France Calls for No Trade Deals with On Countries outside Paris Climate Accord

Since the end of World War II, America has been one, if not the only, preeminent super power in the world.  Much of this hegemony was accomplished and maintained through international alliances such as NATO and trade treaties.  Now, the Trump/Pence regime is shredding the template that has kept America strong and seeking to destroy mostly beneficial trade treaties.  Indeed, Trump and his sinister and apparently equally ignorant Vice President seemingly want to take America back to 1920's - 1930's style isolationism (which helped set the stage for WWII) even though the world and global trade has changed radically in the intervening almost 100 years.  The mindset is just as delusional as pro-Brexit voters in the United Kingdom who dream of the long gone British Empire.  Today, French President Emmanuel Macron suggested what may become a new reality as America slinks back into isolationism: a unified Europe, Mexico, Canada, South America and most of Asia all joining in trade agreements that would truly isolate America.  A piece in The Independent looks at the possible picture of the future.  Here are article highlights:

Emmanuel Macron has announced France will no longer accept “commercial agreements” with countries that do not “respect” the Paris Climate Accord during a fiery speech at the United Nations General Assembly. 

The French president called for the upholding of trade rules that “guarantee fair competition on equal footing” during his Tuesday speech, following a Monday afternoon meeting with Donald Trump and the US president’s speech on Monday morning. Mr Macron appeared defiant towards Mr Trump, suggesting he’d no longer negotiate trade deals with the US after its withdrawal from the climate agreement last year. 

The US is now reportedly the only nation in the world which remains opposed to the Paris Agreement, after Mr Trump decided to pull out of the accord in 2017. 

Mr Macron also appeared to reject the US president’s “America First” policies, arguing that international superpowers should seek peaceful resolutions for global issues, from the Syrian Conflict to Iran’s nuclear programs. 

He also criticised the president’s decision to pull out of the Iran Nuclear deal, touting its success in preventing the country’s "nuclear military path”. 

“What will bring a real solution to the situation in Iran and what has already stabilised it? The law of the strongest? Pressure from only one side? No!“ he said. “We know that Iran was on a nuclear military path but what stopped it? The 2015 Vienna accord.” 

The speech deeply contrasted that of Mr Trump, who spoke on Monday about “America’s policy of principled realism,” while criticising components of the United Nations.

“We will not return to the Human Rights Council until real reform is enacted. We will also not provide any support to the International Criminal Court,“ he [Trump] said, adding that “the ICC has no authority. It violates all principles of justice and due process.”

“We will never surrender America’s sovereignty,” Mr Trump continued. “We reject the ideology of globalism. America is governed by Americans.“ 

[Trump] The president also announced the US would reduce its funding towards the UN peacekeeping budget to under 25 per cent. 

I'm sure that Trump supporters will sneer at France's position, but before they do so, they might want to reflect on the reality that France has a transportation/infrastructure far better than America's and a health care system that is the most efficient in the world which doesn't leave its citizens in bankruptcy when serious illness occurs.  

Study: Marriage Leads to Improved Health for Same-Sex Headed Families

The Christofascists and their simpering political whores in the Republican Party who oppose same sex marriage always claim to be "concerned about the children" - even as they are only too willing to throw the children of same sex couples onto the trash heap along with their gay or lesbian parents.  Actions speak louder than words and by their opposition to marriage equality these individuals and "family values" organizations demonstrate that they truly do not give a damn about the children of same sex couples.  Now, a new study published in The New England Journal of Medicine finds that marriage equality has positive effects on public health by improving access to healthcare for same-sex couples and their children and reducing stresses.  Thus, in reality, the Christofascists are harming the children.  Deliberately harming them.  Here are highlights on the study via GayRVA:

 [M]arriage equality has positive effects on public health by improving access to healthcare for same-sex couples and their children, and reducing the risks of anxiety, depression and other mental health problems when a couple’s relationship is not legally recognized.

According to the report, public health research has suggested not only that discriminatory environments and bans on same-sex marriage are detrimental to health but also that legalizing same-sex marriage (among other policies expanding protections) contributes to better health for LGBT people.

Legalizing same-sex marriage also improves access to health insurance for LGBT people, the report finds:

About 55% of Americans are covered through their own or a family member’s employer-sponsored health insurance plan, but many employers do not extend coverage to same-sex partners or children of same-sex partners. Even among companies with more than 200 employees, only 42% offer health benefits to same-sex partners, according to the 2012 Employer Health Benefits Survey conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research and Educational Trust.

Thus, adults in same-sex relationships are less likely than their heterosexual counterparts to have health insurance and may therefore delay or forgo necessary medical care. When states legalize same-sex marriage, some workplaces that offer employer-sponsored insurance are required to treat married same-sex couples just as they treat married opposite-sex couples.

