or will soon learn if you pursue this agenda), despite decades of resistance, the IRS recently launched a pilot program for free filing. It works pretty well, but it’ll likely remain small scale unless something changes in the current Washington status quo.

That’s where you and Vivek have a historic opportunity.

What has always struck me about Washington is its ability to resist fundamental change. People arrive with big plans for reforms and often end up becoming part of the problem.

I began my career as a Washington reporter in 1983, two years after President Ronald Reagan took office promising to upend how business was done in the capital. Reagan was serious about coming up with some concrete ideas for saving money and reducing waste. He created a presidential commission of business executives and urged its members to work like “tireless bloodhounds.”

“Don’t leave any stone unturned in your search to root out inefficiency,” the president said.

Two years later, the commission delivered 47 volumes of reforms that it said could save $424 billion in government spending over three years. Most of the proposals required congressional action, a daunting task when the Senate was controlled by Republicans and the House by Democrats. In the end, only 27% of the recommendations were enacted. By the time Reagan’s term was over, government spending was up and the deficit had grown.

I believe Republican control of the presidency and both houses of Congress gives you and Vivek a better shot at taking on issues like free tax filing that have long been dismissed as lost causes. There’s a broad coalition of Americans who voted for Donald Trump, many of whom feel the government cares little about their problems. Politicians of both parties understand that their futures may depend on taking real, measurable steps to address those concerns.

Eliminating the annual ritual of paying money to a third party in order to tell the government what it already knows about your personal finances could be both popular and more efficient.

There has been a lot of skepticism about whether it’s possible to achieve your goal of cutting trillions of dollars from the federal budget. It appears to me that you could only rack up that level of savings by slashing everything from Medicare to military spending. I think the president’s political advisers will take the ax out of your hands before you hit the first trillion.

That’s not to say there isn’t an array of government programs that could be better run. We see our job as holding power to account, and the waste of the people’s money is one focal point of our reporting. That’s why we’ve written repeatedly about waste and fraud in Medicare and Medicaid, the government’s two biggest health care programs. (We’ve also covered the way cuts to those programs harm people.)

I have little doubt that we will write stories in the coming years that will enrage people you know. Some of our work may even focus on you or your companies. With immense power comes immense scrutiny. (As we did several years ago, we will always reach out to you for your response before we publish anything about you.)

Still, I would be disappointed if we did not also publish a piece or two that prompted you to storm into Vivek’s office and say: “Damn, this is outrageous. We could fix this.”

