Make MetaFilter Happy Day 2011

May 26, 2011 9:43 AM

On the same morning that Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi struck down Wisconsin's infamous union-busting bill on the grounds that it violated the state's Open Meetings Law (PDF of decision, previously), Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin signed America's first state-level single-payer legislation into law.

If the U.S. path to single payer mirrors Canada's, Vermont is our Saskatchewan, and Peter Shumlin is our Tommy Douglas.

posted by gerryblog (94 comments total)

If only they could kill DOMA today, too.
posted by mccarty.tim at 9:49 AM on May 26, 2011 [6 favorites]

It's only 1 PM on the East Coast, mccarty.tim. Anything is possible on Make MetaFilter Happy Day.
posted by gerryblog at 9:50 AM on May 26, 2011 [9 favorites]

I fully expect Walker et al to attempt to implement it regardless - they've made it clear that they have no intent of being bound by the law.
posted by ryanshepard at 9:50 AM on May 26, 2011 [5 favorites]

Gonna be looking really, really hard at Burlington for my next gig. I can be a contractor or entrepreneur, and not sacrifice my family's healthcare and the financial security it brings. Vermont's going to explode with agile, quick-moving tech start-ups, believe it.
posted by Slap*Happy at 9:51 AM on May 26, 2011 [29 favorites]

Every smart entrepeneur in the US with a business idea that isn't anchored to a certain geographic area is going to go to Vermont. Also every other person in the US who can find a job there. So glad there are sane states to balance the crazy.
posted by jsturgill at 9:54 AM on May 26, 2011 [8 favorites]

The only wrinkle, Slap*Happy, is (as the Think Progress link explains) the need for an ERISA waiver to move implementation back from 2017 to 2014. The House of Representatives may just refuse to pass it. On the other hand, current 2012 frontrunner Mitt Romney supports the effort on federalist grounds, so maybe it'll go.
posted by gerryblog at 9:55 AM on May 26, 2011

Vermont's always seemed really cool to me, as far as the US goes. I've lived in Maine most of my life and it seems like the way Maine should be, with less rampant bigots and "Don't beat your wife" road signs and with nicer towns and more mountains.
posted by dunkadunc at 9:57 AM on May 26, 2011 [5 favorites]

So, are the conservatives saying Vermont's single payer healthcare is unconstitutional while the anti-union bill's strike down was the result of activist judging with no hint of irony yet?
posted by mccarty.tim at 9:58 AM on May 26, 2011 [4 favorites]

Sumi's decision is, I believe, going directly to the State Supreme Court -- which is heavy on Republicans and particularly pet Justices of the WMC (state business lobby). The court already has scheduled arguments for June 6, and will be under great pressure from the Governor for a swift decision.

Meanwhile, I'll just leave this here. Er, and this.
posted by dhartung at 9:58 AM on May 26, 2011 [4 favorites]

a) Walker has the votes to just repass the same bill, if they hurry they could get it done before the recalls start. I believe the Dems would be powerless to try and deny qorum again, as the session has already started now.

b) This is going to the state Supreme Court anyway, so the County ruling doesn't mean a whole lot in isolation, it's just one data point journey to the high court...where the Walker candidate won. The only thing that could've stopped the law from taking effect was likely a Koppenburg victory.
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:02 AM on May 26, 2011

I fully expect Walker et al to attempt to implement it regardless - they've made it clear that they have no intent of being bound by the law.

They can, of course, just post the proper 24 hours notice and vote again. However, apparently it's up in the air for two reasons:

1. To do so would require the Senate to acknowledge that their previous passing of the bill violated the open meeting law. In other words they'd basically have to admit they broke the law trying to pass the bill, and that becomes campaign fodder against all of them.

