No trust in lowering drug prices if they own drug stocks

My Sunday movie was Rebuilding. Dusty, a rancher in southern Colorado, loses close to everything when a wildfire burns his home and property – the burn is so bad the bank thinks the land will need a decade to recover. That means no collateral for a loan to rebuild. The ranch has been in the family for a few generations. FEMA offers him a trailer in a group of a half-dozen trailers placed out in the middle of nowhere. But he lost his purpose in life and needs time to figure out what replaces it. He gets to know some of the other trailer residents who also lost everything. They begin to form a community. The two elderly women who share a trailer and used to share a home seem to me to be a lesbian couple. Since his job is gone he has time to reconnect with his daughter Callie Rose and ex-wife Ruby, though she appears to already have a boyfriend. I was amused that because the trailers don’t have WiFi Dusty and Callie occasionally spend time parked outside the town library because though it is closed it’s WiFi is still on. Several other displaced people do the same thing. That’s the only way for some to fill out FEMA forms. I enjoyed it, but while it is a good movie (Metacritic gives it 72/100) it isn’t a great one. The pace is slow. While Dusty does become a part of the trailer community not a lot of that is shown. While Dusty does connect with Callie he doesn’t otherwise exhibit much personal growth. He does come up with a solution, a next step, for his little community’s future. Eric Schmeltzer, a contributor on Daily Kos posted another article on what Democrats need to do when they take the House and if they take the Senate. The first bill of a new Congress, HR1 or S1, is greatly important. It is introduced to tell the country what the party in power is all about. Since the other party will filibuster or veto it if they can, it is a “messaging bill.” Hakeem Jeffries, presumed Speaker in the new House, is already directing work on a bill to lower costs in housing, gas and utilities, food, caregiving, and healthcare. This is his planned HR 1. Schmeltzer says all that is great and sorely needed. But it should be HR 2. HR 1 should be an all encompassing bill on ethics. If the cost of living bill is first, Republicans will roll out their own version, the nasty guy will use executive orders to lower some prices, and Democrats have a muddle they can no longer easily define and campaign on. But the ethics bill can be first because voters have already connected that to the cost of living. No one is going to trust a plan to lower drug prices until there is a ban on lawmakers owning drug stocks. Schmeltzer’s plan has four major components. Transparency: The president, every member of his cabinet, all senior White House officials, and every member of Congress must post a daily log of who they met with. Both Obama and Biden did that, but both times the nasty guy stopped it. Every lobbyist must post their daily log to be matched with the government officials. Making money from the office: The president, every member of his cabinet, all senior White House officials, every member of Congress, members of the Supreme Court, and their families are not allowed to own stock and cannot hold a stake in a company with business before their office. We’ve seen the nasty kids rake in the dough while daddy is in the Oval Office, which is why the ban must include them. Crack down on lobbyists: That same group of people should have a lifetime ban on being a lobbyist. No lobbying for foreign governments. Require registering as a lobbyist even if less than 20% of your time. Tax any company paying more than a half million for lobbying. An ethics cop: Create an Anti-Corruption Bureau with subpoena power and commissioners the president can’t fire. It can look into all the same groups, including the Supreme Court. Fund it through the lobbying tax so Congress can’t so easily cut its funding. And a fifth part: Start the process to overturn Citizens United through a Constitution amendment to limit campaign spending. A quarter of voters say they trust neither party to end corruption. A strong ethics bill will end that for Democrats. They’re about to spend two years investigating the corruption of the White House and Republicans. An ethics bill that also affects Democrats will block the calls of “hypocrite.” On day one, they put up an ethics bill. Republicans will vote no. Democrats now own the issue. If Republicans say they have a better plan for prices, Democrats can reply you voted against the corruption that is keeping prices high. Tell your members of Congress that a strong ethics bill needs to be first. Require Republicans to vote on it. Kos of Kos discussed why Republicans in Texas are desperate to hang on to their Senate seat. They’re pouring huge amounts of money into that race and could better spend it to keep Republican Senate candidates strong in Kansas, Iowa, and Alaska. They might get even more overall seats and one from Iowa counts the same as one from Texas. But a loss in Texas would be a symbolic disaster. It would breach the wall, show that Democrats could will statewide in Texas. It would also blow a hole in their 2028 presidential aspirations. What they’re losing is the luxury of assuming they’ll win in Texas. Having to spend big to keep Texas red means not spending as much in other states. The nightmare is having to fight for Texas every November. And I’m ready for it. In the comments of Tuesday’s pundit roundup for Kos exlrrp posted a tweet (I think) by peechloves:

I’m sorry am I getting this right? NYC Mayor Mamdani taxed wealthy people on properties they own if they don’t live in them, it balanced the city’s multi-billion dollar budget immediately, and all the wealthy people are still wealthy? Am I getting this right? They’re still wealthy right? And no middle or lower financial earners saw any additional tax? Am I getting this correct?

Someone else (not identified) added:

The craziest part? The wealthy stayed wealthy. The middle class didn’t get hit. The sky didn’t fall. Almost like the panic was always propaganda.

