Jack & Jill Politics

The battle over the hefty fines imposed for Janet Jackson's infamous “wardrobe malfunction” at the 2004 Super Bowl is ready to come back to court.

It has been nearly eight months since the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to take a second look at the case and to consider reinstating the $550,000 in fines that the Federal Communications Commission imposed on CBS over Jackson's breast-baring performance. Without comment, the justices said the 3rd Circuit should reconsider its decision in FCC v. CBS Corp. in light of the high court's decision in FCC v. Fox Television Stations — a case that focused on the related issue of vulgar language.

Since then, the 3rd Circuit has ordered both sides to file supplemental briefs. The case also attracted a flurry of amicus briefs, but the judges have not yet decided whether to hold a second oral argument. Predictably, one set of briefs assures the 3rd Circuit that it got the issue right the first time around, while the FCC and a collection of conservative, family values groups argue that the high court's decision in the Fox case compels the 3rd Circuit to reverse itself and reinstate the fines.

The briefs also reveal that comparing the two cases is no simple matter for two reasons. First, the FCC's rules about indecent images and indecent speech are markedly different. And the agency was clear about its intent to get stricter with foul language, while there is strong disagreement in the CBS case about whether the rules got stricter.

The Fox case involved several instances in which celebrities had uttered the “F-word” and other vulgarities during live broadcasts, and the FCC responded by imposing no fines, but announcing that it would no longer tolerate indecent language even when it is fleeting.

The justices, by a 5-4 vote, ruled that the FCC acted reasonably in banning even the single-time utterance of “fleeting expletives” over broadcast airwaves. But the high court stopped short of deciding whether the ban violates the First Amendment, instead sending the case back to the 2nd Circuit for further proceedings, including an examination of the constitutional issue.

Court watchers considered the Janet Jackson case a companion case that raised similar legal issues relating to the FCC's power to regulate indecency of a visual nature. The 3rd Circuit, in overturning the fines, held that the FCC had strayed from a long-held approach of applying identical standards to words and images when reviewing complaints of indecency. Because the Jackson breast-baring incident lasted only nine-sixteenths of one second, 3rd Circuit Chief Judge Anthony J. Scirica said it should have been regarded as “fleeting” and that the FCC, by imposing the maximum fines on CBS, had deviated from its nearly 30-year practice of fining indecent broadcast programming only when it was so “pervasive as to amount to 'shock treatment' for the audience.”

Infamous 'Wardrobe Malfunction' Case Heading Back to 3rd Circuit

As Congress prepares to pass the final health care reform legislation early next year, health care lobbyists are mobilizing legislatures in approximately 14 states to ratify constitutional amendments that would repeal all or parts of the new measure. “The states where the amendment has been introduced are also places where the health care industry has spent heavily on political contributions,” the New York Times notes:

Over the last six years, health care interests have spent $394 million on contributions in states around the country; about $73 million of that went to those 14 states. Of that, health insurance companies spent $18.2 million.

Overall, at least 21 states have indicated a desire to opt out of federal health care reform or block fundamental features of the reform bill, including mandatory health coverage. While Arizona, is the only state legislature to place an opt-out measure on the 2010 ballot, a significant number of gubernatorial and state legislature candidates across the country have also said that they are strongly “leaning towards” opting out of reform.

Lawmakers in Wyoming, New Mexico, Montana, Kansas, Texas, Pennsylvania, Utah, Virginia, Arizona, Alabama, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, West Virginia, Louisiana, Alaska, Minnesota, North Dakota, Georgia Illinois and Florida have introduced ballot measures to protect their states from reform legislation or promised to spearhead such efforts if reform is enacted.

While it’s unlikely that conservatives and their health care industry allies could repeal health care reform, (they are more likely to water-down certain elements of reform), a successful challenge would devastate the populations suffering from the most pronounced health care crisis. A back-of-the envelope analysis conducted by ThinkProgress suggests that on average, the repealing states have experienced very substantial premium increases, high rates of uninsurance and annual percent growth in health care expenditures and higher insurance market concentration:

– 42% (9 of 21): have an uninsurance rate higher than the national average of 15.4%.

– 62% (13 of 21): have an average annual percent growth in health care expenditures that his higher than the national average of 6.7%.

– 62% (13 of 21): experienced premium increases of more than 75% between 2000 and 2007.

– 90% (19 of 21): are dominated by two insurers that control more than 50% of the health insurance market.

The effort to repeal health care reform “began at the conservative Goldwater Institute in Arizona” and was latter “picked up by the American Legislative Exchange Council [ALEC], a business-friendly conservative group that coordinates activity among statehouses.” As the New York Times points out, “five of the 24 members of its ‘free enterprise board’ are executives of drug companies and its health care ‘task force’ is overseen in part by a four-member panel composed of government-relations officials for the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association of insurers, the medical company Johnson & Johnson and the drug makers Bayer and Hoffmann-La Roche.”

Health Care Industry Coordinating Effort To Opt States Out Of Health Care Reform

it's about time..

ps- weren't you supposed to be away from computers for the next week?

withdrawal already?

LOL

I have no idea what these states are grumbling about. This is good legislation that's about to be enacted. Isn't it?

thank you for the hat tip

I got the same vibe about the movie, which is why I didn't want to go see it. But others have convinced me to go see it.