2. The Republican state Senators are already spiraling into the toilet over the first vote, and there are now six who could be facing a recall election... some of whom might as well resign right now if they have to go pass this vote again.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 10:03 AM on May 26, 2011 [1 favorite]

Voiding the anti-union bill plus the capture of Ratko Mladic are the best news I've heard for a while. Hooray!
posted by wowbobwow at 10:04 AM on May 26, 2011

a) Walker has the votes to just repass the same bill, if they hurry they could get it done before the recalls start. I believe the Dems would be powerless to try and deny qorum again, as the session has already started now.

Potentially. But the bill has proved very unpopular and Walker himself increasingly so. Another fight over it couldn't hurt, even if we lost.
posted by gerryblog at 10:05 AM on May 26, 2011 [1 favorite]

Just to balance things out, the Senate is expected to re-authorize the PATRIOT Act today, and Senator Ron Wyden says there's a "Secret" PATRIOT Act that is even worse than what we know.
posted by briank at 10:06 AM on May 26, 2011 [2 favorites]

personally I'd love to see Walker and the republicans try and pass the bill again. Anything to stir up the anger in Wisconsin again is a good thing. I'm sure the republicans there are hesitant to even try it for the reasons others mentioned above
posted by slapshot57 at 10:06 AM on May 26, 2011 [1 favorite]

Every smart entrepeneur in the US with a business idea that isn't anchored to a certain geographic area is going to go to Vermont. Also every other person in the US who can find a job there.

As a native Vermonter, I don't see this as a good thing.
posted by Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese at 10:10 AM on May 26, 2011

Every smart entrepeneur in the US with a business idea that isn't anchored to a certain geographic area is going to go to Vermont. Also every other person in the US who can find a job there.

As a native Vermonter, I don't see this as a good thing.

After my parents' divorce my mother married a man from Vermont. Not only do I not count as a Vermonter as far as native Vermonters are concerned, and not only does my mother not count, my stepfather doesn't count. He moved there from Colorado when he was 9.
posted by gerryblog at 10:13 AM on May 26, 2011 [2 favorites]

So, are the conservatives saying Vermont's single payer healthcare is unconstitutional

No. The argument is that a federal single-payer program is unconstitutional because Congress does not have the power under Article I to create such a system. But there is no reason to believe that a state government could not impose such a system.

Whether or not Vermont can afford to pay for this is a different question--they were about $176 million short last time around--but not a constitutional one.
posted by valkyryn at 10:13 AM on May 26, 2011

Senator Ron Wyden says there's a "Secret" PATRIOT Act that is even worse than what we know.

I'd really like to know what is worse about this hypothetical secret PATRIOT Act, given that pretty much anything goes under the current "PATRIOT" Act (domestic spying, secret searches, disappearings)... I mean, does it allow any government employee to sodomize my mother while pouring sugar in my gas tank?
posted by entropicamericana at 10:13 AM on May 26, 2011 [3 favorites]

a) Walker has the votes to just repass the same bill, if they hurry they could get it done before the recalls start. I believe the Dems would be powerless to try and deny qorum again, as the session has already started now.

The GOP does not want another vote on this, certainly not before the recall elections. As has been stated above (and by the Fitzgerald brothers themselves!) re-passing the bill would be seen as an admission of wrongdoing, and they don't want that. It would also create more opportunities for opponents to remind the electorate of this unpopular policy. They would much rather win this in the courts.

b) This is going to the state Supreme Court anyway, so the County ruling doesn't mean a whole lot in isolation, it's just one data point journey to the high court...where the Walker candidate won. The only thing that could've stopped the law from taking effect was likely a Koppenburg victory.

A Kloppenburg victory would not have stopped anything; she wouldn't have been seated in time to be part of hearing the case.
posted by Jpfed at 10:14 AM on May 26, 2011 [1 favorite]

Man, Vermont sounds pretty sweet right now. I don't mind poverty as long as I got health care.
posted by klangklangston at 10:16 AM on May 26, 2011 [4 favorites]

Near the end of the first round there where three WI R senators who where wavering, and one bailed and voted no. Fitzgerald had to twist a lot of arms to get the other two to go a long with the whole thing and I seriously seriously doubt Fitz would be able to do it again. They don't want to touch it again and Walker's agenda is likely to cost a few of them their jobs as it is, going at it once more so close to the recall elections would ensure a few more get the boot, so yeah, in a real sense I hope they try once more.

