Senior Women Web

Blog

  • A Family Inheritance: More Than ‘Things’ … Emblems of Our Lives

     By Joan L. Cannon

    When my paternal grandfather passed away, one of the provisions of his will was that all household goods were to go to his one daughter — my mother. The three grandchildren were each to choose three keepsakes from the house. One cousin (female) was nine years my senior, the other (male) two. estate jewelryNone of us was a child, so at the time, we were struck by the thoughtfulness of such a bequest.

    Vintage jewelry, Wikimedia Commons

    We arrived to have the door opened by Josephine, my mother’s sister-in-law.  I’d spent many happy hours with my cousins in their house in school holidays. My uncle was a jolly, enjoyable man. The hundreds of hours spent at ‘the farm’ were still always outstanding ones during those growing-up years. The house was like a second home, partly constructed of fantasies of a completely foreign and enchanting existence after the pleasant anonymity of New York’s lower east side.

    The farm was in central Ohio, and my parents and I lived in New York City. Since my aunt and her husband (my mother’s brother) and their two children lived only about ten minutes away, it wasn’t a surprise that they were on the scene before my mother and I were.

    I hurried to the big china cabinet in the dining room to put in my bid for iridescent finger bowls like soap bubbles I’d never seen anywhere but on their shelf in the glass-fronted cabinet. From the time I could walk, I’d spent time on every visit gazing at what looked like something from fairy tales.

    In the living room of this house was my mother’s piano, built specially for her when she was a serious music student in her teens and early twenties. A ‘parlor grand’ fashioned by Steinway and cased in polished cherry with deeply carved cabriole legs. It was a beautiful thing of itself.

    The front hall housed an enormous grandfather clock with the phases of the moon as well as the sun rising and setting according the date and time, its Westminster chimes a cherished accent of my childhood. That house and its surroundings are still almost part of me physically. I can’t think how much more it must have meant to my mother who had grown up there, though her occasional references to events were without visible emotion. Still, that was her style about life in general.

    By the time we left that afternoon, my mother had told me that Josephine had claimed the grandfather clock, the piano, and the finger bowls I so coveted. I erupted with fury. At nineteen, perhaps I should have known better, but I was livid.

    “Why didn’t you point out to her the terms of the will?” I demanded.

    My mother kept her eyes on the road as she drove down the driveway to the state highway. “Not worth a fight,” she said flatly.

    I fumed. “But she has no right…”

    My mother cut me off. “They’re only things,” she said, not for the first time I’d heard her make that remark, though never before in such a loaded (to me) situation.

    My mother passed away at ninety-two. Those words were to be repeated a number of times before she died, and they always silenced me. Because I’m only six years away from her final age, now I’ve realized the implications of her by-word are important and practical. The trouble is that now I’ve also come to realize that concrete objects have a variety of values besides the intrinsic or esthetic ones to which I assume my mother referred.

  • The Holiday Hustle Hassle

     by Rose Madeline MulaThe Letters and Seal of Charles Dickens at the Morgan Library

    I still remember how I used to love Christmas.  That’s really amazing considering how bad my memory is and how long it’s been since the sight of tinsel and holly and the sound of  “Jingle Bells” have made me joyous instead of nauseous. 

    Right, from the J.P. Morgan Library online exhibit of Charles Dickens at 200

    Looking back, I think the magic disappeared just about the time the big kids told me there was no Santa Claus. Even at that tender age, my precocious little mind must have deduced that if Santa didn’t bring all those swell presents, someone sure as heck had to go out and buy them.  Goodbye Ho, Ho, Ho!  Hello, Boo Hoo, Hoo!

    Since then, Christmas shopping has become my least favorite activity, even worse than having a root canal; and it gets progressively worse each year as it becomes increasingly harder to figure out what to buy people that (1) they would like, and (2) they haven’t already bought a more expensive version of for themselves. 

    Years ago, that wasn’t the case, and gift selection was no problem.  Aunt Clara was delighted if you bought her a pair of silk stockings. (Does anyone remember stockings?  They were like pantyhose, only split in half, and without the panty).  Of course, if she preferred panties you bought her a pair of what were called  “snuggies.”  These were like bikini underpants, except they were knee-length, high-waisted, and made of flannel.  And Uncle Joe was happy with a couple of handkerchiefs.  These were something like Kleenex, only they were fabric and you washed and re-used them instead of throwing them away.

    As for the children, we’ve all heard stories about how, in the good old days,  kids used to be beside themselves with joy if they found so much as an orange, instead of a lump of coal, in their Christmas stockings.  Today it’s not so easy to please a kid.  Unless the eight-foot tree is completely hidden behind a pile of bionic, electronic, computerized, over automated and overpriced toys that cost more than you used to have to spend to furnish an entire house (real, not doll), they start reading you their Constitutional rights.

