Unseat Steve Knight
I’m starting a little collection of things I’d like my fellow 25th District residents to know about their Representative in Washington. The things Rep. Knight supports--complete disregard of climate change science, unrestricted corporate greed, and victimization of the poor--make him manifestly unfit to serve. He must be unseated in 2018. I’ll add to this from time to time as a form of therapy.
News about Ol' Steve:
September 6, 2017 Ol' Steve Reacts to Trump's DACA Announcement
Many of the children impacted by the DACA program were brought to the United States and have known no other country. Their status deserves a thorough and thoughtful review. While the program may be ending, it should still receive attention by Congress. I encourage my colleagues to take the opportunity to now review this policy closely to see the impact this decision will have on the affected children.
--Steve Knight, September 3, 2017
Way to say nothing, Steve. A "review" is not a formal legislative action, and six months are going to pass in the blink of an eye. And as you well know, your colleagues in the Republican caucus will simply watch the deadline go by rather than enrage the base that has now raised fear to the level of national policy. Because of your pusillanimous stance many productive, engaged residents of the 25th District will be encouraged to, in the words of your Republican colleague Steve King, go "live in the shadows."
June 1, 2017 Town Hall Meeting, Canyon High School
It was a little surreal. A largely progressive/Democrat crowd, taking ol' Steve to task about everything he's voted on and believes in. One neanderthal in the back yelling "build that wall", the crowd didn't even react to him other than stare in disbelief.
Healthcare, Trump's budget, Education, Immigration, Internet Privacy, Global Warming, Campaign Funding. Zero common ground with the humans he was elected to represent. My favorite exchange was when one irate voter demanded to know why corporate money was accorded the same free speech privileges as actual humans are. Ol' Steve's reply: What about money from unions? Because they're evil too, right? Uncomfortable silence in the auditorium as people realized he was equating corporate greed with the one social institution that advocates for working people.
Another great exchange happened when a gentleman who obviously knew what he was talking about asked why Steve had voted to overturn rules that forbade ISPs from selling personal search information. Steve's reasoning essentially boiled down to the fact that search engines like Google routinely collect and sell search data, so why shouldn't the ISPs be able to do so? The gentleman pointed out that using a search engine is a voluntary act and fundamentally different from paying an ISP for service. Steve backed up into the lame excuse that Congress was simply looking for guidance from the FCC on the issue, dodging the question.
One truly frightening suburban mom spoke up praising Steve for his determination to defund Planned Parenthood. Her absolute certainty that her beliefs alone should determine everyone else's life was breathtaking. No recognition of the fact that wealthy people will still get birth control and abortions no matter how the laws are written--just a blind belief that poor women deserve no access to reproductive healthcare.
And once again Ol' Steve demonstrated an amazing ability to not hear questions he doesn't want to answer simply by moving on to the next question.
May 31, 2017 Steve Doubles Down Support of the AHCA
FAQs about the ACHA from Steve's site. His material in red, corrections are in black.
-Didn't Members of Congress exempt themselves and their staff from the ACHA?
No. Congressman Knight was an original cosponsor of H.R. 2192, which ensures there will be no exceptions for Members or Staff under the AHCA.
Actually Yes, originally they did exempt themselves. ACHA (H.R1628) was introduced March 20, 2017. The amendment closing the exemption Congress awarded themselves was introduced April 27 after the internet went berserk.
-Won't 24 million people will lose their health insurance under the AHCA?
No, in fact the AHCA will ensure that all Americans have access to affordable, quality health care now and for future generations. Unlike the ACA, which caused premiums to rise and mandated Americans to purchase one-size-fits-all insurance plans, the AHCA allows for monthly financial support for the purchase of private, individual health insurance that fits your needs.
This is a reference to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office analysis of the AHCA. Of course the Republican leadership and the White House rushed the vote in order to make sure there was no CBO "score" available for people to form their own decisions. The CBO report came out on May 24. It says that if H.R.1628 became law today, in 2018 14 million more would be uninsured than under current law, in 2020 19 million, and in 2026 23 million. Once again, those numbers are for additional uninsured people. The actual total of uninsured in 2026 would be closer to 51 million.
-Won't the bill cause people with pre-existing conditions to lose their coverage?
Absolutely not. The AHCA clearly states that insurance companies cannot deny you coverage based on pre-existing conditions. States will have the ability to lower premiums and stabilize the insurance market by obtaining waivers for certain provisions if they establish programs to serve people with pre-existing conditions. Although California is not likely to obtain a waiver, Congressman Knight co-authored the Upton-Long Amendment to ensure that individuals in these states will have an extra layer of protection.