The court already has scheduled arguments for June 6,, I think (not sure) that the June 6th arguments are weather or not the court will hear the case at all. Which is fundamentally that the Senate violated the open meetings law. I... could see the conservative Justices upholding Sumi's decision strictly on procedural grounds, hell it's be funny if they just let the ruling stand and refused to hear the case altogether. Although, tactically it'd probably be better for a protracted argument running a few months that resulted in upholding Sumi, that way Wi can have a shot at flipping the Senate and avoiding having to revisit it altogether.
posted by edgeways at 10:16 AM on May 26, 2011 [1 favorite]

As a native Vermonter, I don't see this as a good thing.

It's not likely to make much of an impact on rural or smalltown life, but it will ressurect decrepit old mill towns, developing them into modern urban centers, and bring a lot of money and energy into Burlington.
posted by Slap*Happy at 10:17 AM on May 26, 2011 [1 favorite]

I mean, does it allow any government employee to sodomize my mother while pouring sugar in my gas tank?

Absolutely not. Thanks to corporate lobbying, the law specifically states that the sugar must instead be HFCS.
posted by Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese at 10:18 AM on May 26, 2011 [12 favorites]

Am I the only one here who finds the two subjects of this post to be pretty much completely unrelated? The comments are alternating between one and the other. I don't think it was necessary to gerryblogger the post together like this.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 10:21 AM on May 26, 2011 [9 favorites]

Whoa, I didn't even know the Wisconsin thing was in court, let alone that it was defeated. Awesome!

Also yay for Vermont! Until conservative mega-dollars go to bad-mouthing it and screwing it over, anyway.
posted by DU at 10:21 AM on May 26, 2011 [1 favorite]

How long until insurance companies start paying their most seriously ill clients to move to Vermont?
posted by zylocomotion at 10:32 AM on May 26, 2011 [2 favorites]

gerryblogger

Admit it Kirth Gerson, you just wanted to use that word, which is awesome and should be used every day all the time from now on.
posted by dubitable at 10:34 AM on May 26, 2011 [12 favorites]

You know who else healed the sick for FREE?
posted by blue_beetle at 10:36 AM on May 26, 2011 [4 favorites]

Slap*Happy: "but it will ressurect decrepit old mill towns, developing them into modern urban centers, and bring a lot of money and energy into Burlington."

Really? I wouldn't characterize Burlington as "decrepit" at all.

That said, it'd be awesome if there were a way to do something similar in upstate NY, where population growth and new development are sorely needed. Unfortunately, that'd also require NYC and the suburbs going along with it, which would probably negate any positive effects on the attractiveness of upstate. (For chrissakes, NY really just needs to be split in two.)

I'd also have to wonder if the relative success/failure of Vermont's system could cause other states in the midwest to take a long, hard look at single-payer healthcare as a way to attract people (and more importantly, business) to their states... I think that people are starting to develop much more nuanced (and reasonable) views about healthcare reform, in light of the GOP's recent medicare attacks, and the realization that we already depend pretty heavily on socialized medicine.
posted by schmod at 10:39 AM on May 26, 2011 [4 favorites]

schmod, I don't think he said Burlington was decrepit. (He said the *mill towns* are decrepit.) Burlington's a great town, and this will probably do a lot to make it even better. I'm hopeful that Vermont proves single payer works and then NY and then the Midwest Rust Belt are next in line -- and eventually the whole country.

That said, it'd be awesome if there were a way to do something similar in upstate NY, where population growth and new development are sorely needed.

I actually think New York might be a good candidate to be the first to follow Vermont's approach. Upstate NY stands to lose a lot of people and money insofar as it's just a short hop across the border to Socialist Vermontistan. If they pass single payer too they neutralize that disadvantage.
posted by gerryblog at 10:45 AM on May 26, 2011

You know who else healed the sick for FREE?

