By Jennifer J. Foster
Posted 03/02 at 04:49 PM
(0)
Comments
President Obama this morning made official his selection of Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to head the Department of Health and Human Services.
FoxNews.com.
“As a governor she’s been on the front lines of our health care crisis. She has a deep knowledge of what the burden of crushing costs does to our families and businesses,“ Obama said.
... As HHS secretary, Sebelius will work with Democrats and Republicans to cut costs, expand access and improve the quality of health care in the nation, the White House wrote in a paper statement.
But not everyone is praising Sebelius. From CNN:
The congressional showdown over Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius’ nomination to President Obama’s Cabinet may focus less on her qualifications than on the issue of abortion, analysts said.
... Cabinet nominations require Senate confirmation, and anti-abortion groups already are making their views known.
Analysts suspected that Obama would face a battle over abortion if and when he makes a nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court, but religious conservatives could use Sebelius as a warm-up for the seemingly inevitable fight.
Calling Sebelius an “enemy of the unborn,“ Catholic League President Bill Donohue said the Kansas governor’s nomination is particularly disturbing because the health and human services secretary is one of the few members of the administration who can directly affect abortion policy.
“Sebelius’ support for abortion is so far off the charts that she has been publicly criticized by the last three archbishops of Kansas City,“ Donohue said in a statement.
Hmmm ... I seem to remember hearing something about this before.
I said here a couple of weeks ago when Tom Daschle withdrew from HHS chief consideration that Obama would be sending us a message with his replacement pick.
He’s sending a message, all right. He had promised pragmatism out of his administration—but in Sebelius, he has given us anything but.
I am incredulous at news that leading pro-life senators U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback and U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts—incidentally, both of Kansas—“seem willing to give her a pass on her stance on abortion,“ according to CNN:
Brownback, who sought the GOP presidential nomination and is one of the leading anti-abortion voices in the Senate, recently released a statement with Roberts, congratulating Sebelius and expressing an eagerness to work with their fellow Kansan on health issues.
The senators said they expect to have several differences of opinion with the Obama administration—especially on health care funding and nationalized health care—but they make no mention of the abortion issue.
That is simply astonishing to me.
Well, my money was on U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) for the HHS post ... I guess it’s a good thing I’m not a betting woman. But if I was, I would double down that by the time this confirmation fight is over, Obama might be wishing he had gone with Wyden.
FoxNews.com points out that in a related development, Obama also named Nancy-Ann DeParle, commissioner of the Department of Human Services in Tennessee and a Clinton administration official, as the new health czar, heading up the new White House Office for Health Reform. The announcements come just days before the president holds a White House summit on health care. Lawmakers from both parties and representatives of major interest groups, from insurers to drug companies to consumers, will attend.
Let the games begin.
See also:
Former Vermont Gov. and Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean was really, really annoyed that, for the second time in two months, Obama passed him over for HHS chief. “I was pretty clear” about wanting the job, he said. Hey, Howard—during your breaks in building all those bipartisan bridges, perhaps you could find time to learn how to take a hint.
By Jennifer J. Foster
Posted 03/02 at 01:45 PM
(0)
Comments
I told you here a few weeks ago about that really cool development known as “digital paper” and how it might be the answer to newspapers’ woes.
You are also likely familiar with Amazon’s Kindle, a wireless device that allows users to purchase and download hundreds of thousands of books and other publications to the device and read them on a digital screen. (You might remember that I linked you to GOP pundit Rich Galen’s review of Kindle 2.0 last week.)
Well, the Hearst Corporation believes that the salvation of the newspaper industry may lie in a technological development that is a cross between the two. From CNN Money:
According to industry insiders, Hearst, which publishes magazines ranging from Cosmopolitan to Esquire and newspapers including the financially imperiled San Francisco Chronicle, has developed a wireless e-reader with a large-format screen suited to the reading and advertising requirements of newspapers and magazines. The device and underlying technology, which other publishers will be allowed to adapt, is likely to debut this year.
So-called e-readers like Kindle and the Sony Reader are hand-held gadgets that use electronic “ink” displayed on a crisp, low-power screen to deliver an experience that approximates reading on paper - without the cost of paper, printing and delivery, which can account for as much as 50% of the cost of putting out a periodical.
Hearst executives declined to provide specifics about the forthcoming e-reader, but Kenneth Bronfin, who heads up the interactive media group for Hearst, told Fortune in an interview for a forthcoming magazine story that the publishing company has a deep expertise in the technology. “I can’t tell you the details of what we are doing, but I can say we are keenly interested in this, and expect these devices will be a big part of our future,“ Bronfin told Fortune.
If anyone has incentive to develop this technology and apply it to newspapers, it’s Hearst: The company continues to hemorrhage revenue from print publications. I mentioned here last week that the aformentioned Chronicle may soon go the way of the Rocky Mountain News and give up the ghost; in addition, magazine ad revenue is down 24 percent industry-wide so far in the first quarter.