Just like the Congressional exemption, there were no provisions for pre-existing conditions in the original bill. Once again, it was an angry internet that swung the balance back, forcing the Upton-Long amendment. Leadership would have been much happier if nobody had noticed.
Isn't this just a tax break for the wealthiest Americans?
The AHCA ends the taxes that the ACA imposed on all Americans. The ACA was incredibly expensive, and in order to pay for it taxes were raised on goods and services ranging from medical devices to prescription drugs to over-the-counter medicine. These were huge burdens on everyday working people, and the AHCA will deliver much-needed relief.
I'd love to say something cutting here, but I'll let the CBO do it for me:
For older people with lower income, net premiums would be much larger than under current law, on average. For younger people with lower income, net premiums would be about the same. For people with higher income, net premiums would be reduced among people of most ages, on average.
-Doesn't the bill cut Medicaid spending and hurt vulnerable Americans?
It does not. The AHCA will not kick a single person out of the Medicaid program, and does not place a cap on the benefits any individual can receive through Medicaid. Instead it gives states flexibility in how Medicaid funds are spent while requiring states to provide services to disabled and elderly individuals, who the program is intended to serve.
This is just breathtakingly dishonest, and Steve should be ashamed of this statement. The CBO report estimates that Medicaid will take an $834 billion hit. Of course it won't kick anyone out of Medicaid--it will simply de-fund it and turn over what's left to the States as a block grant. Then we'll have a wonderful patchwork of different ideas of what basic human healthcare looks like depending on which party controls your Statehouse. Red State: unless you're rich, no birth control, no abortion, and if you're not working you get no coverage at all. Blue State: doing the best we can with limited resources, considering single-payer.
-Won't this bill caused healthcare costs for seniors to rise?
Just the opposite. The ACA discouraged healthy Americans from purchasing health insurance by placing costly restrictions on plans and raising taxes, which in turn drove up costs for older Americans. By repealing this harmful provisions and providing a tax credit to every American to purchase insurance, the AHCA will lower costs for everyone, especially seniors.
Fun typo. Once again, from the CBO report, a direct contradiction of Ol' Steve:
For older people with lower income, net premiums would be much larger than under current law, on average.
May 23, 2017 Steve Sends Out Yet Another Biased Survey
Ol' Steve:
May 10, 2017 Steve Knight on Comey Firing:
“The President has the authority to hire or fire anyone that reports to the Executive Branch of the Federal government. I continue to support current Congressional investigations into this and other matters and I look forward to seeing their findings.”
Spineless. Trump, in a typical fit of pique, orders DOJ to cobble up a plausible reason to fire the FBI chief who stubbornly refuses to stop investigating him, and Knight comes down solidly on both sides of the controversy.
News about Ol' Steve:
September 6, 2017 Ol' Steve Reacts to Trump's DACA Announcement
Many of the children impacted by the DACA program were brought to the United States and have known no other country. Their status deserves a thorough and thoughtful review. While the program may be ending, it should still receive attention by Congress. I encourage my colleagues to take the opportunity to now review this policy closely to see the impact this decision will have on the affected children.
--Steve Knight, September 3, 2017
Way to say nothing, Steve. A "review" is not a formal legislative action, and six months are going to pass in the blink of an eye. And as you well know, your colleagues in the Republican caucus will simply watch the deadline go by rather than enrage the base that has now raised fear to the level of national policy. Because of your pusillanimous stance many productive, engaged residents of the 25th District will be encouraged to, in the words of your Republican colleague Steve King, go "live in the shadows."
June 1, 2017 Town Hall Meeting, Canyon High School
It was a little surreal. A largely progressive/Democrat crowd, taking ol' Steve to task about everything he's voted on and believes in. One neanderthal in the back yelling "build that wall", the crowd didn't even react to him other than stare in disbelief.
 |
| Ol' Steve trying to convince his constituents he was a reasonable man. Didn't work. |
Another great exchange happened when a gentleman who obviously knew what he was talking about asked why Steve had voted to overturn rules that forbade ISPs from selling personal search information. Steve's reasoning essentially boiled down to the fact that search engines like Google routinely collect and sell search data, so why shouldn't the ISPs be able to do so? The gentleman pointed out that using a search engine is a voluntary act and fundamentally different from paying an ISP for service. Steve backed up into the lame excuse that Congress was simply looking for guidance from the FCC on the issue, dodging the question.
