No comments

Send Tim Holden Packing on Tuesday

  By 2012, Health Care

Voters in the 17th Congressional District in Pennsylvania have an opportunity to do something really important, not just for themselves, but for the entire country: defeat Congressman Tim Holden. who represents the Republican wing of the Democratic party.   It is obviously important to the 17th District to have a member of Congress who actually support their interests, not those of the corporate rich. And it’s important to the Democratic Party and the country as a whole to rid ourselves of members of Congress who fail to do the minimal in standing up for the ideals of our party. Defeating such members will send a critical message throughout the Democratic Caucus: Democratic members of Congress are accountable to us. And, as I explain below, defeating Tim Holden will remove from office a whining, gutless, dishonest example of the American politician at his worst. Continue reading

One Comment

Lighten Up—and Keep Fighting—with Babette Josephs in the 182nd

  By 2012

I had my say about the 182nd State House race a few weeks so ago and hadn’t planned on writing anything else. But the recent controversy over a mailer sent out by the Josephs campaign—and even more a piece written in response to it by Tom Ferrick—led me to think a bit more about what we progressives should want in a Democratic State Representative at this point in our history. There really isn’t much to say about the controversy over the flier except that everyone ought to lighten up. The Sims camp says that it is unfair because it accuses Brian of holding right wing views he does not hold. But anyone familiar with the issues, or rather non-issues, of the campaign, and who has any sense of humor at all would recognize that the flier is put forward tongue in cheek. Everyone knows that there are no real issue… Continue reading

No comments

Cohen and Josephs for State Representative

  By 2012, Philadelphia, Politics, Progressive Politics

There are some difficult State Representative races for progressives in the city this year. In two of them, long time advocates of progressive causes, Babette Josephs in the 182nd  and Mark Cohen in the 202nd, are in races with younger and ambitious challengers, Brian Sims and Numa St. Louis. How do you choose between candidates who have no differences on issues? There are few if any differences on policy between the incumbents and the challengers. Babette and Mark simply have the best voting records in Harrisburg. (When I ran my own race as a challenger and was looking to find questionable votes taken by my opponent, Rosita Youngblood, I quickly compared her votes to those of Cohen and Josephs. There were many differences and, in each case, Cohen and Josephs had taken the progressive view.) So when there are no issue differences, how do you make up your mind in… Continue reading

One Comment

Stacie Ritter, Obamacare, and Me

  By About me, Health Care, Progressive Politics

This is a story mostly about what Obamacare means to my colleague and friend Stacie Ritter. But is not just a story about a woman whose family has and will continue to benefit from the Affordable Care Act. It’s also about how the struggle for health care for her family has changed Stacie and made her into one of the most important health care activists in Pennsylvania and in the country as a whole. And it’s also a story about me, because in my four years of work as a health care activist and as Director of Health Care for American Now in Pennsylvania no one has inspired me more than Stacie. Meeting Stacie Ritter I met Stacie almost by chance in early September 2009. She was scheduled to speak in support of health care reform in Carlisle, Pennsylvania at an event organized by the premier labor and progressive radio… Continue reading

One Comment

Why is This Mandate Different From All Other Mandates?

  By Constitutional Law and Civil Liberties, Health Care

One of the central concerns that conservatives have about the individual mandate is that it would lead to unlimited federal authority over our individual lives. If Congress can require us to purchase health insurance, conservatives sometimes ask, can’t it require us to purchase cars or broccoli or cell phones? Defenders of the mandate have been so concerned to show that it is justifiable under the Commerce and Necessary and Proper clauses—and there the argument seems quite straightforward—that we have not been focused enough on making sure that we don’t prove too much. And that’s partly because we tend to be political progressives and are not as worried as conservatives about limiting federal power over our economic lives. We are not libertarians, after all. While we progressive are adamant about defending civil liberties, we generally don’t believe that there is a general right to economic liberty. And thus, unless government forces… Continue reading