I know you're joking, but...
posted by gerryblog at 10:46 AM on May 26, 2011

You know who else healed the sick for FREE?

Jesus?
posted by ZsigE at 10:47 AM on May 26, 2011 [3 favorites]

The answer is always either Jesus, Hitler, or Ghostbusters 2
posted by found missing at 10:56 AM on May 26, 2011 [10 favorites]

You know who else healed the sick for FREE?

GOOGLE RAND PAUL.
posted by Theta States at 10:59 AM on May 26, 2011 [5 favorites]

Vermont has done really well here, but if I understand it correctly, it relies on the Federal plan staying. Unfortunately, I'm worried that the SCOTUS won't let it through (it seems like they've moved to the right in the last two years).
posted by drezdn at 11:04 AM on May 26, 2011

As far as Sumi's decision, good news too. According to a Lawyer's Blog, it'll be hard for the state court to overturn Sumi's decision.

From the comments:

What legal rationale could the Wisconsin Supreme Court provide to overturn Sumi's decision?

Find that the Wisconsin Open Records Law violates the Wisconsin constitution on separation of powers grounds.

Would that decision constitute judicial activism on the part of the conservatives on the bench?

According to conservatives' own definition of "judicial activism," totally.

Or, would the conservatives be inclined to let Sumi's decision stand if indeed, as you have reported, it is written and interpreted to the "letter" ...

That would depend on the extent of Deputy Attorney General Kevin St. John's ideological zealotry (I understand he bears primary responsibility for the DOJ's various budget repair litigations).

My understanding is that for the Supreme Court to let Walker off the hook on this they'd have to shoot down the whole open records law (not likely to happen) or say it doesn't apply to the legis. (they might be willing to do that)
posted by drezdn at 11:09 AM on May 26, 2011

gerryblog: "The only wrinkle, Slap*Happy, is (as the Think Progress link explains) the need for an ERISA waiver to move implementation back from 2017 to 2014. The House of Representatives may just refuse to pass it. On the other hand, current 2012 frontrunner Mitt Romney supports the effort on federalist grounds, so maybe it'll go."

But I think if a state tries something like a single payer system, they’ll find out in a big hurry that it’s a disaster my party will do everything in it's power to sabotage it at the state level (as we have at the federal level)... And the people of that state will throw out that government and put in place people who will do something a lot smarter.

FTFY, Romney...
posted by symbioid at 11:12 AM on May 26, 2011 [2 favorites]

A Kloppenburg victory would not have stopped anything; she wouldn't have been seated in time to be part of hearing the case.

This. Also, I have doubts as to whether the WI SC will hear it, because... well, the only reasonable (IMO) argument against the ruling is whether it is constitutional for the legislature to pass laws binding future legislatures barring a constitutional amendment.

Which would make the Open Meetings Law unconstitutional because it improperly restricts the legislature.

It's a neat thought experiment - could the legislature pass a law barring future legislatures from making or modifying any law ? Would that be constitutional ? I
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 11:15 AM on May 26, 2011

Adding to what drezdn said, I've thought since the bill was passed that having the courts invalidate the law could be Walker's actual exit strategy: "...a key GOP trick in the last few decades has been to pass transparently illegal or unconstitutional legislation as a sop to their base, and then turn around and raise more money off it when it's overturned by 'activist judges.' That could be Walker's face-saving exit strategy; let the courts invalidate it and rile up his own side's sense of righteous fury."