One truly frightening suburban mom spoke up praising Steve for his determination to defund Planned Parenthood. Her absolute certainty that her beliefs alone should determine everyone else's life was breathtaking. No recognition of the fact that wealthy people will still get birth control and abortions no matter how the laws are written--just a blind belief that poor women deserve no access to reproductive healthcare.
And once again Ol' Steve demonstrated an amazing ability to not hear questions he doesn't want to answer simply by moving on to the next question.
May 31, 2017 Steve Doubles Down Support of the AHCA
FAQs about the ACHA from Steve's site. His material in red, corrections are in black.
-Didn't Members of Congress exempt themselves and their staff from the ACHA?
No. Congressman Knight was an original cosponsor of H.R. 2192, which ensures there will be no exceptions for Members or Staff under the AHCA.
Actually Yes, originally they did exempt themselves. ACHA (H.R1628) was introduced March 20, 2017. The amendment closing the exemption Congress awarded themselves was introduced April 27 after the internet went berserk.
-Won't 24 million people will lose their health insurance under the AHCA?
No, in fact the AHCA will ensure that all Americans have access to affordable, quality health care now and for future generations. Unlike the ACA, which caused premiums to rise and mandated Americans to purchase one-size-fits-all insurance plans, the AHCA allows for monthly financial support for the purchase of private, individual health insurance that fits your needs.
This is a reference to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office analysis of the AHCA. Of course the Republican leadership and the White House rushed the vote in order to make sure there was no CBO "score" available for people to form their own decisions. The CBO report came out on May 24. It says that if H.R.1628 became law today, in 2018 14 million more would be uninsured than under current law, in 2020 19 million, and in 2026 23 million. Once again, those numbers are for additional uninsured people. The actual total of uninsured in 2026 would be closer to 51 million.
-Won't the bill cause people with pre-existing conditions to lose their coverage?
Absolutely not. The AHCA clearly states that insurance companies cannot deny you coverage based on pre-existing conditions. States will have the ability to lower premiums and stabilize the insurance market by obtaining waivers for certain provisions if they establish programs to serve people with pre-existing conditions. Although California is not likely to obtain a waiver, Congressman Knight co-authored the Upton-Long Amendment to ensure that individuals in these states will have an extra layer of protection.
Just like the Congressional exemption, there were no provisions for pre-existing conditions in the original bill. Once again, it was an angry internet that swung the balance back, forcing the Upton-Long amendment. Leadership would have been much happier if nobody had noticed.
Isn't this just a tax break for the wealthiest Americans?
The AHCA ends the taxes that the ACA imposed on all Americans. The ACA was incredibly expensive, and in order to pay for it taxes were raised on goods and services ranging from medical devices to prescription drugs to over-the-counter medicine. These were huge burdens on everyday working people, and the AHCA will deliver much-needed relief.
I'd love to say something cutting here, but I'll let the CBO do it for me:
For older people with lower income, net premiums would be much larger than under current law, on average. For younger people with lower income, net premiums would be about the same. For people with higher income, net premiums would be reduced among people of most ages, on average.
-Doesn't the bill cut Medicaid spending and hurt vulnerable Americans?
It does not. The AHCA will not kick a single person out of the Medicaid program, and does not place a cap on the benefits any individual can receive through Medicaid. Instead it gives states flexibility in how Medicaid funds are spent while requiring states to provide services to disabled and elderly individuals, who the program is intended to serve.
This is just breathtakingly dishonest, and Steve should be ashamed of this statement. The CBO report estimates that Medicaid will take an $834 billion hit. Of course it won't kick anyone out of Medicaid--it will simply de-fund it and turn over what's left to the States as a block grant. Then we'll have a wonderful patchwork of different ideas of what basic human healthcare looks like depending on which party controls your Statehouse. Red State: unless you're rich, no birth control, no abortion, and if you're not working you get no coverage at all. Blue State: doing the best we can with limited resources, considering single-payer.
-Won't this bill caused healthcare costs for seniors to rise?
Just the opposite. The ACA discouraged healthy Americans from purchasing health insurance by placing costly restrictions on plans and raising taxes, which in turn drove up costs for older Americans. By repealing this harmful provisions and providing a tax credit to every American to purchase insurance, the AHCA will lower costs for everyone, especially seniors.
Fun typo. Once again, from the CBO report, a direct contradiction of Ol' Steve:
For older people with lower income, net premiums would be much larger than under current law, on average.
