Letter to the Editor

January 18th, 2012 No comments

I found the using of the Cruise Ship Costa Concordia tragedy and loss of life, to attack President Obama, deplorable. (Opinion page January 18, 2018) I fail to see the humor. Then right below the tragic cruise ship picture is Rep. Smith’s opinion, “High Court must strike down health law”. In my opinion, we need a representative that will work with the Democrats and stop being an obstructionist to everything President Obama and the Democrats have tried to do to help the people in need. I like the word, compromise. “settlement by concessions”. If Rep. Smith doesn’t like the “Affordable Health Care Act“, what is he going to do to help 40 million people that don’t have health insurance? What about the people that have pre existing conditions? How about families with children with low paying jobs and no benefits or are in school? Children stay on their parents insurance until they are 26. Is Rep. Smith going to stand there when Medicare is gutted, if Rep. Paul Ryan has his way. They like the term “Obamacare”, I like the term “Romneycare”.

Terry Sigler
Chairman, Lincoln County Democrats

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

Nebraska Democrat Chairman Vic Covalt Lunch and Regular Meeting

January 17th, 2012 No comments

Lincoln County Democrats

Meet and Greet Fellow Democrats

Date: Sunday January 22, 2012

Nebraska Democrat Chairman
Vic Covalt
will be at the North Platte Airport Inn Tiffany Room for Lunch.
All Lincoln County Democrats are invited to attend.

Time: 12:30PM
Invite a Democrat to attend

Regular February Meeting

Date: February 2, 2012

Time: 6:00PM Dinner 7:00PM Meeting

Place: Airport Inn-Tiffany Room

Buy USA

For information please call: Terry Sigler 532-6041
Lincoln County Chair

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

Oil for Communist China

January 4th, 2012 Comments off

The oil industry’s top lobbyist warned the Obama administration Wednesday to approve the Keystone XL oil pipeline or face “huge political consequences” in an election year.

Jack Gerard, president of the American Petroleum Institute, said it would be a “huge mistake” for President Barack Obama to reject the 1,700-mile, Canada-to-Texas pipeline. Obama faces a Feb. 21 deadline to decide whether the $7 billion pipeline is in the national interest.

“Clearly, the Keystone XL pipeline is in the national interest,” Gerard said at the trade association’s annual “State of American Energy” event. “A determination to decide anything less than that I believe will have huge political consequences.”

Gerard said the oil group has teamed up with at least 15 unions to support the pipeline, which would create thousands of jobs.

“We will stand shoulder to shoulder” with labor unions that have backed the pipeline, including the Teamsters and the AFL-CIO’s Building and Construction Trades Department, Gerard said.

“Over the next 60 days, they will not be silent,” he said.

Gerard repeatedly referred to the Keystone pipeline at his annual speech assessing the energy industry, calling it the business group’s top near-term priority.

While the pipeline has not been a focus of the GOP race for president, Gerard said the issue has the potential to become a major factor in the general election.

“It’s already an election issue” in the presidential race and is likely to be a focus of several U.S. Senate races, Gerard said, calling the pipeline the largest “shovel-ready” project in the country.

The pipeline, proposed by Calgary-based TransCanada, would carry oil derived from tar sands in western Canada to refineries in Texas, passing through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma.

TransCanada says the pipeline could create as many as 20,000 jobs over two years, a figure opponents say is inflated. A State Department report last summer said the pipeline would create up to 6,000 jobs during construction.

The pipeline proposal has forced the White House to make a politically risky choice between two key Democratic constituencies. Many unions back the project as a job creator in a down economy, while environmental groups fear it could lead to an oil spill disaster.

A payroll tax law signed by Obama just before Christmas includes a Republican-sponsored provision that sets a Feb. 21 deadline for Obama to decide on the pipeline. The administration is warning it would rather say no than rush a decision in an election year.

Environmental advocates, already disappointed with Obama’s failure to achieve climate change legislation and his decision to delay new smog standards, have made it clear that approval of the pipeline would dampen their enthusiasm in his bid for re-election.