    (They interpret the dictum that “all men are created equal” to mean they should get as many expensive presents as the spoiled rich brat across town.)  Yep, things sure have changed.  The only way an orange would please a child today would be if he got to pick it himself from a tree growing in Disneyland.

    And, as I said, every year it gets worse — and it starts earlier.  The Christmas ads (which used to be respectful enough to wait until the Thanksgiving turkey was cold) now compete for space with ads for the post-Fourth-of-July sales (which start appearing in May).  It really makes me sick.  Not that Macy’s and Nordstrom’s aren’t lovely stores, but they weren’t where I had planned to spend my summer vacation — or the money I had saved up for my summer vacation.

  • My Mother’s Cookbook’s Holiday Desserts: Pumpkin and Pecan Pies, Gingerbread Men and Christmas Cookies

    By Margaret Cullisongingerbread men

    Food comes immediately to mind when reflecting on the holidays of my childhood. I remember sitting by a window near the kitchen stove, basking in the warmth of the winter sun behind me while playing with my most prized present that year, an oil painting set. Not old enough to be expected to help, I watched my mother preparing our Christmas dinner and asked her more than once how much longer until the special meal was ready. 

    Dad liked a bowl of mixed nuts in their shells — walnuts, almonds, hazel nuts and pecans — for snacks during the holidays. Sometimes we had Brazil nuts, their exotic shells so dark and oddly shaped that I thought them too strange to eat.

    Mom would put the nut bowl in the library, with nut crackers and pickers at the ready. We children enjoyed the laborious task of cracking nuts, picking out the tasty meats and eating them. Pieces of shell must have been scattered on the floor, but we lived in a household where some messiness related to eating was tolerated.

    Mother wasn’t big on desserts and didn’t serve them after every meal. She paid more attention to the savory dishes she created, although she was fond of pies. People usually excel at cooking what they like best to eat, and her pies proved that point. Pie almost always finished off our holiday meals.

    Except for one unfortunate year, when Mom steamed carrot pudding on the stove for hours and served it with hard sauce. I didn’t like the dense sticky pudding or the sweet sauce. This must have been the family consensus, because the carrot pudding never showed up again. 

    Pumpkin pie is surely the most popular dessert served for Thanksgiving dinner in our country. The recipe Mom favored came from Bernice Lewis. A widow older by some years, she had been Mom’s closest friend from the time she first came to Harlan as a young bride. Bernice had an especially jolly sense of humor, and Mom loved to laugh. 

    More at:  http://seniorwomen.com/articles/cullison/articlesCullisonHolidayDesserts.html

  • The Whoppers of 2017: President Trump Monopolizes Fact-Check.org’s List of the Year’s Worst Falsehoods and Bogus Claims.

    Summary

    We first dubbed President Donald Trump, then just a candidate, as “King of Whoppers” in our annual roundup of notable false claims for 2015.

    He dominated our list that year – and again in 2016 – but there was still plenty of room for others.

    This year? The takeover is complete.

    In his first year as president, Trump used his bully pulpit and Twitter account to fuel conspiracy theories, level unsubstantiated accusations and issue easily debunked boasts about his accomplishments.

    And a chorus of administration officials helped in spreading his falsehoods.

    Trump complained — without a shred of evidence — that massive voter fraud cost him the 2016 popular vote. He doubled down by creating the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity and appointing a vice chairman who falsely claimed to have “proof” that Democrats stole a US Senate seat in New Hampshire.

    Even as he mobilized the federal government to ferret out Democratic voter fraud, Trump refused to accept the U.S. intelligence community’s consensus finding that Russia interfered in the 2016 campaign.

    Trump disparaged the “so-called ‘Russian hacking’” as a “hoax” and a “phony Russian Witch Hunt,” and compared the conduct of U.S. intelligence agencies to “Nazi Germany.” He then falsely accused the “dishonest” news media of making it “sound like I had a feud with the intelligence community.”

    When he spoke of himself, Trump’s boastfulness went far beyond the facts.

    He claimed that his inaugural crowd “went all the way back to the Washington Monument,” and sent out his press secretary to declare it the “largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period, both in person and around the globe.” He described his tax plan as the “biggest tax cut in the history of our country,” and took credit for making the U.S. nuclear arsenal “far stronger and more powerful than ever” after seven months on the job. None of that was true.

    Trump is clearly an outlier. If he and his aides were removed from our list, we would be left with a dozen or more notable falsehoods roughly equally distributed between the two parties. You’ll find those at the end of this very long list.

    Forgive us for the length. But consider this: It could be even longer.

    Analysis

    The Russia Investigation

    Two weeks before Trump took the oath of office, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence released a declassified intelligence report that described an “influence campaign” ordered by Russian President Vladimir Putin during the 2016 election.

    The report said, among other things, that Russian intelligence services hacked into computers at the Democratic National Committee and gave the hacked material to WikiLeaks and other outlets to publicize in an effort “to help President-elect Trump’s election chances.”

