Michael1942's Blog

The plain and simple truth. MA

Justin Miller
July 6, 2017
A Wisconsin union ironworker’s plan to oust the House speaker: “I don’t need a law degree. I don’t need a doctorate. I have ears to listen.”

In late June, an ironworker from southeastern Wisconsin made waves when he released a video announcing his campaign to oust Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan, one of the country’s most powerful and influential conservatives, from his seat in Wisconsin’s First Congressional District in the 2018 election.
In the video, Wisconsin Democrat and longtime union activist Randy Bryce squarely criticized the American Health Care Act, which Ryan co-authored and steered to passage in the House. Bryce talked about his mother’s struggles with multiple sclerosis and his own battle with cancer. He pledged to be a voice for working people like him, and challenged Ryan to trade places with him and come work the iron while Bryce goes to Washington.
The internet blew up. Bryce’s campaign video quickly went viral, with many commentators calling it one of the most effective political messages in years. People flocked to his Twitter account, fawning over his handle (@IronStache) and his humble life story. One Twitter user described him as “genetically engineered from Bruce Springsteen songs.”
His campaign launch has been wildly successful, generating heaps of media coverage and leading thousands of small donors from around the country to contribute to his campaign.
The Prospect spoke with Bryce last week over the phone about his labor activism, how he hopes to beat Ryan, the 2016 presidential election, and the need for working people’s voices in Congress.
The following conversation has been condensed and edited for clarity.
Justin Miller: How and when did you first get involved in Wisconsin politics?
Randy Bryce: I was at a union meeting and the International was telling the locals that they were looking for people for volunteer positions as political coordinator. And everybody knew I was getting as involved as I could with our union, so I was asked if I’d be interested. I volunteered for that. Then I really started getting very active when Scott Walker was running for governor the initial time. He had been the Milwaukee County executive and he had been treating the county workers just like garbage. I was very active making sure he didn’t get elected—but he did. Then ten times more so once he got into office, and especially after he announced that he was going to put forward Act 10 [legislation that stripped public-sector workers of their collective-bargaining rights]. I was all in at that point—and it’s been that ever since.
Are you concerned that Wisconsin is now seen as a national model for Republicans in terms of how to attack labor?
Absolutely. And with it being the birthplace of so many amazing things on behalf of the labor movement—like public-sector unions, worker’s compensation—that makes me even more determined to keep it from getting to the national level. I’ve done what I can on the state level, but they’re doing whatever they can to jam things through. They don’t care at this point. So now I’m going after what I can at the federal level.
Can you describe Wisconsin’s First Congressional District?
It’s pretty much a smaller section of the rest of the country. We have our diverse urban areas and then it’s also a lot of rural areas. So as far as the composition of where people live, it’s a mixed bag. You hear what working people from all walks of life need.
Based on the people you know and conversations you’ve had with folks in the district, how do people feel about Paul Ryan’s “Better Way” plan [which boils down to cutting taxes for those at the top, gutting health-care programs, limiting social services, and rolling back labor protections]?
Well for one, we didn’t know how it would affect us because he hasn’t been here for almost two years to hold a public town hall. We had to find out from neighboring [Democratic Representative] Mark Pocan, who came in to hold two town halls, and they were packed.
The majority of us that live in the district are not the big donors that Paul Ryan’s been visiting.
So people are very concerned with what’s going on. People are scared. It’s a combination of being scared and being upset. The majority of us that live in the district are not the big donors that Paul Ryan’s been visiting. That’s the issue, too—he’s not talking to us but he’s traveling the country and charging $10,000 to have your picture taken with him. It’s not that he doesn’t have the time. It’s either he doesn’t care about us, or he’s afraid to face us.
And I assume there are not many people in the district actively calling on him to cut taxes on the rich, gut Medicaid, and so on?
I haven’t seen one person. I know some people that are well off, but even those people are saying they don’t mind paying their fair share. I don’t know of anybody who would be able to, or would want to, pay $10,000 to have their picture taken with him. There’s not one person here that’s looking forward to tax cuts for these richest people who already have everything.
Why do you think Ryan has been re-elected pretty easily each time since taking office in 1998?
You know, the last time I saw him was probably five or six years ago. He comes across—he almost sounds like a Democrat when he’s in the district. He says a lot of things. I mean, there were commercials running that were just blatant falsehoods, like, “Call Paul Ryan and thank him for saving pre-existing conditions.” He’s been in office for so long and people are starting to come around [to the reality] that he doesn’t care about us.
In early May, there was a Public Policy poll that showed more people would vote to replace him than keep him in office. After 20 years, he’s totally changed. He’s gone full-blown Washington at this point.