If he can't get the bill he wants, at least he gets a talking point about judicial overreach to sure up his base.
posted by gerryblog at 11:15 AM on May 26, 2011 [1 favorite]

Also to drezden also on the subject of judicial overreach: I've been tracking stories about whether health care reform is constitutional for a few years now and (1) everyone in law except the wingnuttiest of the wingnuts agrees it pretty obviously is (2) you have to figure Anthony Kennedy doesn't want what will essentially be his last public act to be seen by basically everyone in the field to which he dedicated his life as an obviously illegitimate power grab. The weakest hinge of ACA is the mandate, but I think it'll pass SCOTUS review -- and even if AK somehow buys the flimsy activity/inactivity distinction I really don't think he'll vote to invalidate the whole thing. Just a hunch, obviously, but I think ACA survives.
posted by gerryblog at 11:20 AM on May 26, 2011 [1 favorite]

gerryblog, would you believe that this is the only webpage on the entire Internet to use the phrase "Socialist Vermonistan"?
posted by madcaptenor at 11:30 AM on May 26, 2011 [1 favorite]

I can't take credit -- Vermonistan is pretty common.
posted by gerryblog at 11:32 AM on May 26, 2011 [1 favorite]

[Removed some comments - please either flag and move on or take to MeTa. Thanks! ]
posted by restless_nomad at 11:34 AM on May 26, 2011

ryanshepard : I fully expect Walker et al to attempt to implement it regardless - they've made it clear that they have no intent of being bound by the law.

They're just trying to prove what they've been saying all along: that the government can't be trusted. And if it means that they, as our government, need to be completely and utterly distrust-worthy, well, that's a price they are willing to pay.
posted by quin at 11:57 AM on May 26, 2011 [1 favorite]

In more Metafilter Happy Day news, one of Sheriff Joe's deputies is in trouble.
posted by drezdn at 12:04 PM on May 26, 2011

drezdn: "In more Metafilter Happy Day news, one of Sheriff Joe's deputies is in trouble."

Wow - it's like homophobic politicians who turn out to be gay or CIA agents dealing drugs.

fuck them all.
posted by symbioid at 12:07 PM on May 26, 2011 [1 favorite]

Admit it Kirth Gerson, you just wanted to use that word,...

Not entirely. I do think this should have been two posts. I also did really want to use that word.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 12:16 PM on May 26, 2011

Pogo_Fuzzybutt wrote: It's a neat thought experiment - could the legislature pass a law barring future legislatures from making or modifying any law ? Would that be constitutional ?

I'm not terribly familiar with Wisconsin's constitution, but it seems to me that the legislature can make itself do whatever it wants whenever it wants. And if it later changes its collective mind, it can surely repeal any such law it made in whole or in part forever or temporarily.
posted by wierdo at 12:37 PM on May 26, 2011

This thread is all kinds of win! (That's what the kids are saying these days, right?)

Setback to rabid rightwingers' attempt to destroy unions? Check.
Setback to rabid rightwingers' attempt to suppress single payer health care? Check.
Setback to rabid rightwingers' favorite power-abusing Sheriff's department? Check
Two awesome phrases: gerryblogging and Socialist Vermontistan? Check!
Ratko Mladic's arrest? Check!

Freedom's on a roll this morning! If we could get rid of DOMA, ditch that new monstrosity of a voter law they just passed in Florida, get recall elections certified against three more state senators in WI, have Russ Feingold declare he's running either for the Gov's job or the open senate seat and then get the mother ship to come pick up Sarah Palin, I will buy MeFi a beer!*

*Metaphorical beer, only, unless we're at a meetup, in which case I may have to hug you all first.
posted by darkstar at 12:39 PM on May 26, 2011

And holy cow, it just hit me: Vermont now will have both gay marriage AND universal health care? Despite the cold, it's starting to get really, really attractive up there, I must say.

I wonder if that state is built on whatever the opposite of a Hellmouth is.
posted by darkstar at 12:45 PM on May 26, 2011 [2 favorites]

"ditch that new monstrosity of a voter law they just passed in Florida"

And are trying to pass here in Wisconsin!
posted by symbioid at 12:45 PM on May 26, 2011

I wonder if that state is built on whatever the opposite of a Hellmouth is.

