Dr. Manny: How Newt Gingrich may help shape Trump's health care plan

Before President-elect Donald Trump hit the campaign trail vowing to repeal and replace ObamaCare, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich had ideas of his own about the Obama administration’s Affordable Care Act. With Gingrich shaping up to be a Trump advisor, a look at what the man who spent 20 years in the House of Representatives has said about ObamaCare in the past, as well as what he put forth during his own 2012 presidential bid, may offer insight into what Trump’s health care plan (THP) will look like.
Gingrich, who once advocated for a 100 percent insured nation, described the ObamaCare insurance mandate as unconstitutional during the 2012 campaign, but supported the idea in the past.
When pressed, Gingrich said he proposed mandates as a free-market alternative to Hillary Clinton’s plan and past plans mirroring what he considered to be socialized medicine, but he changed his stance when he discovered a plan based on tax breaks for individuals who purchase health insurance. The tax breaks-based plan would see unused credits go toward a pool for the uninsured who could use them to cover costs of whatever limited care is available should they become ill.
Gingrich also spent time on the campaign trail lauding his record on Medicare, which he said he helped save from bankruptcy. He enacted a budget measure known as the sustainable growth rate formula which reduces payments to physicians to balance the budget. The idea stems from his belief that the government can’t cut reimbursements if it can’t cut patient care costs. Gingrich again advocated for a credit-based or voucher-based system, in which the poor are given money to buy their own health care to lessen costs over time. This plan is not entirely different from that of current House Speaker Paul Ryan, who also put forth a plan that involves converting Medicare from an entitlement program and giving beneficiaries a certain amount of money to buy private health plans instead.
This type of reform would put the power in the hands of the states, which Gingrich feels could better address the shortcomings of Medicare in the present rather than the government scrambling to find a single solution over a longer period.
As recently as 2015, Gingrich went on record saying that he didn’t think ObamaCare should be repealed, and that congressional Republicans who say they want to overturn it aren’t being truthful.
He told a health conference that more minor parts of the law that aren’t working should be addressed, but the core parts have bipartisan support. The move signals that he hasn’t swayed too far from his original belief that the United States should be 100 percent insured. It also falls in line with Trump's plan to at least consider two provisions that President Obama suggested stay in place, which is to allow children to stay on their parents’ health plan until age 26, and to prohibit insurers from denying coverage based on preexisting conditions.
In 2011, Gingrich told a CPAC audience that there are four necessary steps to take when considering how to best transform our health care system. The steps included medical education debt forgiveness, cuts to inefficient programs, a more transparent way to deliver products and a radical transformation away from population medicine to better personalize medicine, which would include modernizing the FDA.
I feel confident in saying that Gingrich will likely push for some of these ideas while advising the Trump administration on THP, and there is consensus along the party line for many of them. Medicare reform, more state power and less bureaucrats in the exam room seem like reasonable goals for the administration rather than tackling the task of inventing an entirely new health plan in four short years.
Dr. Manny Alvarez serves as Fox News Channel's senior managing health editor. He also serves as chairman of the department of obstetrics/gynecology and reproductive science at Hackensack University Medical Center in New Jersey. 