You’ve run twice before in state legislative races and lost. Why do you think you can beat one of the most powerful politicians in the country?
The two races I ran—there’s the gerrymandering case that’s going before the Supreme Court—those areas I ran in were heavily gerrymandered. I’m counting on all the experience. I learned a lot in those two races. And before [launching the campaign], people had initially reached out that were like, “Randy, you should think about running.”
Some organizations and local electeds had been urging me to get on board. This time, when I finally got to the point where I felt confident we had a winning team, it was like, “OK, let’s pull the trigger: let’s do this.” I think by looking at how our launch went, I don’t know of any other campaigns that have launched as successfully as ours. I like to think of myself as a good learner.
So tell me about the initial response to your campaign.
It’s been nothing short of amazing. I hit the P.O. box on my way home and I open up the letters in between talking to people and making phone calls. Just the stories … people saying, “I’m a cancer survivor, I’m on limited income, but I wanted to give you something—here’s $5.” I mean, that just hits me like nothing else. Or “My mother had MS also, or my husband had Alzheimer’s.” Just hearing personal stories from around the country.
People are saying, “I’m sending you an hour’s worth of work pay.”
More than 10,000 people have contributed. The average contribution level is right around $28, which is perfect. People are saying, “I’m sending you an hour’s worth of work pay.”
It’s an energy that really helps me. Sleep has kind of been in short supply but it gives me a lot of energy. It feels like I’m part of something special going on and it’s not just a campaign—it’s a movement getting working people involved.
What’s the vision and message that you want to run on and what’s your strategy for winning the race?
Well it’s all about people power. It’s getting more people involved. It’s not just about me running, it’s about getting more people like us to run around the country to be able to help working people. We’re working harder and we’re having less to show for it. As far as how we’ll win, it’s going to involve making people feel that they have the power, showing them that when we stand together there’s nothing that we can’t do.
Most members of Congress generally come out of the white-collar world—many of them are lawyers, many of them graduated from elite universities. A majority of members are millionaires. The average member’s wealth is equal to that of 18 average Americans’ households. I don’t think a single one is a tradesman or woman , let alone a union member.
Do you think Congress has any real grasp on the everyday struggles of working Americans? And why do you think it’s so important to have actual working people’s voices in Washington?
Obviously I do think that Congress is not in touch with working people overall. You can just look at the decisions that are being made with health care. Right now, in the Senate, they’re doing it behind closed doors. They’re trying to keep it as secretive as possible.
I don’t need a law degree. I don’t need a doctorate. I have ears to listen. For the last ten years, I’ve been standing up and demanding that people be heard.
If I didn’t think we needed more working people to run—and don’t get me wrong, this is going to be extremely difficult for me, a guy who gets paid by the hour, I’m not salaried—but I think it’s really important. I don’t need a law degree. I don’t need a doctorate. I have ears to listen. For the last ten years, I’ve been standing up and demanding that people be heard. It’s a combination of listening to my neighbors, listening to people in my district, and continuing to stand up and demand that our issues are heard wherever decisions are made.
Do you think Democrats can recapture working-class districts in the Rust Belt that have voted for Trump and Republicans?
I absolutely do, and again, like I said, just the success based on our message that I’m one of us running for office. We need to get more of us to run.
You were a Bernie supporter in the Wisconsin Democratic primary and you were set to be an elector for Hillary in the general election. Are you concerned that those two camps are heading in different directions? How do you think the party can reconcile and come together?
I think I’m in a really good position to be able to unite both camps into one. I understand the support for Bernie. I appreciated him going on picket lines as well as his stances. At the same time, I understand voting for Hillary. I did whatever possible to keep out Donald Trump, who ran on a populist message that some working people fell for. He made a lot of promises that he hasn’t kept. He hasn’t done one thing on behalf of working people that he said he would do.
I’m getting a lot of support from both camps. It seems to be a bigger issue on social media around the country than it does in the First Congressional District.
I’m sure you know plenty of people who voted for Trump from the district. Do you think the fact that he’s broken all these promises and gone the other way on so many policies is breaking through to the people who voted for him?
Absolutely, and I tell them—I know by face and name, because I work with them on the job site, former Trump supporters. I kind of joke with them, “Well, nothing says let’s stick it to the man like voting for a billionaire, eh? How’s this working out for you? What has he done?”
He promised to use U.S. steel on the pipeline—do some research, see where it’s coming from. I hate being lied to. So do the people I work with who voted for him. We work hard, we earn every penny we make. And to be lied to, there’s a heck of a lot of buyer’s remorse going on.
Why do you think Clinton lost in Wisconsin?
I really don’t know. Trump, when he was here, had a message that sounded good. He said what people wanted to hear. And I think once you scratch the surface off, you get to what he’s really about. He has a history of stiffing workers, of not looking after people that he doesn’t feel are worthy of being looked after.
You say in your opening campaign ad that you and Paul Ryan should trade places. Do you think Ryan could hack it one day working the iron?
No. No, absolutely not. I think Paul Ryan’s idea of working the iron are those posing shots where he’s flexing with dumbbells.

