Author: Jack
I retired in 2008 and so I have more time now to devote to several of my interests The blog here is mainly for my interests in some current events but may have the occasional rant on other subjects. I have also decided to keep my genealogy posts and book reviews here instead of 2 additional blogs (and so simplify my life a little).

Trying a new way for medicaid expansion in Pennsylvania

Trying a new way for medicaid expansion in Pennsylvania

Posted on by Jack

I have previously written about the governmental see-saw on medicaid expansion in Pennsylvania. My understanding was the Feds paid 100% for 3 years, eventually falling to 90% (so the state is stuck with 10% in the long-term). But whether or not the state participates the residents still pay the tax for medicaid expansion in the other states.

As far as I could tell Gov. Corbett was against the Medicaid expansion in Pennsylvania but had not reached a final decision. The legislature went back and forth on it. It seemed to me the needy in Pennsylvania would be the losers. But things may be looking up!

Gov. Corbett would like to use these funds to provide private health coverage rather than add to the state’s Medicaid program. But this requires federal approval. Read the full article here. And more details are to follow.

It seems to me that it a good idea to try different methods of delivering services. If this works our well, it could be a model for other states to deliver medicaid services. So I’m eagerly awaiting more details and hearing the federal response.

The Trolley Problem, or Would You Throw the Fat Guy Off the Bridge? by Thomas Cathcart

The Trolley Problem, or Would You Throw the Fat Guy Off the Bridge? by Thomas Cathcart

Posted on by Jack

A simple question and a complicated answer. Most of us think we have a clear sense of right and wrong but how do we think about these things>

About 50 years ago Continue reading “The Trolley Problem, or Would You Throw the Fat Guy Off the Bridge? by Thomas Cathcart”

I decided to renew GenealogyBank for a year

I decided to renew GenealogyBank for a year

Posted on by Jack

I’m impressed with GenealogyBank. I took a trial for a month and impressed with the number of old newspapers on the website and the ease of finding information.

I like the newspaper search but I’m still learning. Continue reading “I decided to renew GenealogyBank for a year”

Asking the wrong questions: polling and Obamacare

Asking the wrong questions: polling and Obamacare

Posted on by Jack

There has been quite a bit in the news lately about public opposition to the Affordable Care Act (aka ObamaCare). It seems that most recent polls indicate most are opposed (see http://www.realclearpolitics.com/).

But are the polls asking the right question? It seems to me you could oppose the law because you think it goes too far. Or you could oppose the law because it doesn’t go far enough.

Or you could generally agree with the aims law and disagree with parts. (And either support the law or not.)

You could want total repeal or perhaps just a modification of what you don’t like. You could want total repeal and replaced with no reform at all. Or you could want it repealed and replaced with a single payer system or another system.

This is really too complicated to just look at one number as a gauge of public opinion.

Another question would be does public opinion really reflect problems in the law or just how effective one side or the other is in presenting the case to the public.

Cash for Freedom

Cash for Freedom

Posted on by Jack

I don’t think carrying cash is a crime.

I don’t think driving out of a major city is a crime. Even if that city happens to be “a known point for distribution of illegal narcotics” and the destination is a town known to receive the same. I would suspect that many places are involved with either the first or second or both. But even if these where the only 2 cities in the US that deal in drugs, it would not be a crime to drive between the two.

There were also children in the car. The couple making the trip indicated these were their children. But the police apparently believed that the children were just decoys to mask the illegal movement of drugs. By the way, they found no drugs, just several thousand in cash.

The police seized the car, cash and occupants. The District Attorney offered a deal where that could sign over the money and gain freedom for both they and the children. If they did not take the deal, the would face several felony counts and get jail-time and lose the children. (No pressure there).

It turns out this is not an isolated incident. These cash for freedom deals are not uncommon. Several of these cases are presented in The New Yorker. It is a good article, read it.

The link above works for me but then I subscribe to The New Yorker. If the link doesn’t work for you, but you can get The New Yorker, try to find the August 12, 2013 magazine. The article is just called “Taken”, the author is Sarah Stillman and it begins on page 48.

I find it amazing that seizures like the can occur. I have no problem with seizing assets of convicted crimes. But these folks were not convicted of any crime. Indeed, they were not even charged but their stuff was still seized.

