Replies: 18 Comments

Comment #1: Dr. Alan H. Levinson said on 4/2/05 @ 12:23am ET...

More interesting news..as typically not stated for general consumption:

April 01, 2005
Social Security fix secretly also a Medicaid fix???
I was speaking with someone I know in the Colorado legal community regarding medicaid funding (I do not want to disclose name or relationship, as I do not want to jeopardize the person's job/position).

Anyway, we were having a nice chat about state Medicaid litigation, and the (among others) requirement the recipient have virtually nothing in assets (I believe that they are allowed to have $3,000.00 in Colorado in liquid assets or less), before they are allowed to become Medicaid eligible.

Now lets say someone today applies for Medicaid. If their 401K or other private retirement savings account has a balance, then after factoring for spousal impoverishment provisions (in Colorado, I think the spouse is allowed to retain $90,000.00 in their 401k - but hey, that should carry you for the next 40 years, right?), they must spend down the rest of their 401k to bring themselves into eligibility for medicaid.

With me so far? I hope so...

Anyway, today, with Social Security, if you are pre-benefits (IE, you are say, 40 years old, and not collecting), you receive no social security income (so that doesn't get factored into your resources), and you also technically have no specific interest in a sum of money held by the government in the "social security trust fund". So there really is no way for the state (the administrator of medicaid) to go after that money (whereas if you were 70 and collecting defined social security payments, that would factor into your resource calculation).

But...what if we had George W. Bush's private account systems?

Now (in this theoretical world) all individuals have retirement income accounts that, while government regulated, are likely to be somewhat similar to 401K and other accounts. If you fall into the need for Medicaid otherwise, its possible that any new law will structure the Private Accounts in a manner that will make them vulnerable to either deny medicaid, or force the recipient to spend down the private account (if they are indeed permitted to do so! - it could be that they would not be permitted to spend the resource down quickly to "preserve" the resource, allowing for a catch-22 denial of medicaid benefits) in order to become eligible for medicaid.

In other words, switching from Social Security to some private account scheme would allow medicaid to have yet another resource to factor into denials, and another resource to force you to spend down your resources (good luck, spouse - you have 90k to live on for the next 30 or 40 years!).

"Solving" the Social Security "problem" could solve the Medicaid problem as well!

I mean, if you don't mind our government's policies going back to the dark ages.

Comment #2: Paul said on 4/2/05 @ 12:39am ET...

Georgia, of course. Really, who would be surprised that they would do this? Georgia USA is having an identity crisis! They seem to think they are Georgia in the old USSR! Maybe we can move Bush Co and all his drones there, then sell it to Russia? Nobody there would notice! America would be better off. :) Of course, not everyone in Georgia deserves this, but they can be allowed to move. :) (With sincere apologies to Georgians who think this bill is a BAD thing!)

Sadly, of course, if this legislation is enacted, other States can point to it so that they can enact something similar. That's the bad thing.

With a Governor like this, i'll be VERY surprised if the bill isn't signed:


Gov. Sonny Perdue, a Republican, will review the bill before deciding whether to sign it, said his press secretary, Heather Hedrick, but in general he "believes that voting is at least as important as seeing an R-rated movie," for which she said photo identification was also required.


And there you have it! Comparing the rights of a voter with someone who wants to watch an R-rated movie! Says it all really...

And the move to implant ID chips in everyone, so every move we make can be traced and we can all be herded like cattle, moves one more step forward! Hurrah!

As far as I can see Sir, the only option now is a revolt by the Georgia electorate before the bill is signed. Is there any other option?

Comment #3: Torqued said on 4/2/05 @ 5:33am ET...

The only option is for the people to take responsibility for allowing a destructive government. The people will have to stop this. The people will have to take back the country. Period.

Comment #4: Dr. Alan H. Levinson said on 4/2/05 @ 10:37am ET...

Mr. Conyers,

I was wondering if you ever wrote that editorial date 3/25/05 regarding Bush's popularity dropping like a rock? Were you planning on sending it to a particular newspaper or other periodical...and...if so, which one?

Comment #5: JC said on 4/2/05 @ 12:45pm ET...

We received a preliminary level of interest from Buzzflash, and are waiting to hear if they will run it or not. If they do not, we will send to other periodicals. So we have not forgotten about it. Thanks for your interest.

Comment #6: Ohiodem1 said on 4/2/05 @ 12:49pm ET...

The same legislation was introduced by the Republicans in the Ohio General Assembly yesterday. I call it the Young and Old People's Voter Intimidation and Supression Bill.

Remember that Ohio Elections are still run by that paragon of virtue, Mr. Kenneth Blackwell. I guess comparison of signatures that has worked for 100 years is no good any more. Gotta show your papers.

Next thing you know, we will have to show our papers to walk down the street. Seig Bush!!

Comment #7: Doug Kenline said on 4/2/05 @ 2:07pm ET...