No comments

The Founding Fathers and Health Care

  By Constitutional Law and Civil Liberties, Health Care

Revised version of an article published in The Philadelphia Public Record, March 15, 2012 under the title The Founding Fathers and Health Care Later this month the Supreme Court will consider the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). There is a narrow question concerning the Commerce Clause and the individual mandate. Most lawyers who have thought about the issue or read the decision of conservative judge Laurence Silberman understand that the mandate is constitutional. There is also a larger debate about not just the ACA but much else the government does. Contemporary right wingers say that the Federal government has gone far beyond its constitutional limits in regulating, taxing and subsidizing economic activity. Libertarians such as Ron Paul argue that the Founders wanted to create a “limited government” that protects our “liberty.” They suppose that by “limited government” the Founders meant what libertarians mean today, a government that does… Continue reading

No comments

The New Sexual World We Have Made and the Return of the Culture Wars

  By Culture War, Feminism, Love and Sex, Sexual and gender equality

In the last fifty years, we have seen a dramatic transformation in both relationships between the sexes and our relationship to sexuality. No one thinks that there is any likelihood that we will return to traditional practices and beliefs. But in the last few months Republican candidates have tried to reignite the culture war that has accompanied these transformations.

One reason that traditionalists continue to call the changes of the last fifty years into question is that of those of us who have turned away from traditionalist ideas don’t give as deep a defense of the new world we have made as we could. We defend sexual freedom, feminism, and the acceptance of homosexuality mostly by talking about the ideals of freedom, individuality and autonomy. The traditionalists answer that those modern ideals are empty and low, a mere excuse for doing whatever we want to do. And they claim that the changes in our lives are deeply in conflict with the ideals of love, marriage, and the care of children. Of course we, too, seek love, marriage and the care of children. But we haven’t asserted as strongly as we should or could that our ideals are not only fully compatible with but enhance our prospects for love, marriage and the care of our children.

This essay sketches a new theory of sexuality that underlies an account of the new sexuality we have been creating as we throw off traditional ideas and build a new way of integrating sexuality into our lives. It’s based on my forthcoming book, Civilization and Its Discontents: Reflections on Sex and the Culture Wars. focus in the essay on Continue reading

One Comment

In Philly, We Need Transparency in Criticism As Well As Budgeting

  By Budget, Philadelphia, Philadelphia Budget, Taxation

Some critics of Mayor Michael Nutter are calling him out for hiding a real estate tax in his new budget since the budget proposes that after the new market based system of setting property values is put in place, tax rates will be set so that the city takes in an additional $90 million in real estate tax receipts. There is a just a little bit of truth in the criticism. But most of it is really just hogwash. Continue reading

No comments

Why the Debate About Contraception is So Important

  By Women and Health Care

I’ve heard from some people in the last few weeks who have asked me why I’m so focused on issues like contraception when we are in the middle of a titanic struggle over economic inequality in this country. This is what I tell them: Two hundred years from now, when the historians write about the time of my life, the first, second, and third things they will discuss is the impact of feminism on ending three millennia of oppression of women. Compared to the changes on our lives wrought by feminism, the rise and fall of communism and the travails of social democracy are historical blips. I care deeply about economic inequality. But the central moral issue of our time is the status of women. And that is what makes issues like abortion or even contraception hard. Some politicians who are otherwise progressive supporters of the rights of women are not… Continue reading

No comments

To Put it Bluntly: the Amendment Undermines Health Care For Women and Everyone Else

  By Women and Health Care

Sometime this week, Senator Blunt’s amendment to the transportation bill that addresses the contraception issue will be taken up by the Senate. The Blunt Amendment allows employers and insurance companies to refuse to cover any health care service required under the new health care law if they object to it on the grounds of their “religious beliefs or moral convictions.” Under this amendment a business or insurance company could  Refuse to cover HIV / AIDS screening or counseling on the ground that the disease is the product of immoral activity, whether gay sex or intravenous drug use. Refuse to cover any illnesses that are the result of or have been exacerbated by smoking or drinking on the ground that these behaviors are contrary to their moral or religious beliefs. Refuse to cover maternity care for unmarried women on the grounds that sex is permissible only for married couples. Refuse to… Continue reading