Browsing
Dear Browsers:
I like to start a session of web browsing with Arts and Letters
Daily,
http://www.aldaily.com, which links to
serious and always interesting long-form essays about topics in
literature, the arts, science, and more rarely politics. Recently, Arts
and Letters Daily featured an article in The Baffler by Hussein Ibish.
Ibish is a scholar of the writings of the Marquis de Sade, and he starts
his article with an amusing and revealing anecdote about the
intellectual straight-jacket in which Washington’s "respectable" opinion
is bound,
http://www.thebaffler.com/past/united_sades_of_america.
"Not long after I took refuge from the academy to work in the policy
centers of Washington, I visited one of DC’s landmark bookstores,
Politics and Prose — a literary venue known, as its name suggests, for
furnishing customers with the conceit that they’re browsing and shopping
in a vaguely subversive fashion. But as I walked up to join the store’s
cultivated and edgy communitas, I committed a terrible error: I asked a
clerk where I might find the works of the Marquis de Sade. My request
made its way up through an increasingly consternated group of shop
assistants; I had to repeat it several times before they fully
registered what I was asking for. At that point, I was told to leave the
store immediately."
From the fury and banishment, you would have thought he had asked
Politics and Prose for Mitt Romney’s No Apology: The Case for
America’s Greatness, or for the writings of Pope Francis on sexual
morality, or asked Busboys and Poets for a book by Benjamin Netayahu,
say Terrorism: How the West Can Win, or Fighting Terrorism.
But Sade didn’t write about Republicans, America, Catholic morality, or
Israel; he merely wrote about sadism, torture, and murder. What could a
respectable Washington bookstore find offensive about that?
Gary Imhoff
themail@dcwatch.com
###############
Mayor’s Counsel Orders West End Land Agreement
Released
Robin Diener, Library Renaissance Project,
rdiener@savedclibraries.org
The General Counsel to Mayor Vincent Gray has ordered the Deputy
Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED) to release the
final, signed Land Disposition Agreement (LDA) for the West End
Library/Firehouse Deal, as I requested on behalf of the DC Library
Renaissance Project under the DC Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). This
request appealed DMPED’s decision denying the Library Renaissance
Project’s request for the final LDA.
The letter from General Counsel Donald S. Kaufman states that DMPED
"shall provide" the final LDA as requested. Kaufman noted DMPED’s claim
that it had satisfied the FOIA request by referring Ms. Diener to a
draft of the LDA on the city council’s web site. However, the deputy
general counsel pointed out that the final Zoning Commission order
approving the West End deal says that the LDA "was executed" and
therefore exists as a matter of public record.
The letter from Mayor Gray’s General Counsel upholding the FOIA law
is most welcome. We look forward to DMPED’s prompt compliance and
receiving the final LDA. The West End deal involves the sale of three
pieces of public land in the city’s highest priced neighborhood — prime
real estate that DCLRP has consistently maintained was greatly
undervalued by the city. DCLRP took the Zoning Commission decision to
the Court of Appeals where it is being considered. The first question
judges asked at the hearing was, "Where is the completed LDA?" For
details about the West End parcels deal brokered by the Deputy Mayor’s
Office of Planning and Economic Development, see
http://www.tinyurl.com/westend-vid.
###############
On May 13, the DC council’s Health Committee conducted a public
roundtable on the DC Health Benefit Exchange (HBX), a marketplace for
insurers to post plans for individuals, families, and small businesses.
In keeping with proposed DC legislation, all plans approved for sale in
the District will be available for review and comparison with other
plans on the Health Benefit Exchange — unless the insurers have their
way.
Missing among the top five favorite stories in the regional media is
the critical struggle over the direction of the DC HBX. The roundtable
on May 13 addressed many provisions of the proposed District
legislation, "Better Prices, Better Quality, Better Choices for Health
Coverage Amendment Act of 2013," including advantages for women’s
health, basic "essential benefits" insurance plans, and impacts of
coverage costs on small businesses. Nevertheless, the key provision
marking the line drawn in the sand between insurers and consumers is
whether the HBX will post all plans available in the District insurance
market or whether insurers will be able to keep plans for small groups
and small businesses off the HBX or off the publicly accessible market
bulletin board.
"All in, none out!" is a slogan advanced by consumer health advocates
and full disclosure proponents. It requires all plans to be posted on
the HBX. Unfortunately, we have come to expect the insurance industry to
be disingenuous in many matters of policy and regulation of the sector.
They didn’t disappoint. During the debate on a "unified" or "closed"
market, which requires all insurers to disclose the terms, prices, and
coverage details of all plans sold in the District to be posted on the
HBX — the "All In" feature — the insurers and their coterie of brokers
and small group and small employer representatives decided to
misrepresent the issues in dispute and to promote nondisclosure.
[Finished online at
http://www.dcwatch.com/themail/2013/13-05-29.htm#jordan]
Instead of supporting full disclosure or transparency and access to
all insurance products on the same market board, the keys to intelligent
consumer choice, the insurers fought for a "transition period." Rather
than acceding to the provision requiring full disclosure, the insurers
wanted to "wait and see." If the HBX succeeded after two or three years
without full disclosure from all insurers, then the insurance industry
would participate fully. An HBX can succeed as a guarantor of consumer
choice only if all information is available on the exchange. Anything
less is the thicket of chaos and inscrutable fine print consumers
encounter at present. To withhold full disclosure on all plans is to
continue to suppress competition and to limit access to comparative data
— business as usual. Insurers want an off-the-public record-market for
plans sold to vulnerable small employers and small groups, such as
nonprofit foundations, professional associations, and think tanks,
staples of the DC market, who are at the mercy of brokers who promote
their own favorite plans and don’t encourage consumer plan shopping.