A Heavenanus.
posted by grubi at 12:47 PM on May 26, 2011 [13 favorites]

Its already passed. They signed it yesterday.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 12:47 PM on May 26, 2011 [1 favorite]

Pogo Fuzzybutt has it, it is now easier to carry a concealed weapon in Wisconsin than it is to vote.
posted by drezdn at 12:48 PM on May 26, 2011 [3 favorites]

And holy cow, it just hit me: Vermont now will have both gay marriage AND universal health care? Despite the cold, it's starting to get really, really attractive up there, I must say.

I drove through and they even have kilometres on some of their road signs!
posted by Theta States at 12:50 PM on May 26, 2011 [4 favorites]

Well shit... It's already passed (no surprise, I guess). I flag this as false claims I am NOT happy!
posted by symbioid at 12:59 PM on May 26, 2011

Roadsign upon entering state:

"Welcome to Heavenanus! We're shitting out good things daily!"
posted by darkstar at 1:05 PM on May 26, 2011 [4 favorites]

Ugh, the Wisconsin voter bill makes me so mad. I did some research and figured out that it costs a poor person $73 just to get a state ID (not a driver's license). Self-link to Tumblr.

But yeah, happy day for all the rest of the stuff.
posted by desjardins at 1:11 PM on May 26, 2011

desjardins: "Ugh, the Wisconsin voter bill makes me so mad. I did some research and figured out that it costs a poor person $73 just to get a state ID (not a driver's license). Self-link to Tumblr.

But yeah, happy day for all the rest of the stuff."

Poll tax much?
posted by symbioid at 1:35 PM on May 26, 2011

symbioid: precisely. In a not-so-happy coincidence, my mother found my grandparents' poll tax receipts from 1959 (my family is white, I have no idea why they kept them).
posted by desjardins at 1:39 PM on May 26, 2011 [1 favorite]

On the other hand, current 2012 frontrunner Mitt Romney supports the effort on federalist grounds, so maybe it'll go.

"Romney's stance is particularly ironic considering that, as ThinkProgress' Igor Volsky points out, the health care plan that the potential presidential candidate put forward earlier this month would undermine states' abilities to create their own health care systems by allowing insurance plans to be sold across state lines and thus 'circumvent state consumer protections and regulations.'"*

posted by ericb at 1:52 PM on May 26, 2011

Where can I submit my resume for the Death Panel®?
posted by dr_dank at 2:05 PM on May 26, 2011

This thread is all kinds of win!

Unfortunately the NYC rape cops were not convicted and sentenced to be fed to fire ants as I was hoping.
posted by elizardbits at 2:19 PM on May 26, 2011

Sarah Palin is now making a movie about herself. Thus cementing her as a Hollywood elite.

Ma and Pa certainly don't get million dollar movies about themselves on OnDemand cable.
posted by mccarty.tim at 2:41 PM on May 26, 2011

Also, let's call the wave of socialist healthcare the Vermonster, because it sounds scary to a lot of people but it's actually a big bowl of yum.
posted by mccarty.tim at 2:42 PM on May 26, 2011 [3 favorites]

You know what I love about the upcoming Sarah Palin documentary? In it she has the filmmakers liken her and her struggle to that of Joan Of Arc.
posted by hippybear at 3:11 PM on May 26, 2011

H-bear: Did you leave out the 'D' there? Sure it isn't Joan of D'arc?
posted by Twang at 3:38 PM on May 26, 2011

Joan D-Arc
posted by mccarty.tim at 3:45 PM on May 26, 2011

Actually, no, it'd be more like, "Joan, D-Arc, ..."
posted by mccarty.tim at 3:46 PM on May 26, 2011

Hey, it's a citation from a UK newspaper. Since when have the English bothered to stick with original French anything?

Hey look, another citation from a UK paper which notices the exact same thing about the documentary.
posted by hippybear at 3:52 PM on May 26, 2011

Joan of D'Arc would be like Rio Grande River. Joan of of Arc.
A local savings institution is Jean D'Arc Credit Union. There are a lot of people of French Canadian descent in the area.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 4:07 PM on May 26, 2011

And obviously, I'm not one of them. It's Jeanne D'Arc Credit Union.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 4:09 PM on May 26, 2011

Every smart entrepeneur in the US with a business idea that isn't anchored to a certain geographic area is going to go to Vermont.