Thanks for blogging Representative Conyers. I'm trying to get the State Representatives blogging here in Georgia.

Georgia State Representative Ronald L. Forster has a blog with reader comments set up for the people here...

http://ronforster.blogspot.com/

Thanks again for blogging. Still sad to think that you are the only member of Congress out of 540 members that has a clue about blogging but hopefully your good leadership will help to get a few slakers off of their butts and then one thing will lead to another and soon we'll have 540 good United States Congressional blogs going.

History will show that John Conyers of Michigan was the first.

Comment #8: Teresa said on 4/2/05 @ 2:36pm ET...

Yes, there is always someone ahead of the pack, scouting and protecting.

And now there is a pack ahead of all other packs.

Onward.

Comment #9: Torqued said on 4/3/05 @ 1:03am ET...

This topic is mentioned at CANNONFIRE in the latest election fraud news concerning the exit polls. The BRAD BLOG is another good site for the truth about the 2004 election as is Democratic Underground's election forum.

This legislation in Georgia, Indiana and other states is simply the systematic legalization of election fraud in action. The extremist Neo-Con Fascist takeover of the Republican Party cannot survive without stealing elections and staging another "Pearl Harbor" event soon to instill fear into the populist.

But we are not afraid of them. Lets go boys...

Comment #10: Dr. Alan H. Levinson said on 4/3/05 @ 7:44am ET...

PLEASE bear with me, I am a simple man (my wife will agree with the simple part)...and confused as to why it is so terrible for individuals to get voter ID cards. On the face of it, once you have an id card, doesn't it prevent you from being turned away from the poles on election day? If this plan targets the minority voter, can the minority do something NOW in order to be prepared when it counts. Is it that the poor (who are mostly dedmocratic) cant get to the places, or get the right materials?

I'm sorry, maybe I'm thick, I am not playing devil's advocate, nor am I on the side of 'almost' anything this administration does. I just don't understand!!

Alan

Comment #11: Steve said on 4/3/05 @ 11:55am ET...

Dr. Levinson:

As I understand it, the law requires a photo ID, which essentially means, a driver's license.

What if you don't have a driver's license?

What if you are elderly and too infirm to drive? You lose your right to vote too. Or if you are blind, or for some other reason (too poor to own a car, had license revoked, etc.) don't have a driver's license.

I completely agree with the need to require voters to verify their identities. That's completely appropriate. But there should be an alternative to a photo i.d., and this bill would disallow that.

Comment #12: Nana said on 4/3/05 @ 8:46pm ET...

The state I live in has a police ID type card. It is as legal/accepted as a divers license. It has photo, and looks very much like a license,and is obtained at the same place, the same way.

Comment #13: Horkus said on 4/3/05 @ 10:41pm ET...

As I understand it, the 2000 Florida dabauchle was due mainly to people being kicked off the voter rolls. Many of them were actually eligible. I don't see how voter ID prevents people from being kicked off the voter rolls just the same.

As far as Georgia goes, does anybody realize that Georgia was the first state to go completely electronic with it's voting? Supiciously, the Democratic incumbents were leading by large margins, but lost in the final tally. I sense that the voter ID issue is a smokescreen from the real issue.

Here's a good sight that briefly explains all the discrepancies.

Comment #14: Horkus said on 4/3/05 @ 10:43pm ET...

Messed up on the link.
here it is.

Comment #15: Nana said on 4/5/05 @ 3:18pm ET...

#13 Good point. I keep forgetting about those smokescreens and mirrors.

Comment #16: Ken said on 4/6/05 @ 1:00pm ET...

Where's all the Democrats' outrage at the stolen election in Washington state? I must've missed it.

It'd be nice if the Democrats could go one election cycle without trying to cheat.

Comment #17: Paul said on 4/9/05 @ 11:43pm ET...

Hahahahahaaaa...

Terribly sorry Ken.... I couldn't reply right away, every time I read your amazingly funny post, I get tears from laughing!! ROFL

(quote)
It'd be nice if the Democrats could go one election cycle without trying to cheat.
(/quote)

Ohhhh... too good!! Hahahahahaha...

I think you should be voted the Official Conyers Blog Clown! Hahaha

(oh, OK... I'm not at all sorry... Just being polite!) LMAO

I think that phrase "The pot calling the kettle black" will be used a lot with you! Hahahaha...

Sorry everyone!! I couldn't resist! I'll ignore him too now! :)

Comment #18: Paul said on 4/9/05 @ 11:52pm ET...

Hello Dr. Levinson, and all :)

The thing that worries me about this Photo ID thing is that it is very discriminatory. It discriminates against the disabled, the poor, the elderly and some of the young. I would have thought that was unconstitutional!

I believed the *EVERYONE* who is eligible, has the right to vote! Period! Why make it all so complicated? Simple answer: The more complicated something is, the easier it is to manipulate!

Sigh... and the World turns! :(