Best,

Steve Engelberg

Sharing of Customer Data With Political Operatives

 <h1>Senator Slams Gun Industry’s “Invasive and Dangerous” Sharing of Customer Data With Political Operatives</h1><p>by Corey G. Johnson</p><p><em>ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for <a href="https://www.propublica.org/newsletters/the-big-story?source=reprint&placement=top-note">The Big Story newsletter</a> to receive stories like this one in your inbox</em>.</p><div><p>A U.S. senator this week criticized the gun industry for secretly harvesting personal information from firearm owners for political purposes, calling it an “invasive and dangerous intrusion” of privacy and safety.</p><p>In a <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25291300-bllumenthal-letter-to-nssf">letter sent</a> to the National Shooting Sports Foundation on Tuesday, Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., questioned the legality of the “covert program” in which firearms manufacturers for years shared sensitive customer information with political operatives.</p><p>Blumenthal cited <a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/gunmakers-owners-sensitive-personal-information-glock-remington-nssf">a ProPublica investigation</a> that found some of America’s most iconic gunmakers secretly participated, even while the gun industry presented itself as a privacy protector and fought against government and corporate efforts to track firearms ownership.</p><p>At least 10 gun industry businesses, including Glock, Smith & Wesson and Remington, handed over <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25246159-nssf-bd-of-gov-agenda2-kansas-city-51801-database">hundreds of thousands</a> of names, addresses and other private data — without customer knowledge or consent — to the NSSF, which then entered the details into what would become a massive database. The database was used to rally gun owners’ electoral support for the industry’s candidates running for the White House and Congress.</p><p>Blumenthal, who chairs a Senate subcommittees on privacy, gave the NSSF a Nov. 21 deadline to answer several questions. He wanted to know more about which companies contributed information to the database, the type of customer details shared and whether the data is still being used by the organization or by others.</p><p>The senator, who served as Connecticut’s attorney general for two decades and has consistently supported legislation to reduce gun violence, said he was also “disturbed” by “glaring discrepancies” between what ProPublica uncovered and the NSSF’s previous responses to his office.</p><p>In 2022, Blumenthal sent the NSSF a list of questions after reading leaked documents that made a passing reference to the database. In <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25245645-nssf-response-to-senator-blumenthal-letter18-1">its response</a>, the NSSF would not acknowledge the database’s existence.</p><p>“The secretive compilation and sharing of private information by NSSF and its partners seems to have violated federal consumer protection laws and created substantial data privacy and safety risks for lawful gun owners,” Blumenthal wrote.</p><p>The customer information initially came from decades of warranty cards filled out and returned to gun manufacturers for rebates and repair or replacement programs. A ProPublica review of dozens of warranty cards from the 1970s through today found that some promised customers their information would be kept strictly confidential. Others said some information could be shared with third parties for marketing and sales. None of the cards informed buyers their details would be used by lobbyists and consultants to win elections.</p><p>Violating a promise of strict confidentiality on warranty cards or failing to mention that consumer information could be given to the NSSF may qualify as a deceptive practice under the Federal Trade Commission Act, privacy and legal experts said. Under the law, companies must follow their privacy policies and be clear with consumers about how they will use their information.</p><p>The NSSF did not respond to messages seeking comment. Previously, the group defended the data collection, saying in a statement to ProPublica that any suggestion of “unethical or illegal behavior is entirely unfounded.” The statement said “these activities are, and always have been, entirely legal and within the terms and conditions of any individual manufacturer, company, data broker, or other entity.”</p><p>Glock and Smith & Wesson did not previously respond to ProPublica’s requests for comment. In the years since the data sharing program was launched, Remington has been split into two companies and sold. Remarms, which owns the old firearms division, said it was unaware of the company’s workings at the time. The other portion of the company is now owned by Remington Ammunition, which said it had “not provided personal information to the NSSF or any of its vendors.”</p><p>Founded in 1961 and currently based in Shelton, Connecticut, the NSSF represents thousands of firearms and ammunition manufacturers, distributors, retailers, publishers and shooting ranges. While not as well known as the chief lobbyist for gun owners, the National Rifle Association, the NSSF is respected and influential in business, political and gun-rights communities.</p><p>For two decades, the organization has raged against government and corporate attempts to amass information on gun buyers. As recently <a href="https://www.nssf.org/articles/nssf-applauds-louisiana-gov-landry-for-signing-second-amendment-financial-privacy-act/">as this year</a>, the NSSF pushed for laws that would prohibit credit card companies from creating special codes for firearms dealers, claiming the codes could be used to create a registry of gun purchasers.</p><p>As a group, gun owners are fiercely protective about their personal information. Many have good reasons. Their ranks include police officers, judges, domestic violence victims and others who have faced serious threats of harm.</p><p>The gun industry launched the data harvesting approximately 17 months before the 2000 election as it grappled with a cascade of financial, legal and political threats.</p><p>Within three years, the NSSF’s database — filled with warranty card information and supplemented with names from voter rolls and hunting licenses — contained <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25200741-nssf-bd-agenda-database-update-2002">at least 5.5 million</a> people. The information was central to what NSSF called its voter education program, which involved sending letters, postcards and later emails to persuade gun buyers to vote for the firearms industry’s preferred political candidates.</p><p>Because privacy laws shield the names of firearm purchasers from public view, the data NSSF obtained gave it a unique ability to identify and contact large numbers of gun owners or shooting sports enthusiasts. The NSSF has credited its program for helping elect both George W. Bush and Donald Trump to the White House.</p><p>In April 2016, a contractor on NSSF’s voter education project delivered a large cache of data to Cambridge Analytica, a political consulting firm credited with playing a key role in Trump’s narrow victory that year, according to internal Cambridge emails and documents. The company later went out of business amid a global scandal over its handling of confidential consumer data.</p><p>The data given to Cambridge included 20 years of gun owners’ warranty card information as well as a separate database of customers from Cabela’s, a sporting goods retailer with approximately 70 stores in the U.S. and Canada.</p><p>Cambridge combined the NSSF data with a wide array of sensitive particulars obtained from commercial data brokers. It included people’s income, their debts, their religion, where they filled prescriptions, their children’s ages and purchases they made for their kids. For women, it revealed intimate elements such as whether the underwear and other clothes they purchased were plus size or petite.</p><p>The information was used to create psychological profiles of gun owners and assign scores to behavioral traits, such as neuroticism and agreeableness. With the NSSF supporting Trump and pro-gun congressional candidates, the profiles helped Cambridge tailor the NSSF’s political messages to voters based on their personalities.</p></div><link rel="canonical" href="https://www.propublica.org/article/blumenthal-slams-gun-industry-customer-data-investigation"><meta name="syndication-source" content="https://www.propublica.org/article/blumenthal-slams-gun-industry-customer-data-investigation"><script type="text/javascript" src="https://pixel.propublica.org/pixel.js" async></script>