Therefore, disparities in insurance coverage are narrower in states that permit same-sex marriage or civil unions that guarantee complete spousal rights to same-sex couples.

Same-sex marriage also strengthens access to health insurance for the 220,000 children who are being raised by same-sex parents in the United States.

[C]hildren with same-sex parents are less likely than children with married opposite-sex parents to have private health insurance. These disparities diminish when LGBT families live in states with marriage equality or laws supporting adoptions for same-sex parents.

The take away?  When Victoria Cobb, Tony Perkins and Maggie Gallagher bloviate about caring about "the children" know that they are lying.

Papa John's, Applebee's, Et Al Pay High Price For Anti-Obamacare Stance

The Republican Party wants to bring back the Gilded Age and the harsh conditions faced by the majority of workers.  Some employers seemingly are all on board for such a step backwards in time, including the CEO's of Papa John's and Applebee's who stated that they would cut workers' hours rather than comply with the mandates of the Affordable Health Care Act, a/k/a Obamacare.  Unbeknown to these Scrooge like individuals, much of the public found their miserliness disgusting and voted with their feet and/or wallets.  The result?  Both Pappa John's, Applebee's and similar anti-worker employers saw their bottom lines severely damaged.  Karma can indeed be a bitch.  (NOTE: Walmart still plans to slash employees' hours - one of the reasons I never shop at Walmart). Here are highlights from Forbes:

It turns out that being a good corporate citizen is as important to selling pizzas as the thinness of the crust or the quality of the cheese.

If you don’t believe it, just ask Papa John CEO, John Schnatter.  As covered—and criticized—in this column in great detail, Mr. Schnatter decided to mix his politics with his pepperoni when suggesting that he would be cutting the work hours for Papa John employees in order to bring them below the 30 hour per week threshold that would require Schnatter to provide his employees with healthcare benefits.

It turns out, the pizza eating public did not approve.  Indeed, so serious was the reaction that Schnatter was forced to publish an op-ed piece where he sought to convince us that he never really intended to cut back worker hours but had simply been speculating on what he might do in response to the legislation.

According to YouGov BrandIndex,  a leading marketing survey that measures brand perception in the marketplace (called “Buzz”), Papa John’s had good reason for concern as the pizza chain’s brand identity has plummeted from a high of 32 on election day, to a remarkably low score of 4 among adults who have eaten at causal dining restaurants during the past month.  Ouch.

Papa John is not alone in his anti-Obamacare misery.  Fast food server, Applebee’s, possessed a healthy Buzz score of 35 before Zane Terkel, CEO of one of the company’s largest franchisees, appeared on television to complain about the law and to announce that he would not be building more restaurants or hiring any more workers in response to his objections to Obamacare.  Applebee’s “pre-Terkel” Buzz score of 35 now sits at a pathetic 5.

[O]ne  . . . company is facing the music straight on. Darden Restaurants, Inc.— owner of Olive Garden, Red Lobster and LongHorn Steakhouse—has lowered its profit projections for the quarter ending November 25^th, acknowledging that its bad numbers are the result of poorly performing  promotions, Superstorm Sandy and…wait for it…the poor publicity it engendered by its decision to test out a plan to cut back on healthcare costs by putting more workers on part-time schedules.

Hopefully, other businesses seeking to avoid their responsibilities under the healthcare law—such as Walmart who intends to cut back employee hours in the effort to push workers onto Medicaid rolls rather than take responsibility for their employees’ health care—will get the message.

Perhaps there is a God after all!  I for one am thrilled that these nasty, greed motivated business owners have received a strong rebuke from consumers.

Click image to enlarge

Railroads to Offer Health Care Benefits to Same-Sex Spouses

While those living in the past - and perhaps wrestling with their own demos - like Randy Forbes and similar anti-gay bigots in the GOP continue to seek to marginalize gays, the nation's largest railroad carriers have announced that they will begin offering health care benefits to legally married same sex couples starting January 1, 2014.  One of the carriers is Virginia based Norfolk Southern (based in Norfolk).  Also included is CSX Corporation which has major operations in Virginia, including in Norfolk, Newport News, Portsmouth, and Richmond. The Virginian Pilot reports on the move by the railroad industry.  Here are highlights:

A day after being sued by legally married, gay engineers, the nation's largest freight rail carriers announced they will provide health care benefits to the same-sex spouses of their employees.

Gus Melonas, a spokesman for BNSF Railway Co., read the statement Wednesday from the National Railway Labor Conference to The Associated Press. The conference represents the railroad companies in dealings with labor groups, lawmakers and courts.

[T]he railroads agreed with labor to provide the benefit in light of recent changes allowing same sex couples to access same federal tax benefits provided to other married couples," the conference said.