Any smart entrepreneur weighs a whole bunch of options before starting a business in any geographical location. By most measures, Vermont tends to come in pretty low. Not as bad as New York, but nowhere near as good as New Hampshire, either.

(Doesn't score high as a place for retirees either, though perhaps this may affect future rankings.)

None of which is to say that this is a good or bad idea. I have relatives in Vermont. I hope it works. But I'm keeping the champagne corked for the time being.
posted by IndigoJones at 4:57 PM on May 26, 2011

could the legislature pass a law barring future legislatures from making or modifying any law ?

No. Because that would amount to a constitutional amendment, and legislatures generally don't have the authority to do that on their own.

The reason it amounts to that is because such a bill would effectively change the authority of the legislative body itself. As the legislature does not derive its authority from legislation, but rather from the constitution, legislation cannot modify said authority.
posted by valkyryn at 5:46 PM on May 26, 2011

Yet another reason why the spending cap idea being floated is stupid.
posted by wierdo at 5:48 PM on May 26, 2011

So from this article on the Vermont thing:

"Canada’s single-payer health care system started as an experiment in one province, Saskatchewan. It was pushed through in the early 1960s by Saskatchewan’s premier, Tommy Douglas, considered by many to be the greatest Canadian. It was so successful, it was rapidly adopted by all of Canada. (Douglas is the grandfather of actor Kiefer Sutherland.)"

Why do they always mention that Sutherland is Douglas' grandson? like somehow people oppose single-payer until Kiefer is involved and then it suddenly becomes acceptable or something? It's a complete non-sequiter.
posted by GuyZero at 5:50 PM on May 26, 2011

Indigo - CEO's whining about high taxes and labor laws aren't a good indication if a place is good for entrepreneurs and tech start-ups - you'll note California and MA are at the very bottom of those rankings, but you won't find the same success rate for tech startups anywhere else.
posted by Slap*Happy at 6:06 PM on May 26, 2011 [3 favorites]

Yeah, thoe "business-friendly" rankings are laughable.
posted by ryanrs at 6:19 PM on May 26, 2011

Proud, as always, of my home state of Vermont!
posted by TheCoug at 6:33 PM on May 26, 2011

Why do they always mention that Sutherland is Douglas' grandson? like somehow people oppose single-payer until Kiefer is involved and then it suddenly becomes acceptable or something?

It's just to reaffirm that single-payer isn't a terrorist/red plot. That shit would never get past Kiefer Sutherland.
posted by -harlequin- at 7:01 PM on May 26, 2011

CEO's whining about high taxes and labor laws aren't a good indication if a place is good for entrepreneurs and tech start-ups - you'll note California and MA are at the very bottom of those rankings, but you won't find the same success rate for tech startups anywhere else..

And the single fact of a new and untried health care system is?

My only point, and I think it's legit, was that entrepreneurs (as well as whining CEOs) factor in a whole lot of stuff before putting their money down. They'd be fools not to. You will not that the third link placed Vermont high on quality of life, so it's not as if I'm citing only Mr Burns.

As to your California and Massachusetts, they have certain advantages over Vermont, such as an MIT, a Harvard, a BU, a CalTech, a Stanford, and a Berkeley. Plus quality of life. (NB also, not all start ups are high tech.)

Here's a data point for you. At a projected 5.5 billion (which is an estimate only), the cost per person of this plan is going to be a tad over $8,800, or $26,400 for a family of three. This in a state where the average income for a family of three is $37,474. This seems high to me, but I am notoriously flatfooted and I may have missed something.
posted by IndigoJones at 6:29 AM on May 27, 2011

Joan of D'Arc would be like Rio Grande River. Joan of of Arc.