Four takeaways from Trump's decision to make Reince Priebus his chief of staff

Donald Trump has tapped Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, to be his White House chief of staff.
What does this say about the nascent Trump administration, other than blue laws not applying to presidential transitions?
Here are four takeaways:
1. Respect. Anyone closely following the election couldn’t miss that Priebus and Trump had a good working relationship – far smoother than the hot mess that was Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and ugly revelations of the Democratic National Committee chairs playing favorites.
Priebus didn’t stack the debate deck against Trump. In early October, after the release of the audiotape that nearly sank Trump’s campaign, Priebus held a 14-minute phone call with RNC members telling them, in effect, not to abandon ship.
Trump also owes Priebus and the RNC for a multi-year ground game that paid dividends last Tuesday.
In must-have Florida, for example, nearly 300,000 Republicans were added to the voter registration rolls since the 2012 election (Trump carried the state by 120,000 votes). Nearly 1,800 paid staff and trained organizers worked the Sunshine State; nearly 6.5 million volunteer voter contacts were made.
Small wonder the two hugged it out on Election Night.
Let’s chalk this up to professional respect – in that regard, little different than the simultaneous hiring of Steve Bannon as White House chief strategist and a soon-to-be announced role for Kellyanne Conway, the latter two key campaign insiders.
2. The Trump Card Is Andy Card. Going back to its modern-day inception during the Truman administration, there hasn’t been a standard-issue White House Chief of Staff.
Bill Clinton brought in a pal from his Arkansas kindergarten days – a Washington outsider from a Fortune 500 gas company whom everyone described as “nice”. Mack McLarty didn’t make it until the first midterm election, replaced by Budget Director Leon Panetta, the ultimate Beltway insider.
Barack Obama’s first chief of staff was Rahm Emanuel – like Panetta a product of Congress, but with an edgy temperament. Obama wanted a bad cop who’d keep a Democratic Congress in line.
If Trump’s choice echoes any recent presidency, it might be the Bush 43 White House.
Andy Card, President George W. Bush’s first chief of staff, was the timekeeper and gatekeeper. He controlled the schedule, oversaw the West Wing’s operations and made sure the trains ran on time. Widely respected around town for his political smarts and his personal integrity, Card lasted on the job for five-plus years (two years is more the norm).
This sounds like Priebus’ job role, with one added responsibility: he’ll be the one making calls to GOP congressional leadership and the extended world of the RNC to keep the troops in line.
3. Not All "Swamp" Creatures Are Alike. To those having a conniption because Trump went with someone who’s a Washington fixture, the choice is a reminder of the reality of life inside the White House: in order to fly the plane, you need someone in the cockpit who’s attended flight school.
Nearly six years as the RNC chair means Priebus knows how to run a political organization, can deal with oversized personalities and is sensitive to Washington’s rhythms.
Just as important: smart national committee chairmen keep their egos in check and do their best to stay out of the news. An effective White House chief of staff operates the same way (John Sununu’s penchant for generating bad headlines was a constant headache in the Bush 41 presidency).
4. A Collective Deep Breath. The choice of Priebus neither guarantees a successful first term nor assures the worst presidency since Harding.
What it is: a smart first step.
Once Trump is through with this first round of inner-circle hires – surrounding himself with much of the same crew that delivered the election – there will another round of appointments. At that point, we’ll find out who’s in charge of policy, communications, congressional relations and legal affairs. We’ll also know more about the various White House fiefdoms – i.e., which deputies have what portfolios.
Stay tuned. There’s never a dull day in the world of Donald Trump – even on Sundays.

Trump's appointment of Bannon receives wave of criticism

Trump names Priebus chief of staff, Bannon chief strategist

President-elect Donald Trump announced Sunday that Reince Priebus would serve as his chief of staff and campaign CEO Stephen Bannon would serve as his chief strategist senior counselor.
Trump’s selection of Priebus was mostly met with praise. White House insiders like Dylan Axelrod, the top White House adviser to President Obama, and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham praising Trump for the appointment. However, it was the Bannon move that drew the most criticism.
Bannon’s past came under fire almost immediately after Trump’s announcement. The Southern Poverty Law Center tweeted controversial stories that had been published on Breitbart during Bannon’s tenure.
“Stephen Bannon was the main driver behind Breitbart becoming a white ethno-nationalist propaganda mill,” the hate-watch group said in a statement on Twitter. “Trump should rescind this hire. In his victory speech, Trump said he intended to be president for 'all Americans.' Bannon should go.”
The Anti-Defamation League also expressed its outrage over Bannon’s appointment, calling it a “sad day.”
"We call on President-elect Trump to appoint and nominate Americans committed to the well-being of all our country's people," the group’s chief executive Jonathan Greenblatt said, according to The Washington Post.
California Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff tweeted: “Selection of Steve Bannon for senior WH role unsurprising but alarming. His alt-right, anti-Semitic, misogynistic views don't belong in WH.”

• And John Weaver, a Republican strategist who worked for Ohio Gov. John Kasich's presidential campaign, tweeted, "The racist, fascist extreme right is represented footsteps from the Oval Office. Be very vigilant, America."

The Council of American-Islamic Relations called Bannon an "anti-Muslim conspiracy theorist and White nationalist alt-right extremist."
Bannon was the executive chairman of Breitbart News and under his reign the website pushed a nationalist, anti-establishment agenda and became one of the leading outlets of the so-called alt-right -- a movement often associated with white supremacy and a defense of "Western values."
Bannon, who became campaign CEO in August, pushed Trump to adopt more populist rhetoric and paint rival Hillary Clinton as part of a global conspiracy made up of the political, financial and media elite, bankers bent on oppressing the country's working people -- a message that carried Trump to the White House but to some, carried anti-Semitic undertones.
An ex-wife of Bannon said he expressed fear of Jews when the two battled over sending their daughters to private school nearly a decade ago, according to court papers reviewed this summer by The Associated Press. In a sworn court declaration following their divorce, Mary Louise Piccard said her ex-husband had objected to sending their twin daughters to an elite Los Angeles academy because he "didn't want the girls going to school with Jews."
A spokeswoman for Bannon denied he made those statements.
Bannon thanked Trump for the job, saying he and Priebus will extend their partnership in Washington to “help President-elect Trump achieve his agenda.”
“I want to thank President-elect Trump for the opportunity to work with Reince in driving the agenda of the Trump Administration,” he said. “We had a very successful partnership on the campaign, one that led to victory. We will have that same partnership in working to help President-elect Trump achieve his agenda.”
Neither Priebus nor Bannon bring significant policy experience to their new White House roles.
Bannon was notably given top billing in the press release announcing the appointments, a curious arrangement giving that White House chief of staff is typically considered the most powerful West Wing job.
Chiefs of staff in particular play a significant role in policy making, serving as a liaison to Cabinet agencies and deciding what information makes it to the president's desk. They're often one of the last people in the room with the president as major decisions are made.

Bias Liberal Media Cartoons

A conservative's advice for the newly humbled press

Since Donald Trump won the presidency in numbers that shocked everyone paid to know the math, the media has been frank in its assessment that they got a collected “F” on their homework. From the denizens of MSNBC Morning Joe to Chuck Todd’s raw commentary to truly insightful column by CBS’ Will Rahn, members of the fourth estate have engaged in a bit of collective groveling, talking about how they need to do more to suppress their blatant displays of smugness in the face of the “others” in our society who don’t have to good sense to live in a large metropolitan city with sanitized points of view.
But after decades of working with members of the press representing conservatives of all kinds I don’t believe that disconnect will change as long as the media’s “analysis” of the problem continues to ignore the very people whom they claim to want to talk with and get to know.
In the last few days, panels of reporters have interviewed each other about why they and other professional critics missed the story, but when was the last time you saw them talking to the people who made this change happen with that same curiosity.
A network of people across the country, frustrated with government, academia, entertainment and media empires decided to act, and even now, when you watch the “analysis” of the change, what is offered is more naval gazing by the people who didn’t look up over the last 8 years, as wages have fallen and costs have exploded and millions of Americans have cried out for some relief.
Most of the time when issue boils over into the headlines, media representatives like myself spend hours gathering the details of the story, preparing the experts on the front lines and fine tuning key points that are being ignored, then spending countless more hours trying to get members of the media to pay attention. And most of the time, if there is a story, you find members of the media explaining what conservatives, or people of faith, or pro-life advocates or constitutionalists think. But God forbid that the actual people who are fighting good the fight on any specific issue get booked and are given the opportunity to speak for themselves.
Activists on the left get the courtesy of speaking for themselves, whether it is actors with an environmental gripe or people whose identity drives their activism. But for those on the conservative front, the media filters even the sight of the “other.”

And then there is the psychological approach to treating conservatism as some kind of weakness for which reporters and academics dismiss as lack of learning or response to economic pressures or a misplaced desire to return to the 1950s. Arriving at a different conclusion is not deplorable; it’s a Constitutional right.