Please Donate

The following article is by far not a complete analysis of the efforts to repeal and replace Obamacare aka “ACA”. Unfortunately not enough Americans will read or believe this article (unless it appears on one of the favored news outlets by Trump supporters). This article could be considered “alternate facts”. Any alternate facts that are true are merely facts with the alternative being lies. MA 

Fact Checker | Analysis
Decoding the White House spin on Obamacare ‘failures’
By Michelle Ye Hee Lee
July 5, 2017 at 3:00 AM

The White House includes misleading and incomplete information in its video explaining Obamacare’s failures.

(Meg Kelly/The Washington Post)

As the Senate gears up to vote on the GOP bill to overhaul the Affordable Care Act, the White House is publishing statistics to criticize the current health law. The White House published a “Repeal and Replace Obamacare” website, rife with numbers and graphics, and is posting various statistics through its Twitter account.
We always say numbers are like catnip for fact-checking — and it’s especially so when it comes to health care, a regular topic of interest at Fact Checker. So we looked into the recent spin on health-care figures from the White House. As readers will see, in most instances, the White House used accurate figures but characterized them in misleading ways or out of context.
The Facts:
“Obamacare Fail #1: Higher Costs: Average premiums are up 105% across the country since 2013”
— White House Video
This is a common talking point by President Trump that we’ve fact-checked before, and it’s still misleading.
It’s difficult to make simple comparisons to data from pre-Obamacare plans in 2013. The number of people who qualify for health insurance, and the type of insurance they get, are much different under the ACA than in 2013, before the change. One study found that when adjusting for actuarial value to create an apples-to-apples comparison, individual-market premiums actually dropped after the introduction of the ACA.
In addition, this does not take into account the impact of premium tax credits, which shield 80 percent of people in the marketplace from premium hikes. On average, eight out of 10 marketplace enrollees receive government premium subsidies, and they are protected from a premium increase (and may even see a decrease) if they stay with a low-cost plan.
State-by-state weighted average increases range from as low as single-digit increases to more than 100 percent. For 2017, the average increase in premiums before subsidies was 25 percent, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
“Obamacare Fail #2: Fewer Choices. 83 Insurers abandoned the Obamacare marketplace this year alone”
— White House video
The White House appears to be referring to the number of issuers who exited states in 2017, compared with 2016. Some states gained issuers, so the net number of issuers who exited states in 2017 is 68.
The number of issuers varies widely between states. In 2014, an average of five insurers participated in each state’s marketplace, ranging from one to 16 companies in a state. The average number for 2017 is 4.3, ranging from one to 15 companies in a state, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.
It’s important to keep in mind that before the ACA, many rural areas only had one or two carriers. After the exchanges, companies jumped into the market in 2015 and 2016 after the exchanges launched — then left the market after realizing the exchanges weren’t profitable yet. So many states in 2017 are back to the same number of issuers there were in 2014 — which does not necessarily mean there are “fewer choices.”
Interestingly, many insurance companies say they’re actually leaving the market now because of uncertainty caused by the Trump administration and the Republican Congress.
“Obamacare Fail #3: Fewer Covered under Obamacare exchanges. In 2016, 29% of enrollees dropped off Obamacare exchanges, over 3.6 million people”
— White House video
This appears to be a reference to the difference in the number of people who had selected policies in the exchanges as of January 2016 (12.7 million), compared with the number of people enrolled as of Dec. 31 (9.1 million). The White House did not respond to our request for clarification.
There is constant flux in the individual market; people drop out when they get a job with health insurance coverage, or when they become eligible for Medicaid. So the 3.6 million people do not necessarily represent those who are no longer covered, as they may have obtained coverage elsewhere.