    A day after the report came out, Trump declared on Twitter that the intelligence community “stated very strongly that there was absolutely no evidence that hacking affected the election results.” Not so. The report specifically stated that the intelligence community “did not make an assessment of the impact that Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election.”

    This would be one in a long line of false, misleading or unsubstantiated statements by Trump and his aides this year about the ongoing federal investigation into whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians.

    There is evidence of contacts between Trump aides and Russian representatives during the campaign, as documented in our timeline, but the question of collusion remains unresolved.

    To date, two Trump aides — former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos — have pleaded guilty to giving false statements to the FBI. Two other Trump campaign aides — Paul Manafort and Rick Gates — were indicted on money laundering and tax evasion charges related to their work for a pro-Russia political party in Ukraine prior to the 2016 election.

    Here are some of the false and unsubstantiated claims that Trump and his aides made about the Russia investigation:

    • In a March 4 tweetstorm, Trump called it a “fact” that “Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!” Trump offered no evidence of what he equated to “Nixon/Watergate” crimes. Then-FBI Director James Comey told the House intelligence committee on March 20 that the FBI and Justice Department had “no information that supports those tweets.”
    • Two days after Comey’s testimony, Trump doubled down by claiming the House intelligence committee chairman “just got … new information” (during a meeting at the White House) that proved he was “right” about Obama wiretapping his phones. There’s still no evidence of that.
    • When asked in July to give a definitive “yes or no” answer if he believes Russia interfered with the election, Trump said, “I think it could very well have been Russia but I think it could very well have been other countries.” There is no evidence that other countries were involved.
    • Trump tweeted in May that former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper “reiterated what everybody, including the fake media already knows – there is ‘no evidence’ of collusion w/ Russia and Trump.” Clapper didn’t say that. Clapper said he had no such information “at the time,” meaning before he left office in January.
    • The White House issued a statement on May 9 saying the president fired Comey as FBI director “based on the clear recommendations” of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. White House Counselor Kellyanne Conway said the firing had “zero to do with Russia.” That was all spin. Trump later said he would have fired Comey “regardless of recommendation,” and he was thinking of “this Russia thing” when he decided to act.
    • National Security Adviser Mike Flynn told the Washington Post in February that he did not speak to Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States, about U.S. sanctions leveled by the Obama administration in response to Russia’s election meddling. Flynn shortly after admitted he did talk about sanctions with Kislyak and resigned. About 10 months later, he pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his conversations with Kislyak.
    • In response to Flynn’s guilty plea, Trump claimed that Hillary Clinton “lied many times to the FBI and nothing happened to her.” There is no evidence Clinton lied to the FBI. In fact, Comey, then serving as the FBI director, told Congress last year that there was “no basis to conclude she lied to the FBI.”
    • In an interview, Vice President Mike Pence was asked if “there was any contact in any way” between the Trump campaign and “the Kremlim or cutouts they had.” Pence responded, “Of course not. Why would there be any contacts between the campaign?” That proved to be false.
    • Donald Trump Jr. agreed to meet on June 9, 2016, with Russians who promised damaging information on Clinton as part of Russia’s support for Trump’s candidacy. The president’s son at first misleadingly described the meeting as “primarily” about the adoption of Russian children, but later acknowledged he agreed to the meeting to obtain dirt on Clinton.
    • Jay Sekulow, one of the president’s attorneys, said on July 12 that “the president wasn’t involved” in drafting his son Donald Jr.’s statement about the June 2016 meeting with the Russians. That turned out to be false. Two weeks later, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders admitted the president “offered suggestions like any father would do.”
    • Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, met with Kislyak on Dec. 1, 2016, during the transition. It was reported in May that Kushner asked Kislyak at the meeting if Russia could set up a secure communications channel for discussions with the Trump transition team. In rebuttal, Trump retweeted a “Fox & Friends” tweet that said, “Jared Kushner didn’t suggest Russian communications channel in meeting, source says.” That’s false. Kushner later told Congress that he “asked if they had an existing communications channel at his embassy we could use.”

    Trumpian Boasts

    During the campaign, Trump vowed that if elected, “We’re going to win with every single facet, we’re going to win so much you may even get tired of winning.” That kind of over-the-top boasting didn’t end with his election:

    • Trump claimed that China ended its currency manipulation out of “a certain respect” for him, when in reality China had not been devaluing its currency to create a trade advantage since 2014.
    • Trump claimed that “the world is starting to respect the United States of America again,” despite surveys that suggest otherwise. The White House provided no support for the statement.
    • He said that his “first order as president was to renovate and modernize our nuclear arsenal” and “it is now far stronger and more powerful than ever,” when all he did was initiate a review that won’t be done until the end of the year and is yet to result in any improvements.
    • Trump stated that his administration is “spending a lot of money on the inner cities,” although we found that there has been little change in spending so far. His first budget proposed to cut or eliminate funding for programs that benefit cities.