Spying on the public by accident

Spying on the public by accident

Posted on by Jack

Whoops.

The National Security Agency apparently didn’t mean to spy on law abiding Americans. They accidentally collected thousands of communications by Americans with no known connection to terrorism according to a report in USA Today.

I’m not sure what was going on. After Edward Snowden said the NSA was doing this, we were told it was an important part of protecting Americans. Now it is a mistake they apparently realized in 2011. Is anyone else confused?

Free Speech and Fear

Free Speech and Fear

Posted on by Jack

Last night I watched some excellent reporting by Anderson Cooper on the detention of David Miranda (Glenn Greenwald’s spouse). Greenwald believes this incident was meant to intimidate him and all journalists.

This weekend I had also read a good story in the NY Times called How Laura Poitras Helped Snowden Spill His Secrets. There was also an online feature called Behind the Cover Story: Peter Maass on How He Got the Very Secret Laura Poitras to Open Up. Both are interesting reading and not unrelated to this discussion free speech and fear.

Laura Poitras is a documentary film maker and some of her films on Iraq and surveillance have irritated US authorities to the point that she is on a watch list and subject to to extensive security screening and sometime detention. All of this and more can be found in How Laura Poitras Helped Snowden Spill His Secrets (see link above).

I suppose now that Poitras is known to have gotten Edward Snowden (and his NSA secrets) to Glenn Greenwald, she is even more unpopular the US government.

Both the Miranda and Poitras stories raise the question of whether this apparent retaliation is meant to introduce an element of fear of the consequences of free speech that will make Americans less willing to speak freely if they happen to disagree with our government.

Trying GenealogyBank

Trying GenealogyBank

Posted on by Jack

I am still trying GenealogyBank. See my earlier post for more (or maybe less) on my initial impressions.

I’m about half-way through the trial and I’m very impressed with the old newspapers aspect of the website. So far I haven’t had much luck searching the historical documents and books in their collection but given time I may get better at that. The GenealogyBank search box to the right is free to use and gives you an idea of the site but you do need to pay to actually view the documents.

I find the newspaper search much better than the one at Ancestry. I think the search function works better and there is quite a collection of newspapers to search. I’ve not had much luck with my New York City ancestors. Part of the problem is common names such as Greer and Tracey.

Reidy is not so common but in most of the records my great grandfather’s name was spelled Ready. So a search for William Ready pulls up articles with headlines such as “William ready to do this or that”.

But I have found quite a bit on other lines, especially those in Maryland and Delaware. And despite all the difficulties I have found some things in New York City. Despite my ancestors being mostly obscure, they got into the papers at times.

Some of the findings are the types of things I expected. Some are total surprises. So far I’m impressed with GenealogyBank.

GenealogyBank trial

GenealogyBank trial

Posted on by Jack

I am trying out GenealogyBank right now. I suppose I would have rather had a free trial but they charge for a 30 day access trial. The GenealogyBank search box to the right is free to use and gives you an idea of the site but you do need to pay to actually see the old newspapers, historical documents and books in their collection.

Most of the papers are from the U.S. but there are Irish American newspapers with information on Ireland and that is of interest to me. In fact, I’ve found a few worthwhile items there during this trial.

So far I’m a few days into the trial and feel it is well worth the fee for looking. They do have quite a collection and I have found quite a bit in a few days.

So if you think this might be of interest, look around. I’ll be writing more about my experience with GenealogyBank. I just noticed that I hadn’t posted in about a week and want to let you know what I’ve been up to.

Thanks for the fact checkers

Thanks for the fact checkers

Posted on by Jack

Years ago Daniel Patrick Moynihan said “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”

But now people seem to be armed with their own facts. Supposed facts are claimed to support both sides of an argument. Unfortunately it is the claim that gets the attention and relatively few hear about the basis of the claimed fact later.

For example, I am sure many of us saw the claim that about 75% of small businesses will have to fire workers or cut their hours as a result of ObamaCare. This claim was based on a survey or more accurately what the survey was said to show. Of course, the survey showed no such thing but that part of the story was not very prominent in the news.

The Fact Checker of the Washington Post recently examined this claim and lays out the facts and demonstrates why this claim is far from fact. Lest anyone think this is a partisan criticism, I should point out that this article has links to previous articles by this fact checker criticizing President Obama and the NRA for misusing survey data.