If Trump Makes Cuts to Medicaid, Texas Officials Could Seize the Opportunity to Further Slash the Program

If Trump Makes Cuts to Medicaid, Texas Officials Could Seize the Opportunity to Further Slash the Program by Lomi Kriel and Jessica Priest ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published. This article is co-published with The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan local newsroom that informs and engages with Texans. Sign up for The Brief Weekly to get up to speed on their essential coverage of Texas issues. Texas leaders have shown a decadeslong antipathy toward Medicaid, the federal-state health insurance program that covers millions of low-income and vulnerable residents. They declined additional federal money that, under the Affordable Care Act, would have allowed Medicaid to offer health care coverage to more low-income families. The state was among the last to insure women for an entire year after they gave birth. And when the federal government last year ended a policy that required states to keep people on their Medicaid rolls during the coronavirus pandemic, Texas officials rushed to kick off those they deemed ineligible, ignoring persistent warnings that the speedy process could lead to some people being wrongfully removed. Come January, when Donald Trump assumes the presidency for the second time, Texas leaders could get another opportunity to whittle down the program — this time with fewer constraints. Trump has not shared any plans to cut Medicaid, which covers about 80 million Americans, and his campaign did not respond to requests for comment. Health care advocates and experts, however, say that his past efforts to scale back the program, as well as positions taken by conservative groups and Republican lawmakers who back him, indicate that it would likely be a target for severe reductions. “We expect the Republicans to move very quickly to cut Medicaid dramatically and indeed end its guarantee of coverage as it exists today,” said Joan Alker, executive director of Georgetown University’s Center for Children and Families in Washington, D.C. Currently, the federal government picks up, on average, nearly 70% of Medicaid spending, with states assuming the remaining costs. (A state’s share varies based mostly on what percentage of its residents are impoverished.) Any decisions to cut federal spending would likely lead states to shrink the number of people they deem eligible and the care that enrollees are entitled to receive, Alker and other experts said. That would be particularly devastating in Texas, which already has one of the country’s lowest percentages of residents covered through Medicaid and where officials lack the political will to make up the difference in funding with state money, experts say. Parents with two children, for example, must earn less than $285 monthly to qualify for Medicaid for themselves. “Our elected officials would have to decide whether they want to cut health care for pregnant women, kids, people with disabilities, or seniors because that is essentially who Medicaid covers in Texas,” Adriana Kohler, a policy director for Texans Care for Children, a statewide nonprofit that advocates for families, said in a statement. Spokespeople for Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, and the state’s Health and Human Services Commission did not respond to repeated requests for comment. During Abbott’s prior role as the state’s attorney general, he helped to lead a successful lawsuit against the federal government, ensuring that states did not risk losing Medicaid funding entirely if they didn’t want to cover more residents as part of the Affordable Care Act. Even when Texas does offer Medicaid coverage to its most vulnerable residents, state officials enabled a system that creates often insurmountable barriers to receiving care. A 2018 Dallas Morning News investigation found that some of the insurance companies Texas hired to administer Medicaid benefits systematically denied expensive and, at times, life-saving treatments to bolster profits. Critics say problems with the system persist despite legislative reforms spurred by that series of stories. Texas insures more than 4 million residents through Medicaid, which amounts to a smaller percentage of its total population than almost any other state. But given its sheer size, the state still covers the third most people in the nation, behind only California and New York. The program provides health care for 3 in 8 children, 3 in 5 nursing home residents and 2 in 7 people with disabilities in Texas, according to KFF, a national health policy research organization. It is the top funder for nursing homes and long-term care services for the disabled and elderly, and it pays for nearly half of all births in the state. Michael Morgan, a 75-year-old retired nurse who lives in Fort Worth, is among those who worry that if Trump caps or cuts the amount of money the federal government spends on Medicaid, the state could make it even harder to get coverage for his daughter Hannah. She has Down syndrome and schizencephaly, a brain malformation, and she is deaf and partially blind, she doesn’t speak, and she needs assistance to walk and eat. Morgan is depleting his limited savings to pay for Hannah’s health care expenses after she lost Medicaid coverage earlier this year when she turned 19. He submitted a new application for her in May — she should qualify for Medicaid because of her disabilities. State officials denied her coverage in November, arguing that Morgan did not meet the deadline to return a form providing his consent for the agency to access his daughter’s medical and financial records. Morgan, who plans to appeal the denial, said in an interview that he received the form a day before the deadline. “I don’t know how much more they can cut it,” he said of Medicaid in Texas. During his first term, Trump tried unsuccessfully to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which provides health coverage to 45 million Americans. His administration also repeatedly supported spending caps for Medicaid, including block grants that would give states a fixed amount of federal funding, no matter how many people needed the insurance or how much their health care cost. Currently, Medicaid covers all people who qualify, no matter the expense. While those efforts did not significantly advance during Trump’s first term, Republicans will hold majorities in both the House and the Senate come January, and they have signaled an openness to impose caps on spending and establish requirements that most adults in the program hold jobs. They argue that Medicaid spending is unsustainable and that the program is susceptible to waste, fraud and abuse. Republicans who have supported such measures include U.S. Sen. John Cornyn and U.S. Rep. Jodey Arrington, a Lubbock Republican who leads the House Budget Committee. GOP policy primers — including Project 2025, published by the conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation, and one from the Republican Study Committee, a conservative congressional caucus — have also called for cutting Medicaid. Arrington, whose spokespeople did not respond to repeated requests for an interview, told reporters last month that he supported a “responsible and reasonable work requirement.” Harvard University health professors who studied a previous work mandate in Arkansas that Trump allowed during his first term found that most adults using Medicaid were already employed or qualified for an exemption, but thousands of residents still lost health care, at least in part because of the onerous process of continuously proving their eligibility. This is not the first time Arrington has pushed work requirements and sought to lower the share of health care costs that the federal government pays to states. He previously proposed cutting federal Medicaid spending by more than a quarter, or $1.9 trillion. Cornyn, whose spokespeople also repeatedly declined to comment, said last month that he would not support cuts to Medicare, the federal health insurance program for seniors and the disabled, or to Social Security. Still, he suggested that Medicaid cuts were on the table. “We can’t just keep doing things the way we’ve been doing them,” Cornyn told Politico Pro, adding that “block grants make a lot of sense.” William T. Smith, a 65-year-old retired construction worker who lives along the U.S.-Mexico border in Brownsville, said that he voted for Trump partly because he agrees that “there’s too much fat” and supports cutting some federal programs. Smith has chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, which affects his lungs and makes it difficult to breathe. He said he also has bipolar disorder, sleep apnea and chronic pain after decades of performing manual labor. Smith said Medicaid, which he has been trying to get since the summer, should not be where the federal government looks to reduce expenses. Instead, he said, the federal government should take savings from cutting other programs and put the money toward more people’s care. “I don’t think they’re going to yank health care away from people,” he said. “If they do, I’d be really angry.” Caught in Texas’ Medicaid and Food Stamp Application Backlog? Know Someone Who Is? Help Us Report. Dan Keemahill contributed reporting.