Two BNSF engineers in Washington state, one man and one woman, sued the company Tuesday over its refusal to provide benefits to their spouses. The federal lawsuit, which alleges violations of the federal Equal Pay Act, seeks class-action status on behalf of any other BNSF employees who may have been denied benefits for their same-sex spouses in a legally recognized marriage. It says the same-sex spouses have been denied benefits provided routinely to those of opposite sex.

Same-sex spouses will be eligible for dependent health care coverage starting Jan. 1, the statement said.

The rail conference represents the largest freight carriers in the nation — including units of Norfolk Southern Corp., Union Pacific Corp., CSX Corp. and Berkshire Hathaway Inc.'s BNSF — as well as some smaller railroads. Its statement, reported earlier Wednesday by the Omaha World Herald's Omaha.com, said employees would receive more information about the same-sex spouse health benefits in the coming weeks.

While private industry continues to move forward, Virginia's anti-gay laws make the state increasingly non-competitive when it comes to attracting top talent and employees.  All so that Christofascists can feel superior about themselves and look down on gays.  It's sick, but then so is conservative Christianity.

      

The Issues Facing LGBT Americans

A report reviewing the major areas in which unfair laws and Christianist fanned stigma create extra burdens for LGBT Americans in their every day lives has been released by a coalition comprised of the Human Rights Campaign, Log Cabin Republicans, the Movement Advancement Project, Stonewall Democrats and the Victory Fund.  The report is aimed at educating straight allies Many of the findings are disturbing and underscore the reality that while life for LGBT Americans have improved in some states. in most states LGBT citizens are treated as third or fourth class citizens at best.  Unfortunately, Virginia is one of the states where there has been little improvement in the legal climate for LGBT individuals.  Indeed, during the last decade in Virginia, other than the invalidation of Virginia's sodomy laws under the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Lawrence v. Texas, nothing has improved.  In fact, things have gotten worse (e.g., passage of the Marshall-Newman Amendment in 2006).  Here is the report's abstract followed by some excerpts from the report which can be found in full here:

ABSTRACT: Despite historic gains in the last few years, LGBT Americans are simply still not treated equally under federal law. Contrary to popular belief, federal legislation does not protect LGBT people from discrimination in housing, public accommodations, credit or employment—and LGBT people also lack such protections in most states. LGBT workers often cannot extend their health insurance coverage to their partners or children. Without family and marriage tax deductions, LGBT families pay additional taxes but lack access to critical protections that many Americans often take for granted, like Social Security Survivor Benefits. Due to these and myriad other inequalities, LGBT people are more likely to live in poverty and suffer from health disparities.

FAIR AND INCLUSIVE WORKPLACES:  The vast majority of Americans (73% according to the latest poll by the Center for American Progress) believe that workers should be treated fairly and equally and that no one should be fired for reasons that have nothing to do with their job performance. Yet LGBT people continue to face pervasive discrimination in the workplace. According to an analysis of the 2008 General Social Survey by the Williams Institute, more than one in-four lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) employees (27%) reported experiencing employment discrimination based on their sexual orientation in the past five years.11 The National Transgender Discrimination Survey found that 50% of transgender employees had been harassed at work.12 There is no federal law explicitly prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

As shown in Map 1, only a minority of states have legislation that protects workers for being unfairly fired .  .  .  .

Click on image to enlarge

ACCESS TO WORKPLACE BENEFITS:  LGBT people are less likely to have health insurance coverage.  No federal law requires employers to offer health benefits to the same-sex spouses or partners of LGBT employees, and most employers do not offer such benefits.  Even when employers do offer such benefits, LGBT employees (unlike married straight employees) and employers are taxed on the value of domestic partner health insurance benefits, making health insurance more expensive for LGBT employees and their families. 

FREEDOM FROM DISCRIMINATION:  Many LGBT people experience discrimination when just going about their daily activities–whether eating at a restaurant with their families or friends, trying to obtain safe, clean housing, or applying for a loan. One study found that in 27% of cases, same sex couples encountered discrimination when trying to rent or buy a home, and another study found that 19% of transgender respondents had been refused a home or apartment because of their gender identity or expression.20 Under federal law, LGBT people are not protected from discrimination in housing, public accommodations, credit or employment.

FREEDOM TO MARRY:  Many states in the U.S. have state-level laws banning same-sex couples from marriage and/or prohibiting other forms of relationship recognition. These state-level laws stand in the way of same-sex couples’ ability to take care of one another and tell them that their relationships and families don’t matter.

There much more detail, but these excerpts hopefully will help straight readers realize that there votes against anti-gay politicians are crucial to ending the daily inequality that we in the LGBT community face daily.