Two other sites I like for checking the factual basis of claims are Politifact and FactCheck.org.

Don’t accept the “facts” presented by either side without some critical thinking and checking. Having fact checkers helps us do that. Thanks to the fact checkers.

VoterID on trial in Pennsylvania

VoterID on trial in Pennsylvania

Posted on by Jack

Over a year ago the Republicans who control the state legislature and the governor’s office in Commonwealth of Pennsylvania decided that we needed to spend millions of dollars and disenfranchise many voters in order to fight the virtually nonexistent crime of voter impersonation.

I specify Republicans because the law did not attract a single Democratic vote. And I think it is not just coincidence that this is likely to disenfranchise many more Democratic voters than Republicans.

Unfortunately for the Republicans and the taxpayers of Pennsylvania, this attempt ended up in court, has not yet been enforced, and is now costing even more.

When I wrote about this last year, The Philadephia Inquirer had a good series of articles on the issues but the link I had in my post then is bad. I don’t know why they reorganized the website but I cannot find anything comparable. Fortunately philly.com has posted a good article from the PA Independent on the VoterID issue.

I have no problem with showing ID at the polls. The problem I see is the state limiting what is acceptable as ID and choosing to make obtaining that ID especially difficult.

For those interested in reading more, here are a few recent articles:

Same-sex marriage comes to Pennsylvania

Same-sex marriage comes to Pennsylvania

Posted on by Jack

Just up the road a few miles from here, the Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, Register of Wills has been issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Some of those couples have been married in Pennsylvania. But the problem is that such marriages are against state law.

A few weeks ago, the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania announced that she would not defend state law banning gay marriage in court because she believed the law to be unconstitutional. Now the Montgomery County Register of Wills is issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The governor is suing to stop the Montgomery County Register of Wills.

Same-sex marriage has come to Pennsylvania but this is a very confusing but interesting situation and I don’t have a clue as to how it will turn out.

Voting Rights Act – don’t mess with Texas

Voting Rights Act – don’t mess with Texas

Posted on by Jack

Very soon after part of Voting Rights Act was struck down by the Supreme Court several states moved to restrict voting rights with the new-found freedom that they believed the court had given them.

For example, here is Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas):

In June, the Supreme Court found that it was unconstitutional to hold Texas and several other states to a different standard in the Voting Rights Act. The Court found that the actions of the past could not be held against current and future generations. The result of the decision is that Texas is no longer required to seek pre-clearance from the Justice Department before voting rights laws can be implemented.

In other words, the Supreme Court message to the Justice Department was clear – don’t mess with Texas. But Eric Holder and the Justice Department aren’t listening. …

The bold in the quote above is my emphasis because that part is clearly wrong.

It is important to note that the Supreme Court only struck down the requirement that some (but not all) jurisdictions be subject to pre-clearance by the Justice department for any voting change because those jurisdictions were identified using 40 year old data.

The Court upheld all other aspects of the Voting Rights Act and clearly did not give states the freedom to restrict voting in any way they choose. All states (even Texas) are subject to the Voting Rights Act.

I think Eric Holder and the Justice Department are listening and doing the right thing .

Public service and bipartisanship

Public service and bipartisanship

Posted on by Jack

I live outside of Philadelphia and so yesterday I happened to be reading The Philadelphia Inquirer and I ran across an interesting article about the need for bipartisan cooperation and public service. The article is Public service, a noble calling.

The article is by an unlikely pair – Karen Hughes and Victoria Kennedy. Read it; it is worth your time and while you are at the website, look around.

Google Newspaper Archive has not gone away

Google Newspaper Archive has not gone away

Posted on by Jack

The Google Newspaper Archive has not gone away although many think it has. A few years ago, it was announced that Google was shutting down the Newspaper Archive project.

But reading further into the articles you may notice that while Google is no longer scanning newspapers to add to the archive, what was already done is still online and searchable.

The link http://news.google.com/newspapers will give you a list of newspapers in the archive and a search box. You can refine your search after the initial seach.

The link https://news.google.com/news/advanced_news_search?as_drrb=a takes you to a seach box that lets you refine your search right away.

I haven’t decide which I like better but give both a try. You may find nothing but then maybe you will find something worthwhile.