By Jennifer J. Foster
Posted 03/02 at 11:20 AM
(0)
Comments
Those of you who don’t live in the print delivery area of the Opelika-Auburn News can read my Saturday column here.
In it, I explain how the one-sided speech showdown last week is indicative of our political outlook ...
... at least until Republicans can develop a decent uppercut.
By Jennifer J. Foster
Posted 03/02 at 08:52 AM
(0)
Comments
If you have seen Prime Minister’s Questions on C-SPAN anytime since December 2005, you know the name and face of David Cameron, the leader of the British Conservative Party.
Overdue condolences are due Cameron and his wife, Samantha; the pair suddenly lost their six-year-old son, Ivan, last week.
Ivan fell ill last Tuesday evening. His condition continued to deteriorate throughout the night, and he died early Wednesday morning.
According to the London Telegraph:
Ivan, who was born on April 8, 2002, suffered from Ohtahara Syndrome, a severe form of cerebral palsy which involves a rare and severe epilepsy syndrome involving severe degenerative seizures. He had been in and out of hospitals all his young life. His condition was diagnosed after only six days when he suffered his first seizure. He was the couple’s eldest child and had required round-the-clock medical care all his life.
In a statement Cameron released to supporters after Ivan’s death last week, Cameron spoke candidly about the challenges of caring for his special-needs son and the loss his family has suffered. His grief bleeds through his words:
We always knew Ivan wouldn’t live forever, but we didn’t expect to lose him so young and so suddenly. He leaves a hole in our life so big that words can’t describe it. Bed time, bath time, meal time - nothing will feel the same again ... we all just miss him so desperately.
“When we were first told the extent of Ivan’s disability I thought that we would suffer having to care for him but at least he would benefit from our care.
“Now as I look back I see that it was all the other way round. It was only him that ever really suffered and it was us—Sam, me, Nancy and Elwen—who gained more than I ever believed possible from having and loving such a wonderfully special and beautiful boy.“
Nancy and Elwen are the Camerons’ two younger children. They are five and three, respectively.
The Telegraphhas other background on Ivan’s life, including this touching slideshow.
Times columnist Libby Purves produced a poignant and moving tribute to the plainness with which the Cameron family faced Ivan’s medical challenges. It includes this excerpt:
His father described him as wonderful but has been frank about the initial horror of discovering that his first child was so grievously hurt by Nature: “The news hits you like a freight train. You are depressed for a while because you are grieving for the difference between your hopes and the reality. But then you get over that.”
It is that public acknowledgement that has been valuable, whether or not Mr Cameron becomes our national leader. Voters, he said at the time of his domestic filming, “have a right to know a bit more about you, your life and your family, what makes you tick and what informs your thinking”.
He is right. And that gap between hopes and reality, between illusory glamour and the inescapable toughness of life, is one of the things that politicians and public figures can most usefully demonstrate. It is a fine line to tread, and family privacy is precious: but there is real benefit when they are prepared, without exploitation or mawkish self-pity, to share the shocks and griefs of life.
Wow.
Cameron family, our prayers are with you as you live with this indescribable loss.
By Jennifer J. Foster
Posted 03/02 at 01:22 AM
(0)
Comments
From SportsBusinessJournal.com :
The NBA is set to borrow $175 million Feb. 26, marking one of the first league financings since the implosion of the credit markets last fall.
The money, which will be available to 15 teams, supplements an existing $1.7 billion leaguewide credit facility that uses the NBA’s media contracts as collateral to secure loans for the clubs. The NBA surveyed its teams, and 15 responded they would like to tap into the new borrowing.
… The 15 teams can use the money for any purpose, but covering operating losses may be high on the list.
Of course, NBA commissioner David Stern would prefer that you avoid the B-word.
“It’s exactly the opposite” of a bailout, Stern said this week.
Really? Let’s see … So … NBA teams have liabilities – which include the outrageous salaries they give dudes to play basketball. Those teams have assets and cash flow, which include the money they make in ticket sales. Their liabilities exceed their assets, and they can’t pay their bills … so someone else steps in to do it for them.
Yeah. That’s what I thought.
But wait! There’s more!
Guess who’s providing the loan?
The private-placement deal was arranged by JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America. In a private placement, non-banking lenders such as pension funds and insurers extend the cash, commonly at fixed rates for five- to seven-year terms and at rates higher than what banks offer for floating-rate loans.
That’s the Bank of America your federal government bailed out with your tax dollars last year.
And can I just emphasize ... Pension funds!! Extending loans to the NBA!!
Harvey Benjamin, the NBA’s executive counsel for business and finance, would not reveal which teams plan to borrow from the placement, so the guessing game’s on.
It’s small consolation for the steady evaporation of capitalism, but on the bright side, you may now have a tiny little stake in your favorite hoops team!! Oh boy!!