    Jobs and the Economy

    During the campaign, Trump promised he would be “the greatest jobs president that God ever created,” and ridiculed the official unemployment rates (which were steadily declining) as “phony numbers.”

    In what has been a running theme since he assumed the presidency, Trump regularly boasts that he has turned the economy around — citing the official job gains and unemployment rates in speeches and tweets.

    In Trump’s telling, the economy was in shambles until he won the election, and has dramatically turned around since due to his leadership. As he put it in a speech on Dec. 14, “And you remember how bad we were doing when I first took over — there was a big difference, and we were going down. This country was going economically down.” That’s not true.

    Here’s a list of some of his economic boasts that were off base:

    • Trump took credit for companies moving to the U.S., claiming that they are “creating job growth the likes of which our country has not seen in a very long time.” In fact, the U.S. has been steadily adding jobs every month since early 2010, and the job gains for the first 11 months of 2017 were slightly smaller than the gains during the first 11 months of each of the four previous years, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
    • Trump repeatedly took credit for investment and job-creation announcements that had nothing to do with him: Ford, GM and Charter Communications, to name a few. The president, for example, said Toyota’s announcement that it would invest $1.3 billion in an assembly plant in Kentucky “would not have been made if we didn’t win the election.” That’s false. Toyota spokesman Aaron Fowles told us in an interview that the investment “predates the Trump administration” and had been planned “several years ago.”
    • Trump also said he is “putting the miners back to work,” citing as evidence a new coal mine in Pennsylvania that was under construction before he won the election.

    Immigration, Crime and Terrorism

    Trump frequently ties immigrants to crime and terrorism without the benefit of facts.

    In December, Trump lobbed the baseless charge that other countries are gaming a lottery-based immigration program known as the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program. Trump said foreign countries “take their worst and they put them in the bin” so that when the lottery occurs, “we end up getting them.” That’s not how it works.

    Other claims that Trump made on immigration and terrorism:

    • Trump drew rebuke from the Netherlands Embassy in the United States and British Prime Minister Theresa May for retweeting an anti-Muslim video that purported to show a “Muslim migrant” beating up “a Dutch boy on crutches.” The tweet was wrong. The attacker was born and raised in the Netherlands and was not an immigrant.
    • He also exaggerated when he said Sweden was “having problems like they never thought possible” as a result of accepting refugees from Syria and other Middle Eastern countries. There was an increase in some categories of crime in Sweden since 2015, but government statistics do not corroborate the claim of a major crime wave due to immigrants.
    • Trump, who regularly criticizes the media, made the nonsensical claim that “radical Islamic” terrorist attacks are “not even being reported” by the “very, very dishonest press.” The White House later said Trump was talking about terrorist attacks that have gone “underreported,” not unreported. But even that criticism was proved wrong when the White House produced a list of “underreported” terrorist attacks that contained numerous widely covered attacks between September 2014 and December 2016.
    • Trump incorrectly tweeted that “122 vicious prisoners, released by the Obama administration from Gitmo, have returned to the battlefield,” when the total at the time was really eight former detainees.
    • Trump falsely claimed that border apprehensions, an indicator of attempts to illegally enter the U.S. through Mexico, “didn’t go down” under “past administrations.” Before Trump took office, there was a 75 percent decrease in apprehensions at the Southwest border from the peak in fiscal year 2000 to fiscal year 2016.

  • C-Span Video: Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Faith Leaders, Health Advocates Condemn Tax Reform Bill

     