LOL – 20,000 health care workers divided by 10,000 community health centers = 2 health care WORKERs per center (not 2 doctors).

1) medical schools need to have larger classes or new medical schools.
2) Doctors only need 2 years of undergrad and after that should go straight into medical schools.
3) Primary care doctors work very long hours for a lot less money than say interventional cardiologists.
4) 10 – 14 billion for community health centers – sounds more like a feel good, local empowerment money hole unless these centers are placed where there are no other health care facilities. Are these centers in direct competition with private urgent care centers or private medical practices?

For many urban areas and rural communities a clinic is a good thing.

Breaking: One Democrat Finally Defends Obama From GOP National Security Attacks

Former CIA Official: Iran Nuke Document Was Forged WASHINGTON, Dec 28 (IPS) – U.S. intelligence has concluded that the document published recently by the Times of London, which purportedly describes an Iranian plan to do experiments on what the newspaper described as a “neutron initiator” for an atomic weapon, is a fabrication, according to a former Central Intelligence Agency official. Philip Giraldi, who was a CIA counterterrorism official from 1976 to 1992, told IPS that intelligence sources say that the United States had nothing to do with forging the document, and that Israel is the primary suspect. The sources do not rule out a British role in the fabrication, however. The Times of London story published Dec. 14 did not identify the source of the document. But it quoted “an Asian intelligence source” – a term some news media have used for Israeli intelligence officials – as confirming that his government believes Iran was working on a neutron initiator as recently as 2007. The story of the purported Iranian document prompted a new round of expressions of U.S. and European support for tougher sanctions against Iran and reminders of Israel's threats to attack Iranian nuclear programme targets if diplomacy fails. http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/former-c…

they are so obvious, it's ridiculous.

Dividends are a good thing othewise all investing is pure speculation.

As Congress prepares to pass the final health care reform legislation early next year, health care lobbyists are mobilizing legislatures in approximately 14 states to ratify constitutional amendments that would repeal all or parts of the new measure. “The states where the amendment has been introduced are also places where the health care industry has spent heavily on political contributions,” the New York Times notes:

Over the last six years, health care interests have spent $394 million on contributions in states around the country; about $73 million of that went to those 14 states. Of that, health insurance companies spent $18.2 million.

Overall, at least 21 states have indicated a desire to opt out of federal health care reform or block fundamental features of the reform bill, including mandatory health coverage. While Arizona, is the only state legislature to place an opt-out measure on the 2010 ballot, a significant number of gubernatorial and state legislature candidates across the country have also said that they are strongly “leaning towards” opting out of reform.

Lawmakers in Wyoming, New Mexico, Montana, Kansas, Texas, Pennsylvania, Utah, Virginia, Arizona, Alabama, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, West Virginia, Louisiana, Alaska, Minnesota, North Dakota, Georgia Illinois and Florida have introduced ballot measures to protect their states from reform legislation or promised to spearhead such efforts if reform is enacted.

While it’s unlikely that conservatives and their health care industry allies could repeal health care reform, (they are more likely to water-down certain elements of reform), a successful challenge would devastate the populations suffering from the most pronounced health care crisis. A back-of-the envelope analysis conducted by ThinkProgress suggests that on average, the repealing states have experienced very substantial premium increases, high rates of uninsurance and annual percent growth in health care expenditures and higher insurance market concentration:

– 42% (9 of 21): have an uninsurance rate higher than the national average of 15.4%.

– 62% (13 of 21): have an average annual percent growth in health care expenditures that his higher than the national average of 6.7%.

– 62% (13 of 21): experienced premium increases of more than 75% between 2000 and 2007.

– 90% (19 of 21): are dominated by two insurers that control more than 50% of the health insurance market.

The effort to repeal health care reform “began at the conservative Goldwater Institute in Arizona” and was latter “picked up by the American Legislative Exchange Council [ALEC], a business-friendly conservative group that coordinates activity among statehouses.” As the New York Times points out, “five of the 24 members of its ‘free enterprise board’ are executives of drug companies and its health care ‘task force’ is overseen in part by a four-member panel composed of government-relations officials for the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association of insurers, the medical company Johnson & Johnson and the drug makers Bayer and Hoffmann-La Roche.”

Health Care Industry Coordinating Effort To Opt States Out Of Health Care Reform

it's about time..

ps- weren't you supposed to be away from computers for the next week?

withdrawal already?

LOL

I have no idea what these states are grumbling about. This is good legislation that's about to be enacted. Isn't it?

thank you for the hat tip

I got the same vibe about the movie, which is why I didn't want to go see it. But others have convinced me to go see it.

LOL – 20,000 health care workers divided by 10,000 community health centers = 2 health care WORKERs per center (not 2 doctors).

1) medical schools need to have larger classes or new medical schools.
2) Doctors only need 2 years of undergrad and after that should go straight into medical schools.
3) Primary care doctors work very long hours for a lot less money than say interventional cardiologists.
4) 10 – 14 billion for community health centers – sounds more like a feel good, local empowerment money hole unless these centers are placed where there are no other health care facilities. Are these centers in direct competition with private urgent care centers or private medical practices?