US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2285

On September 11 2015 04:31 cLutZ wrote:

Who is shutting down the government again?

Around the U.S., a worsening heroin epidemic has more and more cities turning to the anti-overdose drug naloxone to reduce deaths from abuse. Also known as Narcan, the medication blocks the effects of opioids and reverses the respiratory depression that occurs during an overdose.

Baltimore recently stepped up its naloxone training, focusing on drug users, and their families and friends. So far this year, city health workers have taught nearly 4,400 people how to use naloxone. That's more than quadruple the number trained in 2014.

A big concern for Baltimore and other cities is the price of naloxone, which has risen dramatically as demand has gone up. In February, the Baltimore City Health Department was paying about $20 a dose. By July, the price had climbed to nearly $40 a dose.

Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, places the blame squarely on the manufacturers and, in particular, Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, the company that makes the naloxone most widely used by health departments and police.

"When drug companies increase their prices and charge exorbitant rates, they decrease the access to the drug," Cummings said this summer. "There's something awfully wrong with that picture."

Amphastar says it raised prices because of increased manufacturing costs, including a rise in the prices of raw materials, energy and labor.

On September 11 2015 05:07 Acrofales wrote:

Free market capitalism working as intended, I'd say. Supply is the same, demand is up. Textbook economics 101.

President Barack Obama has directed officials to prepare to accommodate at least 10,000 Syrian refugees over the next year — a number around six times greater than the total taken in by the U.S. over the first four-and-a-half years of the Middle East conflict.

In what the White House described as a "significant scaling up" of Washington's response to a crisis, the administration said it would accept thousands more people fleeing the war and would provide for their basic needs.

To date, the U.S. has accepted around 1,500 Syrians displaced by years of fighting — a tiny percentage of the 11.6 million people who have been chased out the country or uprooted from their homes.

In announcing the increased numbers, White House press secretary Josh Earnest noted that the administration had provided around $4 billion to relief agencies helping Syrian refugees. But he added that Obama has decided that admitting more people would help boost the U.S. response.

The move comes amid an ongoing crisis in Europe, where hundreds of thousands of people fleeing bloodshed are looking to resettle. And the administration's announcement Thursday followed criticism that the U.S. had not been pulling its weight when it came to taking in Syrian refugees.

A White House petition published on Aug. 31 calling for Washington to resettle 65,000 Syrian refugees has so far garnered more than 62,000 signatures.

Even with the increase, the number of Syrians that the U.S. is willing to give sanctuary to represents a tiny proportion of those needing resettlement. More than four million Syrians have fled the country since the war started and at least seven million have been displaced internally.

On September 11 2015 05:07 Acrofales wrote:

Free market capitalism working as intended, I'd say. Supply is the same, demand is up. Textbook economics 101.

On September 11 2015 05:11 Rebs wrote:


OMG did someone just try to explain monopolistic price fixing with a demand and supply curve arguement. Really is Econ 101 lol.

You know what else is Econ 101... economies of scale. That doesnt seem to be applying though.. Wonder whyyy..

On September 11 2015 06:01 Danglars wrote:
Shipping around baby parts, negotiating on pricing to companies, reminding workers to close the eyes on fetal heads to not freak anyone out in shipping... pretty disconcerting stuff. Change PP to haliburton and the investigative group to something like amnesty international and there would be widespread outrage and calls for imprisonment.

It however is a left wing staple, the abortion nexus of the Western Hemisphere, so it's above reproach. Don't talk about defunding, the men and women of planned parenthood are doing the Lords work. Let's ignore the movies and shut down the government instead of funneling the money away from a corrupt, unprincipled institution.

Senate Democrats voted to uphold the hard-fought nuclear accord with Iran on Thursday, overcoming ferocious GOP opposition and delivering President Barack Obama a legacy-making victory on his top foreign policy priority.

A disapproval resolution for the agreement fell two votes short of the 60 needed to move forward as Democratic and independent senators banded together to vote against it. Although House Republicans continued to pursue eleventh-hour strategies to derail the international accord, the outcome in the Senate guaranteed that the disapproval legislation would not reach Obama's desk.

As a result the nuclear deal will move forward unchecked by Congress, an improbable win by Obama in the face of unanimous opposition from Republicans who control Capitol Hill, GOP candidates seeking to replace him in the Oval Office and the state of Israel and its allied lobbyists in the U.S.

Beginning next week, Obama will be free to start scaling back U.S. sanctions to implement the agreement negotiated by Iran, the United States and five other world powers. The accord aims to constrain Iran's nuclear ambitions in exchange for hundreds of billions of dollars in relief from international sanctions.

"We have one goal in mind, shared by many nations around the world: to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon," said Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Senate Democrat. "I believe this agreement comes as close to achieving that as we can hope for at this moment."

Frustrated Republicans railed against Democrats for using a procedural vote to block final passage of the disapproval resolution, and issued grim warnings about a deal they contend could serve only to enrich Tehran and leave it closer to building a bomb when constraints begin to ease in 10 or 15 years.

"To my Democratic friends: You own this. You own every 'i' and every 't' and every bullet, and you own everything that is to follow," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. "And it's going to be holy hell."

In the House, Republicans had not given up on blocking the deal against all odds. After backtracking on plans to vote on the disapproval resolution when it began to look short of support in the Senate, House Republicans lined up votes on several related measures.

Late Thursday they expected to pass a measure specifying that Obama had not properly submitted all documents related to the accord for Congress' review, and therefore a 60-day review clock had not really started.

On September 11 2015 06:05 KwarK wrote:
People who support planned parenthood don't do it out of love for abortions. They do it because they recognise that control over reproductive health is one of the most significant factors in the success and stability of both individuals and families. The stakes are high and the benefits are worth the costs.

On September 11 2015 07:15 Danglars wrote:
The question is if the cost is legal ethics, violating the laws against selling aborted fetuses for profit. Is the cost also medical ethics, doing procedures with a look towards salvageable parts first (see video on techniques used for good specimens, based on what the biotech company wants) and not the health and comfort of the mother? Is there a step too far where you find another national provider or is your attachment to this particular organization trump your thoughts on reproductive health?