May 23, 2017 Steve Sends Out Yet Another Biased Survey
Ol' Steve:
| Dear Neighbor, As you may know North Korea is carrying out illegal tests of nuclear weapons and claims to be in its final stages of developing a functioning ballistic missile capable of striking our allies in the region. As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I am troubled by this behavior and believe the U.S. should consider changing its strategy in the region. Your thoughts are important to me as I represent you and your family in Congress, and I want to hear from you about your thoughts on this important issue. Please take a few moments to complete this brief survey.
Sincerely,
Steve Knight
Member of Congress
Me:
Your two question “survey” once again prods the respondent for a particular action rather than solicit an honest opinion. Your first paragraph, in fact, states that your intention is “changing…strategy in the region.” One may reasonably conclude from this that you will disregard any answers that do not agree with your position (as you did on H.R.1628).
And just which sanctions do you refer to? H.R.757 (by some measures the strongest sanctions in two decades, signed into law by President Obama in 2016)? Or the sanctions the U.S. participates in as part of the United Nations? Or perhaps you refer to the Japanese, or possibly the EU sanctions?
It’s obvious from your tone in Question 2 that you disregard any input South Korea may have in this, despite the fact that it has been South Korea bearing the brunt of the violence and perfidy of the North Korean dictatorship. Here’s a radical idea: why not work with President Moon Jae-in to try to keep the peninsula at peace while pursuing diplomacy? After all, his government is right there in artillery range of the madman Kim Jong Un—perhaps President Moon should be listened to and not lectured from the other side of the planet?
By “proactive” do you mean “pre-emptive”? To me, proactive means having appropriate plans and resources in place. We’re good on resources--the U.S. maintains a vigorous military presence on the peninsula—but plans, strategy? Not so much with Donald Trump in charge. The further our small-minded President is kept away from decision making about complex problems, the better.
From an international affairs standpoint I am much more concerned with the President offhandedly sharing extremely sensitive security information with Russian diplomats in the Oval Office than any North Korean bluster. If anything deserves sanctions, that behavior does.
Sincerely,
Peter Baird
Stevenson Ranch
|
May 10, 2017 Steve Knight on Comey Firing:
“The President has the authority to hire or fire anyone that reports to the Executive Branch of the Federal government. I continue to support current Congressional investigations into this and other matters and I look forward to seeing their findings.”
Spineless. Trump, in a typical fit of pique, orders DOJ to cobble up a plausible reason to fire the FBI chief who stubbornly refuses to stop investigating him, and Knight comes down solidly on both sides of the controversy.
Here are things Steve Knight has voted for since becoming a congressman:
July 18, 2017 Ozone Standards Implementation Act of 2017
I could write some words on this, but I'll leave it to the fiercely non-partisan League of Women Voters:
The innocuous-sounding name is misleading: this legislation would actually systematically weaken the Clean Air Act without a single improvement, undermine Americans’ 46-year right to healthy air based on medical science, and delay life-saving health standards already years overdue.
I can't resist adding that it's a giveaway to energy producers and puts mega-idiot Scott Pruitt in charge of fast-tracking insults to the air we breathe. Passed along an almost complete party-line vote, 229-199.
June 8, 2017 Financial CHOICE Act of 2017
The Republican Congress repeals large chunks of the Dodd-Frank legislation passed to safeguard the financial system from the kinds of chicanery that caused the 2007-8 meltdown (and nearly caused a worldwide Depression). Specifically HR 10 guts the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, so your debit card fees will skyrocket, and puts Wall Street's interests above the average American's. Passed on a party line vote. UNSEAT STEVE KNIGHT.
July 18, 2017 Ozone Standards Implementation Act of 2017
I could write some words on this, but I'll leave it to the fiercely non-partisan League of Women Voters:
The innocuous-sounding name is misleading: this legislation would actually systematically weaken the Clean Air Act without a single improvement, undermine Americans’ 46-year right to healthy air based on medical science, and delay life-saving health standards already years overdue.
I can't resist adding that it's a giveaway to energy producers and puts mega-idiot Scott Pruitt in charge of fast-tracking insults to the air we breathe. Passed along an almost complete party-line vote, 229-199.
The Republican Congress repeals large chunks of the Dodd-Frank legislation passed to safeguard the financial system from the kinds of chicanery that caused the 2007-8 meltdown (and nearly caused a worldwide Depression). Specifically HR 10 guts the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, so your debit card fees will skyrocket, and puts Wall Street's interests above the average American's. Passed on a party line vote. UNSEAT STEVE KNIGHT.