Romney Picks Paul Ryan - And His "Immoral Budget" - for VP

Both the Virginian Pilot and the Washington Post are reporting that Mitt Romney has selected Paul Ryan - architect of the GOP budget plan that even the child rapist protecting Catholic bishops describe as immoral for what it does to the neediest Americans - as his vice presidential running mate.  The official announcement is reportedly to be made in little more than an hour aboard the decommissioned battleship Wisconsin that comprises part of Norfolk's maritime museum on the Norfolk Waterfront.   While the irrational and ignorant GOP base may be rejoicing, anyone with a shred of compassion for the less fortunate ought to be appalled.  Ryan will serve to solidify Romney and the GOP as the antithesis to the Robin Hood legend: they will rob from the poor and middle class and give to the most wealthy elements of society.  Grandma might truly find herself subsisting on dry dog kibble and with greatly reduced health care options should Romney win the White House and the GOP take control of Congress.  Here are highlights from the Washington Post coverage (which also looks at the con job Romney hopes to work at the GOP convention to reverse the growing realization that Romney is a reverse Robin Hood):

NORFOLK — Mitt Romney has selected Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin as his running mate in the presidential race and will make the long-awaited announcement here Saturday morning.  Romney’s campaign told supporters at about 7 a.m. via an iPhone app that the seven-term congressman would be the Republican vice presidential nominee.

Romney plans to announce his decision about 8:45 a.m., when he tours the USS Wisconsin, a decommissioned World War II-era Navy battleship named to honor the state.

If Romney announces Ryan as his running mate, he would offer voters the starkest possible choice on how to address issues of spending and taxing, embracing Ryan’s single-minded focus on reducing the nation’s debt without raising taxes by dramatically altering Americans’ relationship to their government.

It is a fight Democrats, too, have savored, believing the details of Ryan’s budget will convince voters that they offer a fairer path to reduced deficits through a combination of spending cuts and higher taxes on the wealthy. 

“To borrow a phrase, the convention has the potential to be an ‘Etch a Sketch moment,’ ” said Mark McKinnon, a longtime Republican image-maker who advised the presidential campaigns of George W. Bush and Sen. John McCain. “Conventions often wipe the slate clean. A crucial bloc of undecided voters, though there aren’t many this year, will just start paying attention when the convention starts.”

Romney’s advisers are putting the finishing touches on plans to reintroduce the candidate to the nation. They have filmed new videos with Romney and his family at his lakefront vacation home in Wolfeboro, N.H., and are devising a prominent role onstage for Ann Romney and their extended family.

For Romney, a big moment couldn’t come soon enough. Weeks of pummeling by Democratic ads depicting Romney as an out-of-touch plutocrat and possible tax evader appear to have taken a toll.

Three national polls released over the past two days show Obama widening his lead over Romney to as much as nine points. The surveys of registered voters, all conducted between Aug. 2 and Aug. 8, also show Romney’s unfavorable ratings rising. Two of the polls show his support among independents slipping.

A Fox News poll found the largest deficit, with Romney trailing by nine points — 49 percent to 40 percent — the widest gap Fox has reported all year.

A senior Romney adviser played down the new polls at a news briefing Friday morning at Boston headquarters, saying that they must be midsummer flukes because there had been no “precipitating event” to move the numbers so much.

 Part of me feels that even Bob "Taliban Bob" McDonnell would have been a more compassionate individual for the VP slot - and that is something down right scary.

Rick Perry "Proudly" Refuses health care for 1.2 Million Texans

Mitt Romney is not the only Republican who holds contempt for the less fortunate.  Just yesterday Texas Governor Rick Perry announced that he was rejecting an estimated $164 billion dollars in federal aid coming on line under the Affordable Health Care Act and kicking 1.2 million low-income Texans to the curb with no health care coverage.  To many in the GOP, the less fortunate are simply disposable trash.  Even as they boast of the religiosity while utterly ignoring the Gospel message about caring for the poor, the sick, the hungry and the homeless.  Raw Story looks at Perry's "proud" rejection of coverage for needy Texans.  Here are highlights:

In a statement published Monday morning, Texas Governor Rick Perry (R) “proudly” declared that he will decline to implement key tenets of the Affordable Care Act — a move that will see his state forgo an estimated $164 billion dollars in federal aid and leave over 1.2 million low-income Texans, who would have finally been eligible for health care, helpless and uninsured.

“This is a fiscally stupid decision on the part of Rick Perry,” Texas Democratic Party spokesperson Rebecca Acuña told Raw Story. “Texas would be one of the states that gets the most money from the federal government and the Medicaid expansion would have provided health care to more than a million Texans. It’s… It’s very sad that Rick Perry is willing to play politics with the health of Texans, and that’s exactly what this decision is.”