    Unidentified Speaker

    ON BEHALF OF MY COLLEAGUES THAT I’M HONORED TO JOIN INWELCOMING SOME VERY SPECIAL GUESTS TODAY, WHO WILL TELL THEIR STORIES AND WHY WHAT IS HAPPENING ON THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE ISAN IMMORALITY. IT’S A BETRAYAL OF THE ROLE WE HAVE TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, WILL INDEBT FUTURE GENERATIONSAND LET’S HEAR THEIR STORIES, ADDIE BARKIN, CAMPAIGN FOR DEMOCRACY DIAGNOSED WITH ALS. THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US. ITHINK AS RACHEL — ARE RACHEL AND CARL HERE? THEY WERE HERE LASTNIGHT. THEY HAVE BEEN AROUND THE CAPITAL ADVOCATING FOR ABETTER AND HEALTHIER AMERICA. THANK YOU. LAUREN HATCHER,MOTHER OF SIMON. SIMON IS HERE WITH HIS PARTY ANIMAL T-SHIRT ONAND TIGGER. DIAGNOSED WITH CEREBRAL PALSY AND SOME OTHER ISSUES LAURA WILL DISCUSS AND UNIQUE DISORDER. SIMON BENEFITS FROM MEDICAID. AND YOU ALL KNOW SISTER SIMONE CAMPBELL, A LOBBY FOR CATHOLIC SOCIAL JUSTICE. YOU’LL BE HEARING FROM THEM AND FROM OUR DISTINGUISHED RANKING MEMBER OF THE WAYS AND MEANSCOMMITTEE RICHIE NEAL OUR CHAMPION ON THIS ISSUE. THANK YOU. OKAY. EVERYONE, TODAY WE STAND AT A DECISIVE MOMENT FOR THE FUTURE OF AMERICA. TODAY THE HOUSE WILL DECIDE WHETHER WE HAVE A GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE, OF THE PEOPLE, OR A GOVERNMENT ONLY FOR THE PRIVILEGED, POWERFUL AND RICH. TODAY WE FACE A GOP TAX SCAM THAT RAISES TAXES ON 86 MILLION MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES. 86 MILLION MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES, HANDS 83% OF THE TAX CUT TO THE WEALTHIEST 1%. 83% OF THE TAX CUTS TO THE WEALTHIEST 1%. BURIES OUR CHILDREN IN DEBT BY INCREASING THE DEBT FUTURE GENERATIONS WILL PAY AND TAKES THE FIRST STEP TO OBLITERATE MEDICARE, MEDICAID AND SOCIAL SECURITY. THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT RAISING THE AGE FOR ACCESS TO SOCIAL SECURITY. AND THEIR ASSAULT ON MEDICARE AND MEDICAID IS WELL-KNOWN. OUR DISTINGUISHED RANKING MEMBER WILL ADDRESS SOME OF THIS. I WANTED YOU TO SEE THE QUOTE. DO I HAVE THE QUOTE? I’LL TELL WHAT IT IS. EVERY DAY LEARN ABOUT SPECIAL GIVEAWAYS AND LOOPHOLES THAT REPUBLICANS ADDED TO GOP TAX SCAM TO ENRICH THEIR DONORS AND THEMSELVES AND THE PRESIDENT FAMILY. THE GOP IS EXPLODING THE DEFICIT TO FILL THE POCKETS OF THE WEALTHIEST IN CORPORATE AMERICA. WHEN IT COMES TO CHILDREN AND WORKING FAMILIES, REPUBLICANS HAVE THE GALL TO SAY THIS, AND I QUOTE. THE CHAIRMAN OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE SENATOR ORRIN HATCH. SENATOR HATCH SAYS, I HAVE A ROUGH TIME WANTING TO SPEND BILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO HELP PEOPLE WHO WON’T HELP THEMSELVES, WON’T LIFT A FINGER AND EXPECT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO DO EVERYTHING. IS THAT SHOCKING? SHAME. SHAME. HOW DARE THEY? HOW DARE REPUBLICANS SAY THAT ABOUT HARDWORKING AMERICANS. IN CONTRAST, THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS HAVE SAID THIS PROPOSAL APPEARS TO BE THE FIRST FEDERAL INCOME TAXES MODIFICATION IN HISTORY THAT WILL RAISE INCOME TAXES ON THE WORKING POOR WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY PROVIDING A LARGE TAX CUT TO THE WEALTHY. THEY GO ON TO SAY THIS IS SIMPLY UNCONSCIONABLE UNCONSCIONABLE. THIS REPUBLICAN BILL IS NOT TAX REFORM. THIS THE WORST BILL TO EVER COME TO THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE. WITH STIFF COMPETITION FOR SOME OF THE THINGS THEY HAVE TRIED TO DO. THE WORST BILL IN HISTORY. THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IT AFFECTS, THE AMOUNT OF MONEY, IT SUCKS UP TO THE HIGHER INCOME AND IMPACT ON OUR FUTURE DEFICITS. IT’S DISGUSTING SMASH-AND-GRAB. IT’S AN ALL-OUT LOOTING OF AMERICA, THE WHOLESALE ROBBERY OF THE MIDDLE CLASS. THE TAX SCAM WILL GO DOWN AGAIN AS ONE OF THE MOST SCANDALOUS ACTS OF PLUTOCRACY IN AMERICAN HISTORY. AMERICAN PEOPLE SEE THIS TAX PLAN FOR EXACTLY WHAT IT IS, OVERWHELMINGLY THE POLLS ARE SHOWING THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE REJECT THIS, THAT THEY KNOW IT WILL NOT HELP THEM OVERWHELMINGLY, AND YET THE REPUBLICANS DO NOT CARE. TODAY WE’RE BRINGING THE VOICES OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, THE VOICES OF CHILDREN, FAMILIES, AND FAITH HEALERS, FAITH LEADERS — HEALERS, TOO — WE MAY NEED SOME FAITH HEALERS. WE’LL NEED SOME FAITH HEALERS. TO THE DOORSTEP OF HOUSE CHAMBERS. REPUBLICANS IGNORE THESE VOICES OF THEIR PERIL. IN CLOSING LET ME JUST SAY THIS IN WELCOMING OUR GUESTS AND THANKING THEM FOR THE OUTSIDE MOBILIZATION WHICH HAS BEEN SO IMPORTANT TO HAVE AN IMPACT ON PUBLIC OPINION AS FAR AS THIS TAX BILL IS CONCERNED AND THE HELP THEY GAVE US IN DEFEATING THEIR REPEAL OF THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT. IN THE COURSE OF ALL THIS, REPUBLICANS MAY WIN THIS BATTLE ON THE FLOOR TODAY BUT IT WILL BE AN APPARENT VICTORY FOR THEM. WHAT WE’VE CREATED IN OUR COUNTRY, A COALITION, A COLLABORATION OF EFFORT, OF PEOPLE WHO CARE, WHO CARE ABOUT ONE ANOTHER, WHO CARE ABOUT THE FUTURE OF OUR COUNTRY. THIS IS FORMIDABLE. IT’S NOT ABOUT POLITICS,IT’S NOT ABOUT DEMOCRATS OR REPUBLICANS, IT’S ABOUT THE PEOPLE,THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. SO I THANK THEM FOR THEIR ADVOCACY, FOR THEIR EFFECTIVENESS AND FOR THEIR HELP OVERCOMING WHAT REPUBLICANS ARE TRYING TO DO HERE AS WE PREPARE FOR THE FUTURE.WITH THAT I’M VERY PLEASED TO YIELD TOM AUTY BARKIN. I TOLD YOU PART OF THE STORY AND I WANT YOU TO HEAR THIS PRIM.