Only an "All In, None Out!" policy can permit an objective assessment
of the Health Benefit Exchange component of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
"Some In, Some Out" is a blueprint for failure and maintenance of the
existing, deliberately confusing insurance market place. Call and E-mail
all members of the DC council and demand passage of the HBX legislation
with an "all in" provision and no concessions on the "wait and see"
trope from the insurers. Don’t be mistaken, the ACA is not single payer,
it is "single market." The ACA is not universal health care. It is an
instrument for equal information for all consumers, no matter their
market niche. It is the first time insurers have been asked to fully
disclose.
###############
It’s a self-serving move, plain and simple. Admittedly, some
residents may be suffering election fatigue. But that has nothing to do
with when the primary election is held in the District, and everything
to do with the spate of corrupt activity that overtook the John A.
Wilson Building during the past three years.
"[They] should not be changing election laws or regulations a year
out from an election," said Dorothy Brizill, cofounder of DCWatch, a
government watchdog organization. Brizill and others are expected to
testify Wednesday on "District of Columbia Primary Date Alteration
Amendment Act of 2013" before the council’s Committee on Government
Operations, headed by Kenyan McDuffie. The bill, if approved, would
change the date for political party primaries from April 1, 2014 to the
second Tuesday in June — which is June 10, 2014. "Everybody who signed
the bill is running for office," added Brizill. Read more at
http://jonettarosebarras.com/?p=3162.
###############
Reply to Virginia Spatz
Julianne M. Robertson King,
kingjulianne@yahoo.com
The recent attacks on Empower DC [themail, May 19 and May 22] by
Virginia Spatz revive an unfortunate, time-worn tendency of
left-of-center groups to splinter along racial and religious lines and
fall apart due to bickering over ideological side issues. Not this time.
Although I hesitate to respond to her spurious claims of religious
insensitivity, or misguided organizing strategies, I will ask: "Who made
her the arbiter of what strategies and techniques are appropriate or
effective in the effort to fight the powerful forces of school
privatization?" Empower DC has been raising consciousness and organizing
on grassroots issues for close to a decade. In contrast, Ms. Spatz seeks
to make it about her, portray the victim, and garner the spotlight in
order to air some imagined grievance over the mention of Jesus during a
fundraiser held in a Baptist church. Hello? If you are filled with
loathing toward any religious character other than Moses, if you are
uncomfortable with the concepts and deities of other faiths, don’t go
into houses of worship other than your own. In case you weren’t paying
attention (and frankly I’m pretty sure that while real oppressed people
were getting hosed and attacked by dogs in the street, you were busy
launching a doomed attempt to catapult yourself into the ruling class)
the invocation of a Higher Being to bring cosmic support to an earthly
problem is pretty standard fare for grassroots causes.
Although I can’t speak to the value, if any, of Ms. Spatz’ previous
affiliation with Empower DC , her decision to break ties was hers to
make. Why then does she feel the need to elevate her displeasure with
the group into a cause? Is she being paid by the Walton Foundation to
discredit Empower DC? Is she secretly hoping to be at the vanguard of a
new anti-privatization movement created from the ranks of other
disaffected souls? Is her paranoid, hysterical, pseudo-liberal,
ego-based rant rooted in the fear that the Brave New World emerging from
the destruction of DCPS is somehow springing from our collective
conscious, so-why-not-pin-the-blame-somewhere-and-Empower DC
is-the-only-viable target I can identify? Although Virginia Spatz is
irrelevant to the success or failure of efforts to fight school
privatization, even she must realize that the only entities that will
benefit from her current behavior are the opponents of public education.
Is that the plan? Are you willing to be a distraction that shifts focus
from the real problems facing students on DCPS? Who’s holding the other
end of your leash, Virginia?
[I’ll let this message through, but I’ll repeat an admonition that I
have had to issue only rarely in themail. You can attack the ideas and
positions that other people write in themail as strongly as you want,
but please don’t attack the people themselves. — Gary Imhoff]
###############
CLASSIFIEDS — EVENTS
EnergySmart DC Meeting, June 1
Marchim Williams,
marchim.williams@dc.gov
The District Department of Environment is in the process of
developing its EnergySmart DC Plan. This plan will provide specific
short and long term energy goals and strategies for accomplishing those
goals that align with the mayor’s Sustainable DC and Climate Action
Plan. DDOE will host an EnergySmart DC meeting for residents of the
District on Saturday, June 1, 10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m., at Watha T. Daniel
Shaw Library (at the Shaw/Howard University Metro stop).
As a resident of the District, it’s important that we hear from you
regarding the EnergySmart DC plan. We want to discuss and hear your
recommendations in the following areas: 1) How can the District’s
EnergySmart DC plan help you save money? 2) What job opportunities can
we create in DC? 3) How can we use more renewables like solar and wind?
4) Where do innovations and new technologies fit in? Please mark your
calendar, and share with your constituents and civic associations, and
bring your neighbors with you. We want to make sure that this plan is
dynamic and representative of all of the residents in the District. If
you have any questions regarding this message, please do not hesitate to
contact the EnergySmart DC Public Outreach Coordinator, Chancee Lundy.
at 434-8921 or community@energysmartdc.com.
###############
themail@dcwatch is an E-mail discussion forum that is published
every Wednesday and Sunday. To change the E-mail address for your
subscription to themail, use the Update Profile/Email address link
below in the E-mail edition. To unsubscribe, use the Safe Unsubscribe
link in the E-mail edition. An archive of all past issues is available
at http://www.dcwatch.com/themail.
All postings should be submitted to themail@dcwatch.com, and should
be about life, government, or politics in the District of Columbia in
one way or another. All postings must be signed in order to be
printed, and messages should be reasonably short — one or two brief
paragraphs would be ideal — so that as many messages as possible can
be put into each mailing.
|