The gradual attrition rate over the course of the year is close to the 2015 rate, notes Charles Gaba, who keeps careful track of enrollment figures at ACASignups.net. Moreover, this statistic ignores that more people are covered under the ACA, and the expansion of Medicaid provided insurance to as many as 14 million people.
“Obamacare Fail #4: Less Freedom. In 2015, Americans paid $3 billion in penalties for not purchasing unaffordable health plans that did not meet their needs”
— White House video
The number of Americans who paid a penalty actually decreased by almost 20 percent from 2014 to 2015.
Did they pay penalties because the plans “did not meet their needs” or because they couldn’t afford them? It’s not clear. Those who truly can’t afford insurance can claim a hardship exemption from the penalty. A 2016 Kaiser Family Foundation survey showed that two-thirds of marketplace enrollees were satisfied with their coverage, and 59 percent said it was easy to find a plan that met their needs.
“28 million still uninsured. Nearly 30 million Americans still without health-care insurance coverage. In just the first few months of this year, nearly two million people dropped their Obamacare coverage.”
— White House website
This overlooks the fact that the House GOP plan would boost the number of uninsured by 23 million, and the Senate GOP plan by 22 million, by 2026.
We’ve debunked the 2 million statistic before. It comes from a dubious report issued by Health and Human Services, which found 10.3 million had paid for their first premium in February as of March 15, compared with 12.2 million who had signed up for coverage as of Jan. 31, 2017. (This is similar to the earlier claim about 3.6 million dropping off the exchanges by the end of 2016.)
But the HHS report excludes data from March 15-31, which was usually included in previous versions of the report. Such reports, even ones issued earlier than June 12, included data through March 31. In virtually every state, people signing up for coverage between Jan. 15-31 do not even pay a first premium until March. Gaba estimates that leaves off about 500,000 people. Using enrollment as of Jan. 31 rather than enrollment through Jan. 15 also serves to inflate the purported decline.
“Obamacare is failing the American people: Premiums were supposed to drop, but instead they have soared by nearly $3,000.”
— White House website
Again, this does not include tax credits, which keeps premiums flat or even decreases them for 80 percent of people in the marketplace. And again, this uses data from pre-ACA 2013 through 2017, which are not comparable.
Average insurance premiums in the Obamacare marketplace now are about at the level predicted by the Congressional Budget Office for 2017 when it first evaluated the law in 2009. But premiums have certainly spiked in recent years, as insurance companies grappled with a mix of people in the insurance pools tilted toward people who have chronic illnesses and thus require more care and frequent doctor or hospital visits.
“FACT: when #Obamacare was signed, CBO estimated that 23M would be covered in 2017. They were off by 100%. Only 10.3M people are covered.”
— in a tweet by Trump and the White House
The White House frequently tries to discredit CBO estimates by criticizing their previous estimates, but this is misleading. The CBO was mostly correct on its forecast for the overall number of 23 million people who would gain insurance under Obamacare. The CBO was off in its projection is the makeup of the type of insurance gained in the total 23 million population.
The CBO had originally estimated that the 23 million people would gain insurance through the Obamacare exchanges. But only 10.4 million were participating in the exchanges as of the first half of 2016.
That is only a subset of the number of people who gained insurance. The CBO underestimated the number of people who would gain insurance through Medicaid expansions, due to factors that were unknown at the time. More people than projected signed up for Medicaid — 14.4 million, compared to the projected 10 million. That adds up to 24.8 million total people who gained coverage through Obamacare.
A 2015 study by the Commonwealth Fund concluded, “The CBO’s projections were closer to realized experience than were those of many other prominent forecasters.”

Please Donate