🚨 President Biden EXCLUSIVE Interview with MeidasTouch


MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas interviews President Biden in the Roosevelt Room in the West Wing of The White House about his legacy, accomplishments, regrets, future, and more. Interview recorded on December 16, 2024.

Donald Trump’s victory has boosted shares in private-prison companies

Donald Trump’s victory has boosted shares in private-prison companies

AS the dust settled on Donald Trump’s election victory, what businesses did investors think would benefit most from his return to the presidency? Tesla? Big oil? Rustbelt manufacturers? No: two firms that lock people up. Shares in GEO Group and Core Civic, which own and run prisons, soared by two-thirds in the three days after the election, beating the rest of America’s 1,500 most valuable firms.

Chain gangs, free labour, and kickbacks that are very profitable; just like the sharecropping cotton days in the south? All part of the monetization of the presidency and new homes for the deported immigrants?  

Singh joins Poilievre in non confidence vote

 Poilievre says House should be recalled as NDP vows to vote down Liberal government | CBC News

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre says the House of Commons should be recalled now that NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh is vowing to bring forward a motion of non-confidence to take down the Liberal government.

"The Liberals don't deserve another chance," Singh wrote in an open letter on Friday. "That's why the NDP will vote to bring this government down."

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Poilievre said the House shouldn't wait until it comes back from the winter break in January.