Some liberal donors even threatened to cut off funds to Obama’s re-election campaign to protest the project, which opponents say would transport “dirty oil” that requires huge amounts of energy to extract.

If he rejects the pipeline, Obama risks losing support from organized labor, a key part of the Democratic base, for thwarting jobs.

Obama appeared to have skirted what some dubbed the “Keystone conundrum” in November when the State Department announced it was postponing a decision on the pipeline until after this year’s election. Officials said they needed extra time to study routes that avoid an environmentally sensitive area of Nebraska that supplies water to eight states.

The affected area stretches just 65 miles through the Sandhills region of northern Nebraska, but the concerns were serious enough that the state’s governor and senators opposed the project until the pipeline was moved.

Republican Gov. Dave Heineman, who opposed the initial route, says he supports efforts to accelerate the project, noting that provisions in the payroll tax bill allow the project developer to find a new route avoiding the Sandhills.

There was no immediate response from the White House.

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

Meet and Greet Fellow Democrats January 5, 2012

December 25th, 2011 Comments off

Lincoln County Democrats

Meet and Greet Fellow Democrats

Date: Thursday January 5, 2012

Time: 6:00PM – ? (Dinner at 6:00PM and Meeting at 7:00PM)
Invite a Democrat to attend

Place: Airport Inn-Tiffany Room

Agenda:

Tar Sand Pipe Line
Update E-Mails and Addresses
Caucus and Caucus Training
Keith Neville Memorial Award
Discussions on Today’s political issues

Buy USA

For information please call: Terry Sigler 532-6041
Lincoln County Chair

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

Republican Party walking out of the tax cut debate

December 21st, 2011 Comments off

Republican Party walking out of the tax cut debate. Adrain has to go.

Copy and Paste:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_12/literally_walking_away_from_a034239.php

Boehner: Tax increase on millionaires? No way. Tax increase on the other 99.9%? Who cares?

And from the Senate Majority Leader:

Dear Speaker Boehner,

Our respective chambers have been seeking for weeks to negotiate a year-long extension of the payroll tax cut for middle-class families, as well as unemployment benefits and Medicare payments for physicians.

You and I agree that this should be our goal. But as these weeks have made clear, there remain differences between our parties over how to fund and implement these programs that will take longer then a few days to reconcile.

Recognizing this reality, eighty-nine Republican and Democratic senators came together to agree to a short-term extension of these programs. As you requested when we met last Wednesday, Senator Mcconnell and I worked together to find this common ground.

Once the House of Representatives acts on this immediate extension, we will be able to sit down and complete negotiations on a longer extension. But because we have a responsibility to assure middle-class families that their taxes will not go up while we work out our differences, we must pass this immediate extension first.

As the Senate vote made clear, there is no reason for this to be a partisan issue. I am fully confident that we can work out our differences and find common ground on a year-long extension. But in the meantime, families should not have to worry that they will wake up to a tax increase on January 1, 2012.

To provide middle-class families the certainty they deserve, I urge you to reconvene the House to act on the Senate’s bipartisan compromise as soon as possible.

Sincerely, Senator Harry Reid

. .

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

Congress and Keystone XL: A National Disgrace by Robert Redford

December 19th, 2011 Comments off

The Congress is ending the year much as it began — playing politics with our nation’s future and putting American families at risk to score partisan points.
In the closing act to a shameful year of paralysis and indecision on the issues that matter most, House Republicans held common-sense tax relief for American families hostage to a holiday gift to Big Oil.

After the GOP-led House welded the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline rider onto the tax-relief bill, the Democratic-led Senate went along for the ride, passing a bad piece of legislation rather than being accused of blocking a needed tax cut.

When the United State Congress intentionally ties these two things together, though, it’s not a joke: it’s a national disgrace.

Let’s be clear about the purpose of this move. It’s a naked political stunt designed to hurt the president in an election year. Excuse the sarcasm, but you can see the connection here: tax relief worth about $1,000 a year for the typical working family, and a misguided plan to goose the fortunes of an industry that has already hauled in profits topping $100 billion this year.