 With his announcement, Perry becomes the sixth governor to refuse implementing a key aspect of the Affordable Care Act: the Medicaid expansion and the state-based health care exchanges. Republican governors in Florida, South Carolina, Mississippi, Louisiana and Wisconsin have made similar decisions, but Texas is by far the biggest.

Perry would seem to be inviting a political free-for-all thanks to the relative size and power of the Texas hospital industry, which absorbed more than $4.6 billion in unpaid emergency medical costs in 2010. While not seeing it as a cure-all, Texas hospitals largely praised the Affordable Care Act for dramatically expanding health care options for poor people, who are ultimately paid for by others who carry their own insurance. Nearly 25 percent of Texans — 6.5 million people — do not have health insurance, including more than 1.2 million children, and the state’s health care system ranks last in the nation overall.


In a letter to Health and Human Services Director Kathleen Sebelius (PDF), Perry opined that giving poor people health care and setting up exchanges that make health insurance cheaper are both “brazen intrusions into the sovereignty of our state.”

The state of Texas has the most restrictive Medicaid program in the country, requiring that a family of three make no more than $188 per month to qualify. Under federal rules administered by the Affordable Care Act, Medicaid would be expanded to 133 percent of the poverty level, covering an additional 1.2 million Texans under the program. That would cause a 46 percent increase in Medicaid enrollment which the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation (PDF) estimated would cost the state 3 percent more in 2019 than it currently pays, and the federal government would have picked up the rest

Ninth Circuit: Arizona Same-Sex Partners Entitled to Health Benefits

In a common sense decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has temporarily ruled that an Arizona law that stripped same sex couples of partner health care benefits - while, of course leaving them in place of married couples - is unconstitutional under the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution. The ruling will hold until the larger trail on the issue is completed. The law, signed by extremist Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, targeted state employees and was (like all anti-gay measures) aimed at punishing LGBT couples for their failure to conform to conservative Christian moral views on marriage and same sex relationships. Should Arizona appeal the decision, the U. S. Supreme Court could either refuse the appeal or wade into the equal protection issue - something it might well prefer to avoid. Here are highlights from the Tucson Citizen:

Arizona must continue to provide health-care benefits to the partners of gay and lesbian government workers, at least for the time being.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday upheld a temporary injunction from a lower court that blocked a 2009 state law eliminating health-insurance coverage for same-sex partners of state employees from taking effect.

In its unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel of the appellate court noted that the state is not obligated to provide health-care benefits but said denying them to a specific group of employees violates the equal-protection provisions of the U.S. Constitution.

“When a state chooses to provide such benefits, it may not do so in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner that adversely affects particular groups that may be unpopular,” the court stated in its opinion.

It was not immediately clear whether the state would appeal the 9th Circuit ruling. If it does appeal, the state can choose to seek “en banc” review, a decision by the entire 9th Circuit, or it could choose to bypass that step and appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

When asked about next steps, Brewer spokesman Matthew Benson would say only that the Governor’s Office is “studying the ruling.” But he did question the foundation of the appellate court’s argument.

In its opinion, the court said the state’s policy unfairly impacted gay and lesbian workers because, unlike their heterosexual counterparts, they are not able to legally marry under state law.

Abandoning Children - Texas and GOP Style

I realize that at times I sound like a broken record, but the the manner in which the Republican Party's economic policies are 180 degrees opposite of the Gospel message GOP claims to honor is breath taking. The GOP controlled budget in Texas is in many ways a mini-version of what the Congressional GOP seeks to implement and it is an indictment of a political approach that trashes the weakest and most vulnerable members of society. Paul Krugman has a column in the New York Times that takes a good look at the "Christian" and "family" values of the GOP. It is beyond disturbing how little the GOP as a party cares about investing in the nation's real future - it's children. Here are some column highlights:

*

Republicans are demanding draconian spending cuts, but we don’t yet know how far they’re willing to go in a showdown with President Obama. At the state and local level, however, there’s no doubt about it: big spending cuts are coming.

*

And who will bear the brunt of these cuts? America’s children. Now, politicians — and especially, in my experience, conservative politicians — always claim to be deeply concerned about the nation’s children. . . . In practice, however, when advocates of lower spending get a chance to put their ideas into practice, the burden always seems to fall disproportionately on those very children they claim to hold so dear.

*

Consider, as a case in point, what’s happening in Texas, which more and more seems to be where America’s political future happens first. . . . . While low spending may sound good in the abstract, what it amounts to in practice is low spending on children, who account directly or indirectly for a large part of government outlays at the state and local level.