David Horsey posted a cartoon on Kos showing kids with shirts that say the names of the big AI companies pulling out sticks of dynamite and lighting the fuses. A voice says, “What are you boys doing out there?” One replies, “Don’t worry, Mom, we can police ourselves!”

We learned it’s high time to get off fossil fuels

In 2024 the nasty guy made an explicit deal when he asked oil executives for a billion dollars and promised to gut climate rules. He kept that promise by killing wind, solar, and EV incentives. Then he invaded Iran and they’re enjoying big profits from the high prices. Thom Hartmann of the Daily Kos community wrote that a few oil tankers are getting through the Strait of Hormuz and the price came down a bit.

Meanwhile, though, the big lesson the world seems to have learned because of Trump’s fiasco — other than that our military is under the control of an irresponsible alcoholic and a narcissist and unreliable wannabe king — is that it’s high time to get off fossil fuels. Starting a stupid and criminal war is probably the dumbest way to wake the world up to the need to kick their/our collective addiction, but here we are: the war has done more to encourage conservation and the transition to renewables than any other single effort by anybody anywhere in recent memory.

The International Energy Agency reported global oil demand has fallen 2.5%, the equivalent of 42 million gas-burning cars. Hartmann described the German “100,000 Rooftops” program approved about 2000. Banks and power companies worked together to get solar panels on to 100,000 rooftops. The program was basically free to residents. The power companies were in on it because they could avoid building new power plants and even decommission old ones. Solar now supplies about 14% of Germany’s power, and that’s for the cloudiest country in Europe. EVs sell well elsewhere in the world, nearly 100% of sales in Norway, 30% across the EU, and 50% in China. In the US EVs sell 5.8%. In America the price of oil does not include externalities, the other things, “the cancers and the asthma, the wildfires and the floods, or the wars we fight to keep tankers moving through places like the Strait of Hormuz” not included in what we pay for oil. We pay externalities for tobacco, for the cost to health and society. Europe has taxed fuel that way for decades with Germans paying about $3 a gallon in taxes. The federal gas tax has been at $0.184 since 1993. Those European fuel taxes mean people drive smaller cars for fewer miles. They walk (and improve their health) or take the train.

A high price cuts consumption whether it comes from a war or from a tax, but what separates the two is where the money ends up. — When a war drives up the price of oil, the extra dollars flow to fossil fuel companies and dictatorial petrostates as windfall profits. — When a tax does it, the money belongs to us. It can go right back to working families as a rebate check or EV subsidy, and it can pay for the kind of loan guarantees that put solar on all those German roofs.

That doesn’t happen in the US because Republicans have, since Reagan, kept oil companies happy so the companies will keep them in power. The nasty guy has only been more explicit about the deal. This year has shown:

Instead of subsidizing fossil fuels to jack the profits of the companies that fund the GOP, we should be taxing them the way Europe does and using that money to turn every American roof into a power plant.

Let your members of Congress what you think. Kos of Kos wrote that if just 1 in 10 Republicans switch sides Democrats will have an easy victory. That 1 in 10 might be possible because 11% of voters who backed the nasty guy regret their vote. Sure, some will switch parties only long enough to tell Republicans how displeased they are. Some will stay home. And some with switch sides. Kos talks about all three types of voters. One of them is Washington Sun columnist Matt K. Lewis who will be voting for Democrats this year. As part of his reasoning he wrote:

Besides, what bad, un-conservative things could Democrats do? I mean, are they going to start another forever war in the Middle East? Start socializing industries? Raise the national debt to $40 trillion? Cause abortion rates to rise? Increase the cost of groceries and gas? Pal around with socialists (like Zohran Mamdani)? Suck up to communists (like Chinese President Xi Jinping)? Nominate a bunch of weirdos, drunks and inexperienced hacks to the Cabinet? Pursue self-enrichment? Start building monuments to themselves? Threaten to use the power of government on their opponents?

Kos added the nasty guy is responsible for about a quarter of the $40 trillion national debt. He provided links to the other things Lewis mentioned. Kos concluded:

If Democrats can use that opening to demonstrate what responsive government looks like—a government focused on people’s material needs rather than the interests of Wall Street and Silicon Valley—then maybe some of those temporary defections become more durable.

Lisa Needham of Kos reported the nasty guy has been saying to the courts, and the rest of us, that he needs to slap his name on the Kennedy Center because that is the only way to attract donors to keep the place open. Like all nonprofits ticket sales and government grants are not enough to keep the place open. One must have donors. And those donors stopped donating to the Kennedy Center when he took over. So, no he won’t be attracting donors if he slaps his name on the place. Instead, the place is likely to go bankrupt, as many of his businesses have. The way he can attract donors is remove his cronies from the board and resign as chair.

If Trump’s vision for the Kennedy Center was so amazing, so profitable, people would be donating money. Artists would be begging to get booked. People would be clamoring for tickets. But everyone hates Trump and his low-rent, tacky garbage vibe.

Oliver Willis of Kos reported that for the first time the Kennedy Center Honors will not be at the Kennedy Center this year. The reason is the Center is closing because courts won’t let the nasty guy put his name on it. In the comments of today’s pundit roundup for Kos is a meme posted by exlrrp about special prosecutor Jack Smith (remember him?) and his testimony before Congress.