    https://www.c-span.org/video/?438779-1/minority-leader-pelosi-faith-leaders-health-advocates-condemn-tax-reform-bill

  • Congressional Actions, Bill Markups: Human Trafficking, End Banking for Human Traffickers Act, PROSPER Act

    House Committee Passes Bill to Fight Online Sex TraffickingKyrsten Sinema

    The House Judiciary Committee approved, by voice vote, H.R. 1865, the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017, as amended. The House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology and Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations have held hearings on the bill (see The Source, 12/1/17 and 10/6/17, respectively).

    Sponsored by Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO), the bill, among other provisions, would ensure the ability to enforce federal and state criminal law relating to sexual exploitation of children or sex trafficking.

    Above, Rep. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ)

     House Committees Curb Money Laundering by Human Traffickers

    On December 13, the House Financial Services Committee approved, 59-0, H.R. 2219, the End Banking for Human Traffickers Act, sponsored by Rep. Ed Royce (R-CA). The House Foreign Affairs Committee approved the legislation en bloc, by voice vote, on December 14.

    The legislation would add the secretary of the Treasury to the President’s Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Human Trafficking, as well as review and update procedures to combat money laundering by human trafficking organizations.

    House Committee Approves PROSPER Act

    On December 12, the House Education and the Workforce Committee passed, 23-17, H.R. 4508, the Promoting Real Opportunity, Success, and Prosperity through Education Reform (PROSPER) Act, as amended.

    Sponsored by Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC), the legislation would amend the Higher Education Opportunity Act (P.L. 110-315), which authorizes financial support for students and various programs in postsecondary education. The current authorization expired in 2008; Congress extended it through 2016.

    Among other provisions, the bill would address sexual assault at higher education institutions receiving federal funding. The measure would require institutions to conduct a campus climate survey, which would measure attitudes towards sexual assault on campus, and to provide counselors to support students who are victims of sexual assault. 

    The legislation includes provisions to reauthorize the Child Care Access Means Parents in School (CCAMPIS) program.

    *Editor’s Note: This proposed legislation is strongly opposed by Democrats: “Republicans bury anti-LGBTQ provisions in massive higher education bill; The bill would ensure that anti-LGBTQ discrimination does not endanger funding.”

  • Jo Freeman’s Book Reviews: Looking back 40 years at the National Women’s Conference in Houston

  • Cost Estimate for the Conference Agreement on H.R. 1; Estimated Budgetary Effects

    Dall Sheep Ewe and lamb

    Title II would direct the Secretary of the Interior to implement an oil and gas leasing program for the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and would affect oil and gas leases and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Above, a dall sheep ewe and lam, Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska; Photo by USFWS

    According to CBO’s and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation’s (JCT) estimates, enacting H.R. 1 would reduce revenues by about $1,649 billion and decrease outlays by about $194 billion over the period from 2018 to 2027, leading to an increase in the deficit of $1,455 billion over the next 10 years. Those estimates do not incorporate the effects of macroeconomic feedback.

    Summary of the Legislation

    Title I would amend numerous provisions of U.S. tax law. Among other changes, the bill would reduce most income tax rates for individuals and modify the tax brackets for those taxpayers; increase the standard deduction and the child tax credit; repeal deductions for personal exemptions; repeal or limit certain itemized deductions; and increase the exemption amounts for the individual alternative minimum tax. Those changes would take effect on January 1, 2018, and would be scheduled to expire after December 31, 2025. The bill also would permanently repeal the penalties associated with the requirement that most people obtain health insurance coverage (also known as the individual mandate).