*
And in low-tax, low-spending Texas, the kids are not all right. The high school graduation rate, at just 61.3 percent, puts Texas 43rd out of 50 in state rankings. Nationally, the state ranks fifth in child poverty; it leads in the percentage of children without health insurance. And only 78 percent of Texas children are in excellent or very good health, significantly below the national average. It*’s not a pretty picture; compassion aside, you have to wonder — and many business people in Texas do — how the state can prosper in the long run with a future work force blighted by childhood poverty, poor health and lack of education. But things are about to get much worse.
*

Given the already dire condition of Texas children, you might have expected the state’s leaders to focus the pain elsewhere. In particular, you might have expected high-income Texans, who pay much less in state and local taxes than the national average, to be asked to bear at least some of the burden. But you’d be wrong. Tax increases have been ruled out of consideration; the gap will be closed solely through spending cuts.

*

The really striking thing about all this isn’t the cruelty — at this point you expect that — but the shortsightedness. What’s supposed to happen when today’s neglected children become tomorrow’s work force? Anyway, the next time some self-proclaimed deficit hawk tells you how much he worries about the debt we’re leaving our children, remember what’s happening in Texas, a state whose slogan right now might as well be “Lose the future.”

Gays In Brazil Can Claim Partners on Tax Returns

In another example of the USA falling further behind other countries in the Western Hemisphere, pursuant to an attorney general ruling, same sex couples in Brazil will be able to claim partners as dependants as long as they meet the same requirements for heterosexual couples. True, it's not as good as the rights that same sex couples would have from marriage, but its a damn sight ahead of the USA which continues to enshrine religious discrimination in its laws - even as it falsely proclaims itself to be a beacon of freedom and religious liberty. O Globo has details on the ruling and how same sex couples can register their relationships for tax purposes. Oh, and also note Brazil's position of pension benefits and adoption. While the translation that follows is a bit rough, here are highlights on what's happening in Brazil:
*
BRASILIA - Gay couples can declare their partner as a dependent of the Income Tax (IR), provided they meet the same requirements established by law for heterosexuals with stable, like living together for five years. The IRS may require the taxpayer to verify the information.
*
The ruling will be published Friday in the Official Gazette by an opinion of the Attorney General of the National Treasury. The document was approved by the minister, Guido Mantega. It is expected that Revenue will make public Friday where this type of declaration will be filed and accepted.
*
Brazil does not recognize the stable union between persons of the same sex, but the courts - and now the executive branch - have given to same sex relationships the same legal treatment given to heterosexual couples.
*
Last month, the Attorney General's Office acknowledged that stable homosexual unions gives the right to receive pension benefits for private sector workers.
*
The Superior Court of Justice in 2008, supported the inclusion of a same-sex partners in the health plan of the other partner. And in April this year, the Superior Court of Justice approved the adoption of a child by a homosexual couple.

Washington Post: Several D.C. Area Hospitals Do Not Have Nondiscrimination Policies for Gays

Yesterday I noted that at least one Virginia based health insurance provider, Optima Health, does not allow small business health plans to offer employees of adding their same sex partners to their health plan - even though the state of Virginia allows such coverage. In addition, the majority of hospitals - some in Virginia - continue to lack nondiscrimination policies for gays. Obviously, this is important information to know when one is selecting a hospital for elective medical care so that such hospitals can be avoided. It can become potentially a huge problem if one is transported on an emergency basis to one of these facilities. Frankly, I am fed up with being treated as a second class citizen or even less than fully human by discriminatory policies that are hostile to LGBT citizens. As I have argued before, the LGBT community needs to use its purchasing power and boycott organizations that do not offer 100% equality to LGBT patients and businesses that seek to provide health coverage to the partners of their employees. Here are highlights from the Washington Post story on this issue:
*
A study by a prominent gay rights organization found that nearly half of 17 Washington area hospitals do not explicitly include "sexual orientation" or "gender identity" in their patients' bills of rights or nondiscrimination policies.
*
Eight Washington area hospitals, the report says, do not include such language. They are Sibley Memorial, Howard University and Providence hospitals in the District; Shady Grove Adventist Hospital and Washington Adventist Hospital in Montgomery County; Reston Hospital Center and Virginia Hospital Center in Northern Virginia; and Doctors Community Hospital in Prince George's County.
*
There is evidence that gay men and lesbians delay seeking care because of a perception of discrimination, Sullivan said. "When [health-care facilities] are inclusive, people seek health care in a timely manner, and to us, that's just good health-care policy," he said.
*
The report released Monday came at the same time as an announcement by Kaiser Permanente -- one of the nation's largest not-for-profit health providers -- that it has updated its patients' bill of rights to fully protect gay and lesbian patients and their families from discrimination.
*
Those changes, which took effect in Kaiser Permanente's network of 36 hospitals in California, Oregon and Hawaii on Monday, make it the first large health network to have a fully inclusive nondiscrimination policy for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender patients, according to the HRC. A Kaiser spokeswoman said the organization hopes to implement the policy at its 431 medical office buildings across the country within the year.
*
In April, Obama directed the Department of Health and Human Services to make rules that require all hospitals that receive Medicare or Medicaid funding -- nearly every hospital in the United States -- to protect the visitation and decision-making rights of gay men and lesbians.
*
In January, the Joint Commission, which accredits and certifies health-care facilities, announced new patient standards that add language to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
*
The group also reviewed a representative sample of 200 of the largest hospitals in all 50 states and found that 93 percent do not have fully inclusive policies for lesbians, gay men, bisexual and transgender people.

