I am a lawyer and a trained litigator. I have presented cases before Immigration Courts and the Virginia Circuit Courts. And although I have watched congressional hearings numerous times before, they still annoy me. The main reason is that these hearings are not designed so much to try to get to the truth, so much as to put on a dog and pony show in order to get as many sound bites as possible to make it to the news. These impeachment inquiries are no exception.
Let's start with who presides over the hearings. The Committee Chair is a member of the majority party in the House. In this case, the Chair of the House Intelligence Committee is Adam Schiff. But Schiff plays two roles. Not only does he preside over the hearings, but he has a political agenda. In this case, I personally happen to agree with that agenda,which is the impeachment and eventual removal of Donald Trump as President of the United States for his abuse of power. Nonetheless, I do think it is very important that the person conducting the hearings present an image of disinterested fairness. I cringe when Schiff opens up the hearings with his recitation of what he thinks the testimony will show. I wish somehow that the hearings would be presided over by some kind of neutral parliamentarian, who enforces the rules, but does not express an opinion. That would take away much of the argument that the Republicans are making, that Schiff is being unfair to them, when all he is doing is enforcing the rules. It would also free Schiff to pursue his political agenda, without making it appear like a one-sided affair.
Moving on the opening statements of the Ranking Member, Devin Nunes, I've been finding it really hard not to throw something at the TV when he speaks. Yes, I know that the Republicans' strategy is to distract everyone from the facts of the case. When you get down to it, the memorandum of the July 25th phone call is just plain damning. Right there, the President is asking for a favor right after the President of Ukraine refers to his country's desire for defensive assistance. But all of this stuff on how we aren't going to hear from the whistleblower, or the arguments over Joe Biden and his son Hunter, they are just irrelevant to the issue at hand. I keep thinking that if I ever tried to pull that kind of thing in a court of law, I'd have a really annoyed judge in front of me. "Counsel, stick to the facts of this case," I'd likely be lectured.
And if that weren't enough, in the first few hearings, we saw Republicans interrupt with their so-called "point of order." A point of order is supposed to be a complaint over a procedural issue. But the Republicans are trying to use them again to distract from the witnesses scheduled for that day, and raise their inane conspiracy theories. Point of order, we are not going to hear from the whistleblower and whether this personal may have a political agenda. Point of order, you won't let us call Hunter Biden as a witness. None of this has anything to do with the procedure, which was agreed to prior to the hearings. They are all about trying to put the irrelevant conspiracy theories before the public. And when Chairman Schiff recognizes this and cuts them off, they complain that he is not being fair. Dog and pony show.
Now, I know these hearings are not run according to the Federal Rules of Evidence. But for crying out loud, these questions are just the absolute worst. Most of the time, these are just leading questions. That is, the representative, or counsel, simply makes a statement and then asks the witness if he or she agrees with that statement. A times, when the witness tries to answer in his or her own words, the questioner tries to interrupt the answer, and emphasize the questioner's point. Not only that, there have been numerous times that the questioner has tried to characterize the witness' statement with hyperbole or exaggeration, using very loaded or judgmental words. I tell you, if I did that in court, I would get a very strong rebuke from the judge.
More annoying than that are the times that the representative doesn't even ask a question. Instead, he just takes his full time to make a political speech to please the President or his constituency. Jim Jordan, who needs to be wearing a suit jacket during these hearings for goodness sake, is the worst at this. I honestly don't understand why the Republicans put him in the Intelligence Committee specifically for these hearings, because his speeches are just not effective.
One tactic that came out more clearly during Lt. Colonel Vidman's testimony was this attempt by Republicans to unmask the whistleblower. We all know, or should know, that this is illegal. Like it or not, we need to protect the identity of a whistleblower for the very reasons that are unfolding here, before our eyes. We want people to be able to come forward with information of potential wrong-doing, without fear of reprisals. It's bad enough that the Army had announced its readiness to protect Lt. Colonel Vidman if necessary, because of all of the threats he has received. Imagine if the name of the whistleblower had gotten out. With all of those people who blindly support Trump, the whistleblower's life would most assuredly be in jeopardy. And yet, we saw Devin Nunes time and again ask Vindman to identify with whom he spoke, with whom he met, and then criticize Vindman when he refuses to name some people either based on counsel's advice or Chairman Schiff's instructions. Nunes even tried to argue that if Vindman was not asserting a Fifth Amendment right (which is the right against self-incrimination), he couldn't refuse to answer the question.
Look, while I want to be careful comparing this to a criminal action, many times criminal investigations or police action is spurred by unidentified informants. If the investigations or police action independently uncover criminal activity, the identity and motivations of the informant are irrelevant. What is relevant is the information that the investigation or police activity uncovered. The same concept applies here. Independent sources, such as the phone call memo and the witnesses who have testified so far, have corroborated what was reported in the whistleblower's complaint. The only reason to pursue the identity of the whistleblower any further, is to intimidate that person and others who may come forward to report official wrongdoing.