With needed tax relief for working families set to expire at year’s end, Congress should be sending President Obama a clean bill that asks a simple question: should we extend middle class tax relief and unemployment benefits at a time when our workers are struggling with hard times? For anyone who cares about fairness and families, that’s an easy one.

Instead, House Republicans tacked onto that bill a contentious and unrelated question: should we allow Big Oil to build the Keystone XL pipeline, to take the dirtiest oil on the planet from the tar sands of Canada, through the heartland of America, to refineries and ports on the Gulf of Mexico?

Tar sands crude is not only the dirtiest oil on the planet, but it is produced through some of the most destructive industrial processes ever devised.

In requiring the administration to make up its mind within 60 days, this bill ensures that the State Department will not have been able to establish that the pipeline is in the national interest. It would require a decision that pre-approves the safety of an unknown, mystery route, through Nebraska meant to avoid the precious Ogallala Acquifer. There will be no choice but to deny the pipeline permit.

Further, Keystone XL would cross more than 1,500 waterways, threatening them with the kind of accident that dumped 42,000 gallons of oil in the Yellowstone River last summer and put 20 times that much tar sands in Michigan’s Kalamazoo River in 2010, in a spill that hasn’t been cleaned up yet.

For Congressional Republicans, though, that doesn’t really matter.

What they care about is trying to somehow embarrass the president, to force his hand with an arbitrary deadline and cause a rush to judgment on a matter of serious national concern.

The misinformation spouting from GOP Congressional leadership on the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline is stunning. Just this morning on NBC’s Meet the Press, Speaker Boehner lied repeatedly about every aspect of this project. And it sat there, as truth.

Never mind that the majority of the contracts for the processed oil are already cut and most of it will likely be exported to foreign countries. Speaker Boehner sat there and said it’s a matter of national security. It’s not. It’s a matter of a big payday for his friends in the oil and gas industry.

Never mind that every independent study on how many American jobs will actually be created says, at most, 6,500 temporary construction jobs, very few of which would be local hires, according to the State Department. And never mind that Cornell University concludes it would kill more than it would create, by reducing investment in the clean energy economy. Speaker Boehner can pop off with more misinformation saying hundreds of thousands of jobs will be created. And it sits there, as truth.

Here’s the simple truth, they’re all willing to put our people and resources at growing risk to help boost oil company profits.

For the millions of Americans who care about clean air and water for their families, national security and a re-energized economy, all GOP Congressional leadership can come back with is a personal slap down. That somehow Americans who feel public health and safety are priority concerns, are crazy and irrational.

Newt Gingrich, the Republican’s leading candidate for President of the United States portrayed these American citizens, living in a democracy as “… left-wing environmental extremists in San Francisco.” Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell called for the president to not “… let a few radical environmentalists stand in the way… ” All of this feels more like middle school than political leadership.

The American people are a lot smarter than these so-called leaders give them credit for. They can tell when they’re being played. They know that this is a Congress that’s more concerned with scoring political points than it is with doing the country’s business.

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

Medicare’s drug coverage gap shrinks

November 27th, 2011 Comments off

Medicare’s drug coverage gap shrinks

Sunday, November 27, 2011 8:34 AM EST

WASHINGTON (AP) — Medicare’s prescription coverage gap is getting noticeably smaller and easier to manage this year for millions of older and disabled people with high drug costs.

The “doughnut hole,” an anxiety-inducing catch in an otherwise popular benefit, will shrink about 40 percent for those unlucky enough to land in it, according to new Medicare figures provided in response to a request from The Associated Press.

The average beneficiary who falls into the coverage gap would have spent $1,504 this year on prescriptions. But thanks to discounts and other provisions in President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul law that cost fell to $901, according to Medicare’s Office of the Actuary, which handles economic estimates.

A 50 percent discount that the law secured from pharmaceutical companies on brand name drugs yielded an average savings of $581. Medicare also picked up more of the cost of generic drugs, saving an additional $22.

The estimates are averages, so some Medicare recipients may do worse and others better. Also, it’s still unclear if the discounts will start to overcome seniors’ deep unease about the law.