Health Care Around The World - What's Wrong with This Picture?

Click image to enlarge

*

As the health care reform continues, it is informative to see how the USA's supposedly wonderful health care system stacks up in terms of accessibility with other nations around the world. Somehow, I do not feel comforted being in the same league as Africa and well behind most of South America. Blue is single payer and Green is "universal by other means."

*

Since under my own coverage it's a new calendar year, I have a new deductible to meet before coverage kicks in and, as a result, I am leaving therapy and my meds because I cannot afford to make the payments for this care. Me and many others, I suspect. And we have the best system in the world? I think not.

Bob McDonnell's Vicious Budget Priorities

Some say that Bob McDonnell is a rising star of the GOP. If so, people need to take a close look at his proposed budget cuts which demonstrate a low priority towards everyday citizens, particularly the poor and those at the bottom of the economic food chain. The budget cuts are very much in keeping with the mindset of The Family Foundation and other far right elements in the Republican Party of Virginia that all too often seem to believe that one is down trodden, it is because one deserves such misfortune. Indeed, these self-congratulatory Christianists seem to take a decidedly un-Christian view of others be they black, gay, Hispanic, or non-Christian. It may be a very long four years under McDonnell's administration. The Virginian Pilot has details of McDonnell's proposed cuts and the reaction from those who work with society's down trodden elements. There seems to be little compassionate conservatism. Moreover, while McDonnell claims to want to create jobs and attract business, he utterly ignores what social atmosphere attracts the "creative class." Here are highlights:

*
After reviewing his [McDonnell's] proposal to pare $2.2 billion from the budget, some human-service advocates question the governor's intentions. McDonnell's suggestions show "an absolute disregard in investments for our future, while... his spending demonstrates an appetite for more corporate takeover in Richmond," said Doug Smith, executive director of the Virginia Interfaith Center for Public Policy.
*
Smith takes exception to cuts McDonnell recommended for school meals, homeless people, juvenile crime prevention, and a state insurance program for low-income children and pregnant women. By proposing those cuts while asking the legislature to approve tens of millions in funding to attract business to Virginia with incentives and tax credits, "Bob McDonnell is choosing business over people in this budget," Smith argued.
*
Trish O'Brien, executive director of a human services organization called CHIP/Healthy Families in Chesapeake, said that if legislators approve the proposed cuts, she will lose half of her staff members, who check on 3,000 children in at-risk families throughout Chesapeake.
*
Some programs that would be slashed or eliminated would save relatively little money. For example, a teen pregnancy prevention program in Norfolk, Portsmouth, and five other areas would be ended to save $900,000.
*
State Sen. Janet Howell, D-Fairfax County, said McDonnell's proposed reductions slice "the heart and soul" out of state government. Particularly upsetting to state Sen. Louise Lucas, D-Portsmouth, is the possible cut to a school meals program. "To even put school lunches on the table has got to be the most insensitive thought of the session, because that school lunch is the only decent meal some of these kids are going to get in a day's time," Lucas said.
*
The cuts to social services, mental health services and health insurance programs would fray the safety net of a growing number of Hampton Roads residents, according to Betty Wade Coyle, executive director of Prevent Child Abuse Hampton Roads. "It's scaling back direct services to children and to the most vulnerable citizens in the community."
*
Maureen Hollowell, who advocates for disabled people through the Norfolk-based Endependence Center, said 6,000 disabled and elderly people who receive services through a "consumer directed" program that allows them to hire their own personal care assistants would lose their funding under the governor's proposals.
*
Many of us tried to warn that Bob McDonnell is no moderate, but few would listen. I hope voters take a good look at the GOP's priorities when it comes to viewing citizens as basically disposable goods. WWJD??