May 4, 2017 The American Health Care Act
The Republican Congress carries through on their pledge to “repeal and replace” the Affordable Care Act. Highlights:
*New penalties for not staying continuously covered
*Converts Medicaid funding to State-controlled block grants
*Gives States option to require work as an eligibility requirement
*Tax credits for poor people cannot be used for plans that cover abortion (only the rich will have that option)
*States may apply for waivers re-defining “essential health benefits”
*Prohibits funding Planned Parenthood
*Repeals annual taxes and fees paid by branded prescription drug manufacturers
*Repeals limit on corporate deductions for salaries in excess of $1M
*CBO (5/24/17): 24 million will lose coverage
(Steve is a fervent opponent of abortion services: “I am pro-life and believe that life begins at conception.” When asked if there were any circumstances at all in which abortion should be available, he simply repeated his first statement.)
May 2, 2017 The Working Families Flexibility Act
Changes significant sections of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to allow employers to coerce workers into accepting “comp time” in lieu of actual overtime payments.
March 30, 2017 EPA Science Advisory Board Reform
Bars anyone receiving government funds for scientific research from serving on the board. And since the government pays for nearly all basic research, the legislation effectively blocks those scientists best qualified to advise EPA from serving. Vintage Scott Pruitt, dismantle EPA from within with the help of the Republican caucus.
March 29, 2017 Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment Act
Oh, you're going to LOVE this one. The "Open" in the title refers to individual medical records, which by law are kept private. In environmental research, scientists are often granted access to the raw data of such records on the condition the records themselves remain anonymous. As you have guessed, these records offer by far the best barometer of the ways environmental changes affect human health, and such research is a key way to set environmental policy. Unless you're a polluter. In which case you have your lobbyists pay huge amounts of money into Republican campaign coffers to support legislation like this, that bans EPA from considering research that cites but keeps secret personal health records. The measure was opposed by radical groups like the American Geophysical Union, the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the American Lung Association. Ol' Steve has received $330,000+ from various "Leadership PACs" (which is how corps hide their contributions) since 2013.
A Golden Oldie-- September 29, 2015 Women's Public Health and Safety Act
Pretty simple: allows States to decide individually whether a facility that provides birth control assistance (including abortion) qualifies for the Medicare dollars given to the state by the Federal government. States now have the option to stop payment to such facilities forcing them to close their doors, and the women to travel long distances for care. Further fragmentation of the current patchwork of services women must negotiate for health care, H.R.3945 effectively singled out women seeking reproductive services as a class to be discriminated against by the United States Congress. Some States provide services, some make it nearly impossible.
Here are some of the Federal regulations Steve has voted to overturn:
*FCC regulation blocking internet service providers (ISPs) from selling your search data
*Federal regulation blocking States from withholding Federal funds earmarked for family planning services, including Planned Parenthood (Once again, the poor are the victims)
*Department of Labor regulation requiring financial advisers to act only in the interest of their clients (fiduciary responsibility--now they can act in the interest of the funds they represent)
*EPA protection of wild streams in Appalachia from coal mining runoff
March 29, 2017 Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment Act
Oh, you're going to LOVE this one. The "Open" in the title refers to individual medical records, which by law are kept private. In environmental research, scientists are often granted access to the raw data of such records on the condition the records themselves remain anonymous. As you have guessed, these records offer by far the best barometer of the ways environmental changes affect human health, and such research is a key way to set environmental policy. Unless you're a polluter. In which case you have your lobbyists pay huge amounts of money into Republican campaign coffers to support legislation like this, that bans EPA from considering research that cites but keeps secret personal health records. The measure was opposed by radical groups like the American Geophysical Union, the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the American Lung Association. Ol' Steve has received $330,000+ from various "Leadership PACs" (which is how corps hide their contributions) since 2013.
A Golden Oldie-- September 29, 2015 Women's Public Health and Safety Act
Pretty simple: allows States to decide individually whether a facility that provides birth control assistance (including abortion) qualifies for the Medicare dollars given to the state by the Federal government. States now have the option to stop payment to such facilities forcing them to close their doors, and the women to travel long distances for care. Further fragmentation of the current patchwork of services women must negotiate for health care, H.R.3945 effectively singled out women seeking reproductive services as a class to be discriminated against by the United States Congress. Some States provide services, some make it nearly impossible.
Here are some of the Federal regulations Steve has voted to overturn:
*FCC regulation blocking internet service providers (ISPs) from selling your search data
*Federal regulation blocking States from withholding Federal funds earmarked for family planning services, including Planned Parenthood (Once again, the poor are the victims)
*Department of Labor regulation requiring financial advisers to act only in the interest of their clients (fiduciary responsibility--now they can act in the interest of the funds they represent)
*EPA protection of wild streams in Appalachia from coal mining runoff
Comments
Post a Comment