Concern over cutting Medicare to expand coverage for the uninsured helped push older voters toward Republicans in the 2010 congressional elections. Obama and the Democrats have been trying to woo them back ever since.

“For people with high drug expenditures, the 50 percent discount offers real savings,” said Tricia Neuman, director of Medicare policy for the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation. “It’s certainly more helpful than no coverage at all, which is what they had previously.”

More than 2 million beneficiaries already have gotten some help, discounts that have gone largely to middle-class seniors, because the poor are covered in the gap at taxpayer expense.

For retired elementary school teacher Carolyn Friedman, it meant she didn’t need a loan to pay for drugs that keep her epilepsy under control.

“What a change for the better,” said Friedman, 71, of Sunrise, Fla. “This year it was easier to pay my bills, whereas last year I had to borrow money to pay for my medications when I was in the doughnut hole.”

One of her brand-name anti-seizure drugs cost about $370 in the gap last year, and the other about $270. This year Friedman paid about $150 and $130, respectively, for a month’s supply.

Medicare covers about 47 million older and disabled people, and about 9 in 10 have some kind of prescription plan. Most rely on the drug benefit, also known as Part D, which is delivered through private insurance plans.

Beneficiaries have until Dec. 7 to change their drug plans for 2012. Consumer advocates recommend that seniors check their coverage during open enrollment to see if their current choice remains the best for next year. Many families start the process around the Thanksgiving holiday.

The coverage gap, a money-saving idea from a previous Congress, never has been popular.

It starts after an individual beneficiary and his or her drug plan have spent a total of $2,840 on medications for the year. Seniors are then on their own for the next $3,600.

Once total spending reaches about $6,440, Medicare’s catastrophic coverage kicks in and beneficiaries pay only a token amount. Most people do not spend enough in the doughnut hole to qualify for catastrophic coverage.

Although few private insurance plans still cap the amount they spend on medications, Medicare’s hole-in-the-middle approach is highly unusual.

The Republican-led Congress that passed the drug benefit under President George W. Bush was trying to balance coverage and costs, as many conservatives fretted about creating a new unfunded entitlement.

Supporters wanted all beneficiaries to get some initial benefit from the program, and they wanted to protect those with overwhelmingly high costs. The resulting compromise led to the doughnut hole.

Under Obama’s health care law, the gap will be gradually phased down by 2020.

This year, the law provides a 50 percent discount on brand name drugs and 7 percent break on generics. Next year the discount on generics rises to 14 percent. When the changes are fully phased in, beneficiaries will still be responsible for their annual deductible and 25 percent of the cost of their medications until they reach catastrophic coverage.

If Republicans succeed in repealing what they dismiss as “Obamacare,” the discounts would be wiped out as well.

Joan Gibbs thought her pharmacy had made a mistake. Her total cost for a brand-name painkiller in the doughnut hole came out lower than her co-payment earlier in the year, at a time her plan was picking up most of the tab.

“I reluctantly called the insurance company,” said Gibbs, 54, who lives near Cleveland. “If they had made a mistake, I knew they would catch it sooner or later. I was very surprised that it turned out to be such a good discount.”

Gibbs is on Medicare because of an auto-immune disorder and other medical problems that left her unable to work.

Other beneficiaries say it’s still a struggle, even with the discounts.

John Robinson of Bel Air, Md., has diabetes and heart problems. A retired director of patient accounts for a hospital, Robinson said he runs up his credit card balance to pay for insulin, other medications and diabetic supplies in the doughnut hole.

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

December 1, 2011 Christmas Party

November 21st, 2011 Comments off

MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR

Lincoln County Democrats

CHRISTMAS PARTY

Date: Thursday, December 1, 2011

TIME: 6:00pm (Dinner and Drinks)

Place: Margie’s at the Rivers Edge Golf Course
(The Old N.P. County Club)

Menu: Prime Rib (Off the Menu)
Chicken Alfredo
Flatiron Steak
Shrimp
Dessert will be provided

#Buy USA

For information please call: Terry Sigler 532-6041
Lincoln County Chair

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

Why are Nebraskans paying $2 million for another study?