Kaine Plans to Extend Health Benefits to Virginia Same-Sex Partners

One has to wonder why he has waited until the waning weeks of his term to begin to implement the plan to belatedly extend health care benefits to the same sex partners of Virginia State employees. Up until now, outgoing Governor Tim Kaine has largely thrown LGBT Virginians under the bus other than giving lip service to equality for all Virginians. Nonetheless, the proposal has some fun aspects to it because it will pose an immediate test for Governor elect, Taliban Bob McDonnell (pictured at left) who campaigned as moderate despite his Christianist past. The plan has merit and would obviously make Virginia more competitive in the employment market, but the gay-hating Republican Party of Virginia ("RVP") base will likely go berserk. Obviously, if McDonnell has ambitions for higher office, he will have to be careful not to act in a manner that reveals his whole campaign as a moderate was a lie. If there would be no cost to the state, then McDonnell will be greeted with a land mine as soon as he is sworn in. It will be entertaining to see how this all plats out. Here are some highlights from the Washington Post:

*
RICHMOND -- Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine has directed his staff to begin putting into effect a proposal that would allow same-sex partners to be covered under the state's employee health plan. The incoming governor, Robert F. McDonnell (R), who has sparred with Kaine (D) on gay rights issues, expressed concern Thursday about the potential cost of the proposal but did not criticize what is expected to be a controversial one.
*
"My first question is, what [is] the cost to the state by expanding those policies?" McDonnell said at a news conference at the state Capitol. "I am all for using business -- public and private -- to expand health-care coverage. . . . But what I don't know is, what is the cost that has to be borne by the state government versus the individual new subscriber?"
*
Sara Wilson, director of the Virginia Department of Human Resource Management, said officials hope to offer the expanded benefit at no additional expense to the state because employees would be required to pay the entire cost. She said that state officials have been discussing the proposal for months but that she was not directed until mid-November to begin implementing the change.
*
Wilson said that a change of this magnitude would take about 18 months to implement, well after Kaine completes his four-year term Jan. 16. That would leave McDonnell to decide whether to continue the program. House Majority Leader H. Morgan Griffith (R-Salem) said that Kaine, who serves as chairman of the Democratic National Committee, is a "political animal" and called his timing suspect. "He gets to throw a bone to his base and then create a land mine for the incoming administration," Griffith said. "It may be totally innocent, but to change a policy in the last month of administration calls it into question."
*
Kaine and McDonnell clashed on gay rights in 2006 when McDonnell, then the state attorney general, advised Kaine that he had overstepped his constitutional authority when he outlawed bias against gays in state hiring. Eighteen other states provide benefits to adults other than spouses, and 10 provide benefits to domestic partners with no distinction between couples of the same or opposite sex, Wilson said. In the Washington region, Maryland offers benefits to same-sex partners; the District, to domestic partners.

*

McDonnell claims he's now a moderate and that he does not support discrimination against LGBT Virginians. I guess we will see if he meant any of it.

GOP Continues to Traffic in Anti-Gay Hate Speech

The Colorado Senate has passed a bill extending health insurance coverage to the partners of gay and lesbian state workers. As the Denver Post reports, the Senate approved Senate Bill 88 in a 22-12 vote on Tuesday, sending it to the House for consideration. All too typically, the Republican members of the Colorado legislature are (1) chanting the mantra that the majority gets to decide what civil rights, if any, minorities will be allowed and/or (2) engaging in religious based hate speech against gays. Some of the worse hate speech came from Sen. Scott Renfroe, R-Greeley, who equated homosexuality with rape and murder. Obviously, Mr. Renfroe cares nothing about the possible violence against gays that talk such as his can cause. Here are some highlights from the Colorado Springs Gazette that illustrate the irresponsible, theocratic behavior of the Colorado GOP:

*

Debating a gay-rights bill on the floor of the state Senate on Monday, a Republican lawmaker took the rhetoric to new heights by equating homosexuality as a sin with murder. "I'm not saying this (homosexuality) is the only sin that's out there," said Sen. Scott Renfroe, R-Greeley. "We have murder. We have all sorts of sin. We have adultery. And we don't make laws making those legal, and we would never think to make murder legal."

*

Other Republicans said the bill, which would allow partners of gay state employees to be covered by health care benefits, is an attempt by Democrats to chip away at a constitutional amendment voters passed in 2006 defining marriage as between a man and a woman. "These are just micro-steps to a lawsuit in the Colorado Supreme Court to overturn what the voters voted for," charged Sen. Dave Schultheis, R-Colorado Springs.

*

Renfroe called homosexuality an "abomination" and an "offense to God" and argued that God created men and women so they would procreate. He compared the nuclear family structure to the Holy Trinity and, quoting the book of Genesis, said women had been created to be "helpers" for men.

*

Sen. John Morse, D-Colorado Springs, wasn't at a loss for words in responding to Republican opponents. "Just because there's hate in their (Republicans') hearts doesn't mean we're going to do hateful things," Morse said. Veiga denied her bill is about gay marriage. "This is not about marriage. This is about health care," Veiga said. "If today is not the right time, then you've got to tell me when, because equality is equality is equality regardless of when we do it."