    Title I would also permanently modify business taxation. Among other provisions, beginning in 2018, it would replace the structure of corporate income tax rates, which has a top rate of 35 percent under current law, with a single 21 percent rate. The legislation also would substantially alter the current system under which the worldwide income of U.S. corporations is subject to taxation. Title II would direct the Secretary of the Interior to implement an oil and gas leasing program for the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and would affect oil and gas leases and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

    Effects on the Federal Budget

    CBO and JCT estimate that enacting the legislation would reduce revenues by about $1,649 billion and decrease outlays by $194 billion over the 2018-2027 period. As a result, the bill is estimated to increase the deficit by $1,455 billion over the next 10 years, excluding effects from macroeconomic feedback. A portion of the changes in revenues would be from Social Security payroll taxes, which are off-budget. Excluding the estimated $27 billion increase in off-budget revenues over the next 10 years, the legislation would increase on-budget deficits by about $1,482 billion over the period from 2018 to 2027. Pay-as-you-go procedures apply because enacting the legislation would affect direct spending and revenues.

    JCT provided virtually all estimates for the provisions of the bill. However, JCT and CBO collaborated on the estimate of the provision that would eliminate the penalties associated with the individual mandate, and CBO estimated the effects of the oil and gas provisions.

    Long-Term Effects on the Budget

    CBO and JCT estimate that enacting the legislation would not increase on-budget deficits by more than $5 billion in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2028, and would not increase net direct spending by more than $2.5 billion in any of those same 10-year periods.

    Macroeconomic Effects

    Because of the magnitude of its estimated budgetary effects, the bill is considered major legislation as defined in sections 4107 and 5107 of H. Con. Res. 71, the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2018. It therefore triggers the requirement that the cost estimate, to the extent practicable, include the budgetary impact of the bill’s macroeconomic effects. It is not practicable to provide an estimate of the budgetary impact of the bill’s macroeconomic effects at this time.

    Mandates

    CBO and JCT have determined that the provisions of the legislation contain no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).

  • A Christmas Eve Surprise: A Stack of Love Letters

    The Love Letter

    Painting by Auguste Toulmouche, 1883, The Love Letter, Artremoval.org; Wikipedia

    By Sonya Zalubowski

    Christmas Eve, the first ever without Mom.  Her death, only weeks old, still so raw.  I knew I had to be strong, to move on, something even Mom had advised, but this was the first holiday. For all my roaming the world, I’d never established my own family.  Part of the reason I’d come home twenty years before, looking for an anchor. Now once again at 70, I was truly all alone, my own old age beginning to feel like the windswept desert of loss I’d heard it could sometimes become.

    The living room in my little craftsman house in Portland was cold and dark when I came back from greeting parishioners for services at a nearby church. Religion wasn’t really my thing but I’d needed volunteer work to try to fill the hole I felt inside me, all those lifetime connections severed by her death. The activity had helped but now the contrast between my empty house and that of my neighbors, lights all around as they celebrated with their families, hit me hard.  I grabbed at the back of the sofa, took another deep breath.  Let it in, live it through. Wasn’t that what the hospice nurses had counseled? 

    Went into the spare bedroom where I’d stashed so many of Mom’s belongings when I had to move her from her senior apartment after her medical emergency to the nursing home.  Looking now for what I didn’t know. Some remnant of her, something to hold onto, a piece of her clothing, the pile still on the bed that I hadn’t had the heart yet to give away. The little travel pillow nearby that I’d given her one Christmas, that she’d covered with a yellow flannel case she’d sewn herself,  a strand still of her brown hair lying there.   I picked up the pillow, brought it to my face. The scent, the lavender she loved. I gasped, not expecting it. The pain cut into my ribs.

    That’s when I spotted the big box where I’d gathered all the things from her desk, her important papers, a 25-gallon clear plastic tub with a blue cover.  I remembered thinking at the time, all her hopes and dreams and also Dad’s, now gone over 20 years, was that all that was left of them? He hadn’t been the easiest of people with his quick temper and old world autocratic ways over their fifty years of marriage. Especially when he put Mom to work at their neighborhood bar, a grueling seven-day-a-week schedule, just like his immigrant folks had done before them.  Still, Mom had persisted, making a home for all of us.   At Dad’s wake, she’d run her hand across his shirt before they closed the casket and promised him, “I will love you forever.”   All those years of living, those years that formed the framework for my own being,  and all that was left before me now was the pillow, some clothing and this box.

    Old tax papers, bank books, ledgers.  Not much that interested me.   So I had thought when I had hurriedly packed it all away. Stuff  I’d have to share with the lawyer and accountant.  But something made me want to look at it again this lonely Christmas Eve.  I put the pillow down on the bed and peeled the blue plastic lid off the tub.  