November 16th, 2011 Comments off

Flood defends paying for pipeline study

A plan to have Nebraska pay $2 million for a new environmental impact study for TransCanada’s proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline through the state got first-round legislative approval Wednesday after Speaker Mike Flood of Norfolk defended the idea.

Lawmakers voted 44-0 to adopt a Flood amendment to a pipeline siting bill (LB4) to allow Nebraska to pay for the study, then gave the bill first-round approval on a 45-0 vote.

Flood said the state should pay for the study to make sure it gets untainted information. He said there were questions about an earlier environmental study paid for by TransCanada.

“I felt that you can remove a lot of that concern by citizens of this state by having the state pay for it — to ensure the citizens that this is a straightforward, fair process and that report only belongs to the taxpayers of Nebraska,” Flood said. “If it’s important enough to do on behalf of our citizens, it’s important enough to pay for.”

Last week, the U.S. State Department ordered TransCanada to explore a route that wouldn’t go through the environmentally fragile Sandhills — where the water table is near the ground above the Ogallala Aquifer, a source of drinking water for much of the central United States. But there still was the possibility TransCanada could have chosen the Sandhills route.

Flood then brokered a deal whereby TransCanada agreed to voluntarily move the route out of the Sandhills, and Flood offered the amendment to LB4.

The bill, as amended, will allow the state to pay for the required environmental impact study on the new portion of the pipeline in Nebraska. The State Department said Nebraska — through the state Department of Environmental Quality — would have authority to work with federal officials on such a study. Gov. Dave Heineman would then have to sign off on the project.

The $7 billion, 1,700-mile Keystone XL would run from the oil sands of Alberta to refineries along the U.S. Gulf Coast. It was met by fierce resistance from landowners and advocacy groups worried about the effects of a spill in the Sandhills.

Heineman called lawmakers into special session to address those concerns.

On Wednesday, Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln asked Flood if it was fair to have the state pay for the cost of the environmental impact study.

“I didn’t want there to be any question among our citizens as to who this report belongs to and who the customer is,” Flood said. “I wanted a process that we could all be proud of that could be free from any perceived conflicts or influence.

Flood noted that the U.S. Inspector General is investigating the relationship between TransCanada’s lobbyists and the State Department, which will give final approval to the pipeline. He also noted that some questioned the validity of the environmental impact study that was paid for by TransCanada.

“I think our citizens are paying close attention,” Flood said. “I felt like, if this was important enough to do, it was important enough to pay for, so that we ensure that we get the best possible environmental impact statement … that we can.”

Sen. Bill Avery of Lincoln said that “as unpleasant as this might be,” having the state pay for the study is necessary.

“Remember that the current federal environmental impact study (paid for by TransCanada) was profoundly deficient and roundly criticized,” he said. “TransCanada played such a heavy role in actually selecting the company that did the study.”

Another pending bill (LB1), by Sen. Annette Dubas of Fullerton, already has been given first-round approval, but is undergoing major revisions before second-round debate.

Dubas’ Major Oil Pipeline Siting Act would give authority for siting future oil pipelines to the Nebraska Public Service Commission, which oversees telecommunications, mass transit and utilities.

It would not apply to the Keystone XL. That would remove the specter of a lawsuit against the state for passing so-called special legislation aimed specifically at the Keystone XL, which has been in the works for more than three years.

Alex Pourbaix, TransCanada’s president for energy and oil pipelines, said earlier that with state and federal officials working together, the new environmental impact study could be done in six to nine months.

Flood also said he does not support leaving the final say on siting future pipelines with the governor, as has been proposed by some. Leaving the decision with the Public Service Commission after a formal siting process would remove politics from the mix, he said.

TransCanada has said Keystone XL would use state-of-the-art technology and be among the safest in the world. Other proponents tout jobs the project would create and say the pipeline would help reduce the nation’s reliance on overseas oil.

U.S. Sen. Ben Nelson on Wednesday lauded the Legislature and Flood “for their leadership in stepping forward to assert the state’s rights concerning the proposed Keystone XL pipeline project.”