Fun fact: Jack Smith had 86 witnesses of Trump’s crimes, and not a single one was a Democrat.

A tweet from Abdul El-Sayed posted by 2thanks:

I'd rather have an economy that makes 1,000 millionaires than 1 billionaire.

Instant family!

I finished the book Safe, A Memoir of Fatherhood, Foster Care, and the Risks We Take for Family by Mark Daley. When Mark started dating Jason each recognized in the other they would be a good father and both had a desire for a family. By the time they were married they were deep into discussions on how to get that family. Surrogacy seemed that it would take too long, be too chancy, and be too expensive. Adoption might be possible, but foster care leading to adoption sounded better. Just weeks after their wedding they started attending foster care certification classes. They learn foster care is never the choice of the child and by the time they’re in the system they have experienced trauma, sometimes on multiple levels. Within four months of their wedding they were offered the chance to foster Ethan at 13 months, and his brother Logan at 3 months. Instant family! Birth parents Amber and Zach were still wanting to get their children back. How could Mark care for such cute kids and avoid falling in love so his heart wasn’t hurt if he had to give the boys back. Too late, the love was also instant. The boys thrived. Amber and Zach were in and out of rehab. Mark and Jason had to take the boys to visit Amber and Zach, but those meetings either didn’t happen or were much shorter than the court allowed. After some visits Ethan seemed mighty stressed. Mark could see Amber and Zach would not be good parents. How could he turn his little boys over to someone who would likely harm them? Along the way they dealt with a foster care system that seemed more harmful than helpful. Most of the case managers were way overworked, a few incompetent. Some of the judges actually cared bout the boys, others gave into novel arguments from young lawyers. The system was a mess. Daley is a good writer, though the story he tells can be loving followed by harrowing and heartbreaking. My only complaint is he spends so much time rehashing the dread and panic over the possibility that he’ll lose his boys. Then again, he lived in those emotions for months on end. Even so, I highly recommend the book. I appreciate that other than a prompt for why they chose foster care very little of the story is about them being a gay couple. Emily Singer of Daily Kos reported on Monday that some Republicans are trying to distance themselves from the nasty guy and he is lashing out at them. One example is Byron Daniels, Republican candidate for governor of Florida. He rode the nasty guy’s endorsement to win the primary. But last week Donalds removed photos and mentions of the nasty guy from his website. The nasty guy got angry and Donalds restored his site. Then the nasty guy claimed stories about it are fake news.

Ultimately, Republican attempts to distance themselves from Trump were never going to work when there’s so much footage and proof of Republicans bending to his every whim. But if Trump is lashing out at Republican candidates who try to separate themselves from him, the odds for those lawmakers and candidates should grow even grimmer, possibly causing even some MAGA diehards to stay home. No matter how you look at it, Trump is a problem for Republicans. It’s almost as if they should have gotten bailed on their Dear Leader when they had the chance.

Last Saturday Oliver Willis of Kos said that the nasty guy barring CNN, MS NOW, and Politico is just smoke and mirrors. Fox News has been a cheerleader for the nasty guy and Republicans, but has little influence in setting the overall media agenda. For that one needs the power of ABC, CBS, NBC, The Associated Press, Reuters, the Washington Post, New York Times, and Wall Street Journal. Since 2015, when the nasty guy entered the political scene, all the big ones have also been promoting the nasty guy’s cause. See the numerous stories of Hilary Clinton’s emails and Biden’s age, just a bit older than the nasty guy. Even before then they promoted the Republican cause. See stories of Iraq and the weapons of mass destruction.

The right has had this sway over the mainstream press because it created a well-tuned and well-refined grievance machine designed to cajole the mainstream media into following its agenda. Conservatives invoke cries of “liberal media” bias and insist—via pundits and elected officials—that right-wing priorities must be reported on. The left has nothing of this size or scale, which means that even when the political winds favor Democrats—like Barack Obama’s 2008 win—the results are still interpreted through the lens of what’s most favorable to conservatives. ... Ultimately, when it comes to what’s covered, how it’s covered, and how widely it’s covered, the mainstream media is more ally than adversary to the right.

Even if they don’t sing his praises all the time. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez spoke at the More Perfect University’s fourth “Students vs. Billionaires” town hall. Her topic is why Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) should be abolished. There is the corruption: The detention centers are privately owned and need to make a profit. That means they need a steady supply of new inmates. As Congressional Republicans boosted the funding of ICE they also bought stocks in those detention companies. Their personal fortunes also depend on more inmates. The surveillance companies used to track down immigrants are also private and their profit depends on us being afraid of immigrants. But such a system should not exist in a democracy. We already have laws and a judicial system to provide due process to both citizens and undocumented residents. Republicans are going to be all over the “abolish” part. They will also resist ending the corruption. Pedro Molina posted a cartoon on Kos. It shows a couple guys, one in a red hat, sitting in the mouth of an alligator. The red hat guy says, “Remember how funny we thought it was to imagine other people being devoured by alligators?”