Let's now talk about this theme we are hearing from Republicans that the witnesses cannot identify a specific crime, or have not said words like bribery, extortion or quid pro quo. That is not the witnesses' role. The witnesses are supposed to be there to present factual testimony. Most of the witnesses are not lawyers. It is not their role to conclude that the behavior they witnessed or about which they testified amounts to any specific crime. That's a legal conclusion. It's the job of the House to determine if the facts amount to an impeachable event, regardless of how one may label it.
As I watch Devin Nunes deliver his afternoon opening statement, I have to agree with his statement that these hearings are "not serious" or "sober," but not for the reasons he has stated. Yes, it is a dog and pony show. But so far, the most egregious abuses have been from the Republicans, who are doing all they can to prevent the disclosure of facts, and hijack the hearings for their political agenda of pleasing the President and their constituents.
By: William J. Kovatch, Jr.
Header Photo
Tuesday, November 19, 2019
Wednesday, November 6, 2019
Open Enrollment for Health Insurance through the Marketplace is Here, and May Bring a Pleasant Surprise
Open enrollment is among us, if you need to buy your health insurance from your state’s marketplace pursuant to the Affordable Care Act, also known as the ACA or Obamacare. Today, I went to healthcare.gov to choose which plan I wanted for 2020. As some of you may know, I am currently fighting cancer, and incur a lot of health care expenses. I have one of the top of the line gold plans for 2019, and have been very happy with it. I was thrilled to see that not only is the same plan available for 2020, but the premiums went down by about $100 a month for me. I can’t promise the same results for you, but by all means, if you need health insurance check out what is available through your state’s marketplace on healthcare.gov. You have until December 15, 2019 to enroll.
My experience buying health insurance through the marketplace has recently been a pleasant surprise, especially considering that one of the main policy goals of the Republican Party has been to repeal Obamacare. Well, technically, the GOP has called for the repeal and replacement of Obamacare. But if you recall the Spring and Summer of 2017, you may remember that when the GOP had both houses of Congress and the Presidency, there seemed to be wide-spread agreement on the repeal part, but not a single Republican could propose a replacement. This was a scary concept for someone like me, who worked as a solo practitioner at the time, and had a pre-existing condition. If the Republicans could repeal Obamacare, but would not replace it, where was that going to leave me? Luckily, the rest of the country and I watched as Republican Senator John McCain strolled to the floor of the Senate, and famously turned his thumb down, going against his party and saving Obamacare from repeal.
Of course, that was not the end of my anxiety. One thing that is clear about President Trump is his obsession with trying to undo everything he can that President Obama accomplished. If his party could not deliver on the promise to repeal Obamacare, then Trump was going to do everything in his power to sabotage it from the inside.
He started by withholding subsidies to the insurance companies for participating in the market place. This created a great deal of panic and uncertainty. It resulted in higher premium prices and fewer choices for those who went through the marketplace. For myself, I noticed that there were only two insurance companies offering plans in my state. When I purchased the plan I thought was the better choice, I suddenly found that many of the doctors I had gotten used to seeing did not accept this insurance. Not only was my choice limited, but getting the insurance company to approve of the care I needed, such as major surgery, suddenly became a challenge. I spent a lot of time learning about peer to peer reviews and asking my doctors to call the insurance company doctors to convince them why the treatment, such as cutting recurrent cancer out of my body, was necessary.
But this was not Trump’s only strategy. He also stopped enforcing the penalty for not complying with the mandate. That is, in order for Obamacare to work, low risk healthy Americans had to purchase health insurance in order to offset the additional costs to insurance companies for being compelled to offer plans to people like me, without considering my pre-existing condition and at the same premium. Without the penalty for not buying health insurance, which was enforced by the IRS, healthy people may choose to forgo buying health insurance, thus increasing the percentage of high risk customers, which in turn would increase premiums. And that is what I experienced. Not only was my choice of plans more limited, the plans that were available were more expensive and had a high deductible.
Trump tried to drive more people out of the marketplace, by approving more short-term insurance plans. These type of plans had less coverage than the plans available on the marketplace, and were far cheaper. A small number of these plans were available before Trump won the election. I needed to utilize this option for a few months in 2016 through the first month of 2017. The premiums were super cheap. But, that was based on the customer not needing to use the plan for major health problems. This was fine for me, until the beginning of 2017 when I started showing some serious symptoms. My cancer had been in remission for several years, and thus was not considered a pre-existing condition for the purposes of this plan. Nonetheless, the insurance company fought with me tooth and nail to cover the treatment I began to need in early 2017. Indeed, the insurance company refused to pay over $36,000 worth of treatment, until I finally reported the company to my state’s insurance commission. Amazingly, after months of denials and fighting, once the insurance commission got involved the insurance company changed its tune, and my expenses once again covered. Still, from my experience with this short-term plan, I will avoid them as much as humanly possible in the future.
But even with Trump’s efforts to sabotage Obamacare, something amazing happened. The health insurance market stabilized after one year. When open enrollment came around in 2018, there were suddenly over twenty plans available to me through the marketplace. With the guidance from my healthcare providers, I was able to choose a plan that was widely accepted by the doctors I already patronized, and that offered a good amount of coverage at a reasonable price. Despite Trump’s efforts to destroy Obamacare, the system was working well for me.