“This has always been a state’s rights issue for me and it’s been gratifying to see Nebraskans’ rights being exercised on a major project in our state,” Nelson said during his weekly conference call with members of the Nebraska media. “I commend the Nebraska Legislature for stepping forward to address issues concerning the proposed pipeline’s route, safety and impact.

“I also commend the Speaker of the Legislature, Speaker Flood. He’s done an outstanding job in negotiating with TransCanada a new route taking the pipeline out of the Sandhills, and for working on legislation asserting the state’s rights in determining an acceptable alternative route.”

Nelson said it was unfortunate an acceptable route wasn’t negotiated at the beginning of the process.

“That would have avoided the unnecessary costs to both TransCanada and our Nebraska taxpayers,” he said. “But I’m pleased to see that state senators are stepping forward to make sure an acceptable route alternative is developed and that jobs aren’t lost in Nebraska.”

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:

Flood: TransCanada to move pipeline

November 14th, 2011 Comments off

LINCOLN – Speaker of the Legislature Mike Flood said Monday that TransCanada has agreed to move the Keystone XL pipeline out of the Nebraska Sand Hills.

Flood said late Monday afternoon that he had just gotten the word from TransCanada officials that they would voluntarily change their original route. The new route will steer clear from the ecologically sensitive Sand Hills, which overlie the Ogallala Aquifer.

Also Monday as the Legislature began debate on pipeline routing bills, he introduced an amendment to a bill that sets out the process for a state review of the new Keystone XL route.

Flood is proposing an amendment saying that Nebraska will do a supplemental environmental impact statement to go along with the Obama administration’s decision to delay a federal permit for the pipeline until 2013 to further explore routes that bypass the Sand Hills and underlying Ogallala Aquifer.

Under Flood’s plan, Gov. Dave Heineman would recommend approval or diapproval of any pipeline routes viewed by the state. Flood said the process would take six to nine months, which would mean that it could be completed before the extended federal review.

Flood said the review would be done by the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality.

As part of his plan, he said he had gotten agreement from the Natural Resources Committee to advance Legislative Bill 1, the measure proposed by Sen Annette Dubas of Fullerton. He said the bill would be amended to apply to all future pipelines.

“We should never have to live through this nightmare again,” he said.

Flood said the process represents a “win-win.”

Flood said he sent a letter last week to the U.S. Department of State asking whether the federal pipeline review process would allow for formal state participation. He said he sent the letter based on testimony at a public hearing last week.

The federal response arrived early Monday afternoon, clearing the way for the deal to go forward. In it, federal officials said they were open to state participation.

“I am confident that the Department and Nebraska authorities would be able to efficiently work together in preparing any documents necessary to examine alternative routes in the State of Nebraska that satisfy federal laws and any state law Nebraska may adopt,” said Kerri-Ann Jones, assistant secretary of state.

Flood also got a letter from Mike Linder, head of the Department of Environmental Quality, affirming that the department could handle a review of the pipeline route.

Flood said he was proposing that the state, not TransCanada, would pay for the state review. But under Dubas’ bill, future pipeline developers would have to pay fees to cover review costs.

Jane Kleeb, head of the anti-pipeline group Bold Nebraska, said she was excited that the Keystone XL pipeline would be moved and that Nebraska could get pipeline routing authority over future pipelines.
“It’s not often that citizens win against big oil but they did today,” she said.

Kleeb said she remains leery of TransCanada, however, and won’t be ready to party until she sees the promise to reroute the Keystone pipeline in writing.

TransCanada planned a 5 p.m. press conference Monday in Lincoln on the issue.

Meanwhile, the Nebraska Attorney General’s Office won’t weigh in on the legal issues surrounding pipeline routing proposals.

Monday, lawmakers were told that the Attorney General’s Office was concerned that issuing a legal opinion now could complicate the office’s job of defending the state against any lawsuits.

State Sen. Galen Hadley of Kearney had requested the opinion last week in hopes of clarifying the coflicting legal opinions. Hadley said he was awaiting a written explanation from the AG’s office.

Categories: Uncategorized Tags: