The pod next to my computer is normally Hilbert’s territory. Once in a while, though, Hopper curls up in it for a nice nap. When Hilbert gets wind of this, his jealous bone asserts itself and he hops up and starts pushing and nudging to make room for himself. For a few minutes there are two cats wedged into the pod, but eventually Hopper gets tired of the whole thing and heads off somewhere else.
But not this week! Instead, Hilbert walked over and just piled on top of Hopper. I think Donald Trump is having a bad influence on him. Surprisingly, Hopper put up with this for a few minutes, and then tried to shift into a new position. But before long she gave up. As usual, Hilbert had the pod to himself.
Just in case you’re curious about how the public views Obamacare vs. the Republican health care plan, here you go:
Every month, Obamacare gets a little more popular and the Republican plan gets a little less popular. And yet, Republicans persist.
Of course, I continue to think that Obamacare’s regulations about pre-existing conditions and community rating will remain intact because they can’t be repealed under reconciliation rules. But does the Senate parliamentarian agree with me? And even if she does, will Mike Pence have the stones to just overrule her? A few months ago I didn’t think Pence would do it. Today I’m not so sure.
A major shoe dropped in the battle to preserve the Affordable Care Act on Tuesday, as Anthem, the nation’s second-largest health insurer, announced it is withdrawing entirely from the individual market in Ohio….Anthem said in its announcement that the principal causes of its withdrawal are “the shrinking individual market as well as continual changes in federal operations, rules and guidance.”
That’s a reference to the uncertainty surrounding President Trump’s vagueness about whether he will approve subsidies for deductibles and co-pays for the poorest Obamacare enrollees and whether his administration will continue enforcing the ACA’s individual mandate in 2018.
Slowly but surely, we are seeing the practical effects of the Trump administration’s efforts to sow uncertainty over the Affordable Care Act’s future. They look like the very early stages of collapse….Approximately 38,000 Obamacare enrollees now live in places where no health plans want to sell Obamacare coverage in 2018. This is a small fraction of Obamacare enrollees — about 0.3 percent — who mostly live in rural, sparsely populated areas
….The Obama administration worked hard to recruit health insurers to sell to these empty areas. The Trump administration, however, seems to want to stand aside and let Obamacare run on autopilot so it can explode or survive on its own….His administration has waffled on whether it will continue funding key Obamacare payments. He has said he expects the marketplaces to “explode” on their own.
A powerful House Republican said Thursday that Congress should immediately provide money for subsidy payments to health insurance companies, which have been demanding big rate increases or fleeing from Affordable Care Act markets because of President Trump’s threat to cut off the funds.
The Republican, Kevin Brady of Texas, who is the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, went out of his way to make clear that he now believes that Congress should continue the subsidies, which compensate insurers for reducing deductibles and other out-of-pocket costs for seven million low-income people.
Most likely, Brady is afraid that the public will blame Republicans if Obamacare collapses on their watch. But I’ll take what I can get. Regardless of whether it’s just an act of partisan self-preservation, CSR subsidies need to be put on a firm footing. Killing off CSR seemed like great fun and games when Republicans weren’t in power, but now it’s suddenly become clear to them that this is serious business that will cause enormous pain to millions of registered voters.
It’s sad that this is what it takes to get that through their heads, but it is what it is. Whatever the reason, at least some of them are starting to see sense.
This is worth watching to the end. It’s only three minutes long:
I especially like the part where chairman Orrin Hatch has to get a lengthy brief from one of his aides before he’s able to confirm that, no, there will not be a hearing.
It would be a mistake to think of what Trump is doing here as persuasion. He is not trying to offer a more consistent or credible account of events than Comey did. He is not marshaling evidence that disproves Comey’s testimony, or offering alternative explanations for the interactions Comey recorded.
No fair-minded person would look at Comey’s testimony and the White House’s pushback and see anything of value in the latter. Trump isn’t crafting believable lies or arguing with how Comey understood events or even trying to convince observers of an alternative timeline. He’s bullshitting.
I disagree. Not about Trump being a bullshitter, of course. He is. But as always, keep his audience in mind. Trump’s tweets aren’t aimed at me or Ezra or the editors of the New York Times. They’re aimed at his base supporters, many of whom will see little about the Comey hearing other than what Trump says.
For that audience, this is an extremely coherent, consistent, and persuasive statement. They didn’t watch the hearing, and they don’t read Vox or Mother Jones. This is it. And given the opportunity to have first crack at their headspace, Trump doesn’t bother spinning or exaggerating. He just flat-out says he was totally vindicated, and he says it as if this were common knowledge.
And why not? He doesn’t care what anyone else thinks. If his base will buy it, there’s no reason to be subtle.
It’s official: Theresa May and the Conservative Party have lost their majority in Parliament. May called a snap election six weeks ago hoping to give herself a bigger mandate to negotiate Brexit, and just the opposite happened. The Tories lost about a dozen seats and will end up with fewer than 320 by the time every constituency has reported in. They need 326 for a majority. The Guardian’s numbers are below.
Yes. It was all those things. I think. But what do I know about British politics? In any case, the whole populist tidal wave thing sure seems to be petering out. Donald Trump is sucking wind, and turning out to be an old-fashioned Republican plutocrat anyway. Emmanuel Macron won handily in France. And now the Brexit wing of British politics has taken a shellacking.
There’s chatter that Theresa May will resign tomorrow and set up yet another Conservative leadership fight. Didn’t we just have one of those? Either way, it seems likely there will be another election later this year.
As the U.S. government considers expanding a ban on laptop computers and other electronic devices from the cabins of commercial flights, federal data show that storing such devices in the cargo area of a plane could increase the risk of fires.
Indeed. Here’s FAA data on known fires from lithium-ion batteries on passenger flights:
Battery fires have skyrocketed since 2015. When they’re in the passenger compartment, they can usually be extinguished without too much trouble. But if they’re in the cargo hold, there’s a greater risk of a battery explosion causing major damage—and possible loss of life—before it’s put out.
Ironically, this is an example of something I was complaining about yesterday: comparing deaths from terrorism with deaths from accidents like bathtub falls. In this case, though, it’s a live question. What are the odds of a plane going down because a terrorist has smuggled an explosive onto a plane inside a laptop computer? And what are the odds of a plane going down because of a laptop battery fire in a cargo hold?
I assume the chances of the latter are small, since it’s never happened. Then again, the chances of the former are pretty minuscule too. Has anyone tried to do a hazard analysis of this? Are there better ways of making sure electronic devices don’t contain explosives? And how do you factor in the loss of convenience from banning laptops? Those are good questions. Anyone have any answers?
If this holds up, it will be a huge kick in the pants for Theresa May and the Tories. Of course, it might not hold up. Don’t get either too thrilled or too depressed yet.
A couple of months ago, after vast effort, I posted some spectacular pictures of one of our backyard hummingbirds. I wanted to know what kind of hummingbird it was, and figured it should be no problem identifying it. But our bird commenters failed me. “We need to see it from behind,” they wailed. Sheesh.
But today is our lucky day! I saw Hopper become intently interested in something, and when I followed her gaze there was a hummingbird facing away from me. I had time for one quick photo, and this is it. So I’m giving the bird people a second chance. I don’t actually know if this is the same variety of hummingbird as last time, but it probably is, don’t you think? And now we have both front and back photos. So what is this little guy?
ANSWER: Juvenile male Anna’s hummingbird. Unless someone decides to argue about this.
I would count these as the six biggest highlights of James Comey’s testimony before Congress today:
Leaked memo. Comey testified that he leaked his own memos in hopes of prompting the appointment of a special prosecutor.
Jeff Sessions. Comey testified that in addition to Jeff Sessions’ meetings with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the 2016 campaign, “We were also aware of facts I can’t discuss in an open setting that would make his continued involvement in a Russia investigation problematic.”
FBI in chaos. Regarding President Trump’s claim that the FBI was in chaos and agents had lost confidence in Comey, “Those were lies, plain and simple.”
Loyalty. Comey testified that Trump told him, “I need loyalty. I expect loyalty.” After the hearing, Trump’s lawyer flatly denied this. In essence, he accused Comey of perjury.
Direction. Regarding Trump’s comment about the Flynn-Russia investigation (“I hope you can let this go”) Comey testified that “I took it as direction.”
Russia. Comey testified that Trump never once showed any interest in the FBI’s investigation of Russia’s interference with the 2016 election.
More generally, I’d also say that one of the highlights of the hearing was the almost unanimous Republican desire to carry water for Trump and play down the seriousness of what happened. This got almost comical when GOP senators abandoned the subject of the hearing entirely and tried to turn the topic to Hillary Clinton’s email server. I’m only surprised that none of them tried to bring up Benghazi.
Billionaires own the media,
but they don’t own us.
At Mother Jones we know these aren’t conventional times, and they require unconventional coverage. That’s what deliver every day: fierce, independent journalism you can’t find elsewhere. Perhaps never in the history of our country has that been more necessary than now. But we can’t do it without reader support—your support. Please chip in today.
Billionaires own the media,
but they don’t own us.
At Mother Jones we know these aren’t conventional times, and they require unconventional coverage. That’s what deliver every day: fierce, independent journalism you can’t find elsewhere. Perhaps never in the history of our country has that been more necessary than now. But we can’t do it without reader support—your support. Please chip in today.