I’ve worked with some extraordinary journalists whose personal views are not the story, even if they disagree. But many reporters, by the very nature of their questions, make it clear that their mind is made up, and I shouldn’t confuse them with the facts.
I’ve done countless hours of background interviews that end when a member of the media feels they have learned just enough to dismiss a point of view.  But I always hope they will listen.
And then there is the set up interview, when reporters or producers want to book a conservative voice for a news package, editing complex issues to one 7-second sound bite, leading into the thoughtful conversation where the working press tells the world what they “really” meant.
Comedy shows routinely try to hide their intent, thinking sophisticated conservatives are too stupid to recognize that they will be the punch line.
I’ve told bookers directly that no client of mine with do some show because I’ve watched the show, and know it’s a set up, only to be told time and time again, “Well sure, sometimes we do that, but not with you. Trust us.” Right.
Hours of work go into getting one line at the end of a 20-inch story saying basically, “there is another way to see life,” and faith, if it motivates your view, cannot be one of the reasons for your position.
Isn’t it interesting that it is clearly bullying if someone is mocked for their looks or sexual orientation but it’s commentary and analysis if they are mocked for their faith, or the region of country they live in or their support for a candidate they have every right to choose.
On social media after the election, a number of people made disparaging comments saying, among many profanities, that the vast numbers of Americans who painted the country red with their votes were like “sheep.” I laughed heartily at that.
It’s work to hold and defend a position that mainstream culture rejects. Your facts must be sharp and your arguments backed with insight. It’s work to endure the droning on of celebrities and media analysts who are always telling you why they are right.
You must be strong to be gracious in the face of blatant disrespect and kind in explaining complex issues from a point of view that many reporters don’t even have the vocabulary to understand.
For years, I’ve worked with a number of thoughtful, intellectual people who provide excellent balance to the prevailing wisdom if the media took time to look. And they must work harder and longer to be heard.
Yet following Trump’s win, reporters seem puzzled about why the people they ignore are not listening to them. I offer some advice:
Pick up your phone. Check your e-mail. Go to an event not sponsored by the same groups you contribute to and yes, spend time in places where someone might disagree with you. I know firsthand that thoughtful, insightful conservatives have been trying to talk with you. Try talking with them.
And to those gatekeepers of shows, columns and news coverage, next time you want to explain a conservative point of view, feature an actual conservative. Go to the source and skip the filter. You just might learn something new.

North Carolina lawmaker rebuked over fake newspaper article about election

Rep. George Cleveland

N.C. Rep. George Cleveland of Jacksonville faced criticism from his Republican colleagues for emailing them a fake newspaper headline that said “Trump forces black family from home” and showed a picture of the White House.
Cleveland’s email didn’t include any comments about the image, which he sent to members of the House Republican caucus.

Rep. George Cleveland

Two other legislators rebuked Cleveland for sending the image, The string of emails was obtained by The News & Observer.
“I am not sure what point George is trying to make with the email below but it is certainly in poor taste,” House Rules Chairman David Lewis of Dunn wrote. “There are forces at work following this election that I do not understand – forces of hate and intolerance. I condemn those forces. I condemn the KKK and Black Panthers and any other group hell bent on dividing us. We must be smart enough to know our words and actions matter.”
Rep. Bob Steinburg of Edenton responded to Lewis: “Amen David, Amen!! We need NONE of this even in a poor and in my view tasteless attempt at humor. We are better than that.”
Reached by phone Friday evening, Cleveland defended the email and said he did not create the image or headline. “It was a bit of humor that I thought was a good jab at the media, and that was it,” he said. “The media has been very biased in the campaign.”
He said Lewis’ reaction was likely because the legislative leader is “extremely sensitive to what’s going on in the courts.”
Cleveland wanted to know how a reporter had obtained the email. “If you’re going to get involved, it’s going to be definitely blown out of proportion,” he said.
One legislator who received the email replied with his own attempt at humor aimed at the left.
“We need to set up a ‘safe space’ for our people to go to after ‘micro-aggressions,’” Rep. John Blust of Greensboro wrote. “I see where N.C. State has done this in wake of the election for its students. They are even having grief councilors and granola bars. One can’t help but wonder if such students should be home with their parents.
“We are going to be hit and hit hard in the coming session over many things. Let us strive to develop some thick skin.”