That trend continued this year. Indeed, it has been reported that in many states, there are more plans available this year, and at lower premiums. For now, Trump’s efforts to destroy Obamacare without formally repealing it seems to be failing. Yes, there are lawsuits out there challenging the law as unconstitutional. There are lawsuits challenging the requirement to cover pre-existing conditions. Given my personal situation, these are developments I worry about and watch closely. But for now, Obamacare is working for me.
So I urge you, if you need health insurance, check out your state’s marketplace. Yes, you will need to input a lot of information, including information about your income. But you just might find yourself pleasantly surprised, as I was this year.
By: William J. Kovatch, Jr.
My experience buying health insurance through the marketplace has recently been a pleasant surprise, especially considering that one of the main policy goals of the Republican Party has been to repeal Obamacare. Well, technically, the GOP has called for the repeal and replacement of Obamacare. But if you recall the Spring and Summer of 2017, you may remember that when the GOP had both houses of Congress and the Presidency, there seemed to be wide-spread agreement on the repeal part, but not a single Republican could propose a replacement. This was a scary concept for someone like me, who worked as a solo practitioner at the time, and had a pre-existing condition. If the Republicans could repeal Obamacare, but would not replace it, where was that going to leave me? Luckily, the rest of the country and I watched as Republican Senator John McCain strolled to the floor of the Senate, and famously turned his thumb down, going against his party and saving Obamacare from repeal.
Of course, that was not the end of my anxiety. One thing that is clear about President Trump is his obsession with trying to undo everything he can that President Obama accomplished. If his party could not deliver on the promise to repeal Obamacare, then Trump was going to do everything in his power to sabotage it from the inside.
He started by withholding subsidies to the insurance companies for participating in the market place. This created a great deal of panic and uncertainty. It resulted in higher premium prices and fewer choices for those who went through the marketplace. For myself, I noticed that there were only two insurance companies offering plans in my state. When I purchased the plan I thought was the better choice, I suddenly found that many of the doctors I had gotten used to seeing did not accept this insurance. Not only was my choice limited, but getting the insurance company to approve of the care I needed, such as major surgery, suddenly became a challenge. I spent a lot of time learning about peer to peer reviews and asking my doctors to call the insurance company doctors to convince them why the treatment, such as cutting recurrent cancer out of my body, was necessary.
But this was not Trump’s only strategy. He also stopped enforcing the penalty for not complying with the mandate. That is, in order for Obamacare to work, low risk healthy Americans had to purchase health insurance in order to offset the additional costs to insurance companies for being compelled to offer plans to people like me, without considering my pre-existing condition and at the same premium. Without the penalty for not buying health insurance, which was enforced by the IRS, healthy people may choose to forgo buying health insurance, thus increasing the percentage of high risk customers, which in turn would increase premiums. And that is what I experienced. Not only was my choice of plans more limited, the plans that were available were more expensive and had a high deductible.
Trump tried to drive more people out of the marketplace, by approving more short-term insurance plans. These type of plans had less coverage than the plans available on the marketplace, and were far cheaper. A small number of these plans were available before Trump won the election. I needed to utilize this option for a few months in 2016 through the first month of 2017. The premiums were super cheap. But, that was based on the customer not needing to use the plan for major health problems. This was fine for me, until the beginning of 2017 when I started showing some serious symptoms. My cancer had been in remission for several years, and thus was not considered a pre-existing condition for the purposes of this plan. Nonetheless, the insurance company fought with me tooth and nail to cover the treatment I began to need in early 2017. Indeed, the insurance company refused to pay over $36,000 worth of treatment, until I finally reported the company to my state’s insurance commission. Amazingly, after months of denials and fighting, once the insurance commission got involved the insurance company changed its tune, and my expenses once again covered. Still, from my experience with this short-term plan, I will avoid them as much as humanly possible in the future.
But even with Trump’s efforts to sabotage Obamacare, something amazing happened. The health insurance market stabilized after one year. When open enrollment came around in 2018, there were suddenly over twenty plans available to me through the marketplace. With the guidance from my healthcare providers, I was able to choose a plan that was widely accepted by the doctors I already patronized, and that offered a good amount of coverage at a reasonable price. Despite Trump’s efforts to destroy Obamacare, the system was working well for me.
That trend continued this year. Indeed, it has been reported that in many states, there are more plans available this year, and at lower premiums. For now, Trump’s efforts to destroy Obamacare without formally repealing it seems to be failing. Yes, there are lawsuits out there challenging the law as unconstitutional. There are lawsuits challenging the requirement to cover pre-existing conditions. Given my personal situation, these are developments I worry about and watch closely. But for now, Obamacare is working for me.
So I urge you, if you need health insurance, check out your state’s marketplace. Yes, you will need to input a lot of information, including information about your income. But you just might find yourself pleasantly surprised, as I was this year.
By: William J. Kovatch, Jr.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)