Which is why I named my backyard Desjardins Gardens.
posted by desjardins at 6:33 AM on May 27, 2011 [5 favorites]

At a projected 5.5 billion (which is an estimate only), the cost per person of this plan is going to be a tad over $8,800, or $26,400 for a family of three. This in a state where the average income for a family of three is $37,474. This seems high to me

Well, that's an interesting point. But the point should be further expanded, according to what I read here, to include that the $5.5billion figure is actually one which is a SAVINGS over the PPACA plan, and that the savings are projected to be even greater under the single payer plan as time goes on beyond 2015.

I don't know much about math and large-scale budgeting overall, and I agree that the figures do seem high... But the way the figures work out according to that one source, it appears that the alternative would be much more expensive.
posted by hippybear at 6:43 AM on May 27, 2011

a new and untried health care system

Hee hee. Conservatives are silly.
posted by Slap*Happy at 6:59 AM on May 27, 2011 [2 favorites]

Hee hee. Conservatives are silly.

Come along, that's just abusive. And yes, new and untried. In Vermont it is both. Not all sizes fit all situations.

By the way, the reviews of the Taiwan health care system this guy designed are not entirely glowing. Just sayin'

(Thank you for the link, Hippybear. I'm always curious to learn more.)
posted by IndigoJones at 11:09 AM on May 28, 2011

You know what I love about the upcoming Sarah Palin documentary? In it she has the filmmakers liken her and her struggle to that of Joan Of Arc.


Sarah Palin does not want to be president. She wants to be Glenn Beck. ka-ching!
posted by Theta States at 6:04 AM on May 30, 2011

Oh hey, the Wisconsin Supreme Court led by newly re-elected Justice Prosser just reinstated the anti-union law "with unusual speed" by a vote of 4-3 because of course they did.

The court found a committee of lawmakers was not subject to the state's open meetings law, and so did not violate that law when they hastily approved the measure and made it possible for the Senate to take it up. In doing so, the Supreme Court overruled a Dane County judge who had struck down the legislation, ending one challenge to the law even as new challenges are likely to emerge.

The majority opinion was by Justices Michael Gableman, David Prosser, Patience Roggensack and Annette Ziegler. The other three justices - Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson and Justices Ann Walsh Bradley and N. Patrick Crooks - concurred in part and dissented in part.

The opinion voided all orders in the case from the lower court. It came just before 5 p.m., sparing Republicans who control the Legislature from taking up the contentious issue of collective bargaining again.

posted by Rhaomi at 5:37 PM on June 14, 2011 [1 favorite]

The Supreme Court doesn't like the judiciary to invalidate laws for any reason other than the constitution. The court fight over open meetings laws was a false hope for SB11 opponents. The best they'll be able to do is flip the Senate during the recalls, which won't help them undo anything, but will allow the Dems to stop the GOP from going further.
posted by Jpfed at 8:31 PM on June 14, 2011

Jpfed: "The Supreme Court doesn't like the judiciary to invalidate laws for any reason other than the constitution. The court fight over open meetings laws was a false hope for SB11 opponents."

Wasn't Kloppenburg an sure vote against the bill, though? If she hadn't "lost" under very shady conditions, this would likely have been a 4-5 decision than a 5-4.
posted by Rhaomi at 8:43 PM on June 14, 2011

Wasn't Kloppenburg an sure vote against the bill, though?

Nope. Even if Kloppenburg had beat Prosser, she would not have been seated in time to be part of the case.
posted by Jpfed at 9:25 PM on June 14, 2011

The SCOWI reasoning was pretty specious. It implies that the legislature can't make a law that can be enforced by the judiciary against the legislature.
posted by drezdn at 6:01 AM on June 15, 2011

In Wisconsin, state unions take their case Federal.
posted by drezdn at 12:27 PM on June 15, 2011

Reading their case, it looks like they could actually use Citizens United to support it.
posted by drezdn at 12:29 PM on June 15, 2011