    As I remembered, all those papers and documents. I shoveled an armful out onto an open space on the bed.  And then another.  Layered in was a small black leather wallet, a zipper to keep it closed.  Dad’s wallet. Rounded, like he had sat on it for years. I unzipped it, found an old driver’s license back from their days in Seattle, the picture of the Dad I knew as a kid, the widow’s peak of his black hair. Then a fishing license for a senior, free for a lifetime from the state of Oregon, their new retirement home.   He was never well enough to use it.  Inside one of the little plastic windows, I found a small photo, black and white of Mom and my sister Mary, back when she was just a toddler. Mom standing by her side, an apron over her dress. Tall and thin with dark hair, a smile on her full lips. Mary in a dress with the cutout of a tulip on the front. On the back of the photo, Dad had written, “My girls.”

    Then an alligator wallet of  Mom’s, totally empty, like she never used it. Frugal Mom. Must have been special, something she kept in a drawer.  But what caught my eye as I piled through yet more papers was the little brown box down at the very bottom. A square brown metal box, about the size of my two hands. Almost as deep as it was wide. It was painted to look like fake brown wood. In all my earlier rush, guess I just hadn’t paid attention to it.  I’d never tried to open it. The corners were sharp when I reached down and lifted it out.

    Now, I looked closely at the box. An old label, pasted on top, touted the fact the box was metal, making it fireproof to safeguard any treasures.  That word made my heart beat fast.  What treasures could this contain? There was a shiny brass clasp on the front with a keyhole. Where could any key be? But then I noticed a little flare of metal on each side of the keyhole with arrows, indicating you needed to squeeze them together to open the box once it was unlocked.

    I cleared a space on the bed and put the box down. I squeezed those sides tight. To my surprise, the box snapped open.  Inside, I found the two keys to the box taped to the lid.  I have to admit, by then my hands were shaking. Inside, there were two more boxes. A small green velvet jewelry box, about big enough for a pair of earrings. I clicked it open to find two small pins I’d given her long ago from trips I’d once taken, one a silver budgie from Mexico, its wings painted turquoise,  the other a gold pin in the form of a flower bouquet, studded with pearls from Japan.  I put them back in their box and turned to the second box, a rectangular paper box, about the size of my one hand.

  • FDA Consumer Health Information: Filling in Wrinkles Safely

    Right: Being injected with dermal fillers poses some risks. The most common side effects include bruising, redness, swelling, pain, and itching. Additional side effects include: infections, lumps and bumps, and discoloration or change in pigmentation

    Being injected with dermal filler

    These days, people across the country are seeking treatments to smooth smile lines and crow’s feet and to plump up their lips and cheeks.

    One treatment involves injecting dermal fillers into the face. In studies of dermal fillers approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, people generally report they are satisfied with their treatment results.

    But injectable dermal fillers are not for everyone and may not be indicated for people with certain conditions (such as bleeding disorders or certain allergies). If your health care provider confirms that dermal fillers are an option for you, know that all products have benefits and risks. The FDA advises you to work with a licensed health care provider and to understand all of the risks and benefits before receiving treatment. (See more safety tips below.)

    What are dermal fillers, and how are they used?

    In general, injectable dermal fillers are intended to help fill in wrinkles and give a smoother appearance. They are generally injected into the skin with a needle and are regulated by the FDA as medical devices.

    Temporary fillers include the following materials:

    • Collagen injections, made of highly purified cow or human collagen
    • Hyaluronic acid gel, a protective lubricating gel, produced naturally by the body
    • Calcium hydroxylapatite, a mineral and a major component of bone
    • Poly-L-lactic acid (PLLA), a biodegradable, biocompatible, synthetic material

    These products are used for correcting soft tissue defects in the face, such as moderate to severe facial wrinkles and skin folds, lip and cheek augmentation, and to restore or correct the signs of facial fat loss in people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). An FDA approved dermal filler is also used to fill in the back of the hand.

    Most FDA-approved fillers are temporary and achieve a smoothing or “filling” effect, which lasts for about six months or longer in most people. (These injectable dermal fillers are temporary because the body eventually absorbs them.)

    That said, not all products have been approved for every indication. You can find specific information on each product by reading the FDA’s list of approved dermal fillers.

    The FDA has approved only one permanent wrinkle filler, which contains “polymethylmethacrylate” beads. These are tiny round, smooth, biocompatible plastic particles that are not absorbed by the body. The filler is FDA-approved only for correcting facial tissue around the mouth.

    Although the FDA has approved certain injectable dermal fillers for use in the face (for example, to enhance lips and cheeks) and the hands, the FDA has never approved any injectable fillers for large-scale body contouring or enhancement.

    That means you should never get an injectable filler intended as a breast filler, “butt filler,” or muscle filler. And you should never get any type of injectable filler for any other large-scale body contouring or body enhancement.

    Dermal fillers are not FDA approved for large-scale body contouring and can lead to serious injury, permanent scarring or disfigurement, and even death. (Read “The FDA Warns Against Injectable Silicone for Body Contouring and Enhancement” to learn more.)