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/under-the-dome/article114260718.html#storylink=cpy

New York Times publisher vows to 'rededicate' paper to reporting honestly

Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr.

The publisher of The New York Times penned a letter to readers Friday promising that the paper would “reflect” on its coverage of this year’s election while rededicating itself to reporting on “America and the world” honestly.
Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr., the paper’s embattled publisher, appealed to Times readers for their continued support.
“We cannot deliver the independent, original journalism for which we are known without the loyalty of our subscribers,” the letter states.
New York Post columnist and former Times reporter Michael Goodwin wrote, "because it (The Times) demonized Trump from start to finish, it failed to realize he was onto something. And because the paper decided that Trump’s supporters were a rabble of racist rednecks and homophobes, it didn’t have a clue about what was happening in the lives of the Americans who elected the new president.
Sulzbergers letter was released after the paper’s public editor, Liz Spayd, took the paper to task for its election coverage. She pointed out how its polling feature Upshot gave Hillary Clinton an 84 percent chance as voters went to the polls.
She compared stories that the paper ran about President-elect Donald Trump and Clinton, where the paper made Clinton look functional and organized and the Trump discombobulated.
Spayd wrote, “Readers are sending letters of complaint at a rapid rate. Here’s one that summed up the feelings succinctly, from Kathleen Casey of Houston: “Now, that the world has been upended and you are all, to a person, in a state of surprise and shock, you may want to consider whether you should change your focus from telling the reader what and how to think, and instead devote yourselves to finding out what the reader (and nonreaders) actually think.”
She wrote about another reader who asked that the paper should focus on the electorate instead of “pushing the limited agenda of your editors.”
“Please come down from your New York City skyscraper and join the rest of us.”
Sulzberger—who insisted that the paper covered both candidates fairly-- also sent a note to staffers on Friday reminding the newsroom to “give the news impartially, without fear or favor.”
“But we also approach the incoming Trump administration without bias,” he said.

Trump decision on chief of staff 'imminent,' adviser says

President-elect Donald Trump's appointment of his chief of staff is "imminent," his campaign manager and transition team senior adviser Kellyanne Conway told reporters late Saturday.
TRUMP ADVISERS BACK DEREGULATION, PRIVATIZED SOCIAL SECURITY
A significant White House job, the chief of staff likely will set the tone for Trump's White House and serve as a main communications channel to Capitol Hill and Cabinet agencies.
Conway said the announcement would not come Saturday, but added, "It’s imminent. Soon."
Trump is said to be considering Steve Bannon, his campaign chairman and a conservative media executive, and Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus for the job. Neither has significant policy experience, though Priebus is well-liked in Washington and has ties with lawmakers.
"I think Chairman Priebus has expressed an interest in the position. There are several people being considered. And it’s Mr. Trump’s decision ultimately," Conway said.
Conway is also said to be in the mix for a senior job. She is a veteran Republican pollster who formed a strong rapport with the candidate after taking the helm of his campaign in the general election. Conway said a possible future job in the White House was "not a big priority" for her.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who emerged as Trump's frequent travel partner and close aide, is on the short list for several positions, including attorney general.

Fox News has learned that Trump has had phone conversations with 2012 presidential candidate Mitt Romney, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and current Ohio Gov. John Kasich, although it's not clear what roles they could be asked to serve.
Kasich's call was described as cordial and brief. He and Bush called the president-elect. Trump called Romney on Tuesday night.
Trump on Friday announced he'd assigned Vice President-elect Mike Pence to lead the transition team, replacing New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a loyal adviser for much of the presidential campaign.
Christie will still be involved in the transition, joining a cluster of other steadfast Trump supporters serving as vice chairmen: former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson, retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions and Giuliani.