Hi, all, and happy Monday!
I’m still recovering from being sick, so won’t write a long opening today. Just this: thank you for being here. We have a lot of work to do, and there’s no one with whom I’d rather be doing it.
This work can and will make an enormous difference in the America we’ll wake up to in one year, five years, and even twenty years.
So let’s pull on our proverbial boots and get to it.
P.S. — While I don’t have an action related to it in today’s newsletter, this article has upset me deeply. As I’m assuming many of you have been similarly horrified by it, I just wanted to let you know I’ll have actions surrounding it in tomorrow’s edition.
Call Your Senators (find yours here) 📲
Hi, I'm a constituent calling from [zip]. My name is ______.
I wanted to make the Senator aware that Ethan’s Law, a child gun access prevention bill, has just been reintroduced as S 173. Last June, the House passed it with bipartisan support but it never made it to the Senate. I’d like to see that change this year. Is the Senator yet a co-sponsor? [If yes thank. If no add:] I’d like him/her to become one immediately. This bill is a no-brainer—in states where it’s been implemented gun deaths—especially for kids—have been reduced enormously. Please ask him/her to look into it.
I’d also like the Senator to co-sponsor S 25, the Assault Weapons Ban Act. [Add something personal about how gun violence is affecting you]. Thanks. [Source]
(* *Want more gun violence prevention-related actions? Sign up for the Newton Alliance’s Lunch and Lobby event, every Monday in March at noon ET, here.)
Call Your House Rep (find yours here) 📲
Hi, I'm a constituent calling from [zip]. My name is _______.
I wanted to make the Congressmember aware that Ethan’s Law, a child gun access prevention bill, has just been reintroduced as HR 660. Last June, the House passed it with bipartisan support. Is the Congressmember yet a co-sponsor? [If yes thank. If no add:] I’d like him/her to become one immediately. This bill is a no-brainer—in states where it’s been implemented gun deaths have been reduced enormously. I’m told your office can sign on by contacting Harper White in Representative De Lauro’s office.
I’d also like the Congressmember to co-sponsor H.R.698, the Assault Weapons Ban Act. [Optional: add something personal about how gun violence is affecting you]. Thanks. [Source]
Extra Credit ✅
The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services is collecting comments from the public in support of its rate increase for privatized Medicare plans―which would help keep corporate insurers from undercutting traditional Medicare. Let’s be loud and flood the comment site with our voices. Here’s how:
Copy one of these sample comments, and either submit it as is or personalize it.
Comment one:
I strongly support the CMS proposed 1 percent rate increase for Medicare Advantage plans in 2024. It is an important step towards eliminating billions of dollars in waste, keeping Part B premiums in check, protecting the integrity of the Medicare Trust Fund and strengthening Medicare.
Comment two:
The proposed rate increase ends some of the MA upcoding that wrongly drives up Medicare Advantage plan payments. This upcoding allows the Medicare Advantage plans to make their enrollees look sicker than they are and earn additional revenue, even though they do not provide additional services or incur additional costs for those members.
Comment three:
I stand behind this proposed one percent increase and urge CMS to finalize it. If anything, the proposed rate increase does not go far enough to eliminate waste and address overpayments to MA plans, which is weakening the Medicare program. MedPAC says that the excess payments in MA are $27 billion this year alone, six percent higher than Traditional Medicare. Other experts find that they are closer to 20 percent higher.Enter your contact information and Press Submit!
These messages will go directly to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services! [H/T Social Security Works]
Get Smart! 📚
We now know that turnout in last week’s elections in Virginia and Wisconsin was much higher than expected. This Thursday, March 2 at 5 pm PT| 8 pm ET the Center For Common Ground will break it all down— the numbers for voter turnout, how many voters they reached, and how their efforts impacted turnout.
They will also provide an update for their current get-out-the-vote campaign to mobilize BIPOC voters in Wisconsin ahead of the Supreme Court Race on April 4.
Give 💰!
On Tuesday, February 28 at 5PM PT / 8PM ET Airlift, a all volunteer-run organization that raises money for progressive causes, will hold a fundraiser featuring Ben Wikler, Chair of the Wisconsin Democrats, and Amanda Avalos & Lamonte Moore, leaders of Leaders Igniting Transformation (LIT). You’ll get to hear what they’re doing to ensure a win in the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, and if you like you can give a donation to be split between WisDems and LIT.
Win Races—cure ballots! 🗳
Join WisDems for a Ballot Cure Training this week!
Ballot cure is a process where we contact voters whose absentee ballots are at risk of rejection and walk them through their options to make sure their vote will count. It's concrete, gratifying work that has a tangible impact on the lives of voters across Wisconsin and serves as a critical voter education opportunity for future elections. It will also help ensure we win this Supreme Court election!
Trainings will run this week only, so be sure to sign up here to get involved!
Win Races—fight voter suppression! 👊🏼
Make calls to Black and Brown voters in Wisconsin who are specifically targeted by voter suppression efforts with the Center For Common Ground.
Tuesdays 3-5 PM PT. Sign up here.
Resistbot Letter (new to Resistbot? Go here! And then here.) 💻
[To President Biden] [Source] [Quick send: text SIGN PJOOON to 50409]
I know the Biden Administration just proposed a rule that would ban many refugees from seeking asylum in the United States. Under this rule, most asylum seekers who cross into the United States between ports of entry or who present themselves at a port of entry without a previously-scheduled appointment will be considered ineligible for asylum, unless they previously sought and were denied protection in a country they traveled through to get to the United States.
I support the longstanding U.S. commitment to welcoming refugees who are fleeing persecution and imminent danger as a reflection of our moral and national values. I therefore oppose this proposed rule.
Among other things, this proposal would disproportionately affect marginalized groups while favoring white and wealthy immigrants who can afford visas and air travel. It is deeply concerning that one set of rules applies to people at the southern border, and another set of rules to those who arrive by plane. The proposed asylum ban would favor people with more financial resources over refugees most desperately in need and would cause disproportionate harm to Black, brown, indigenous, and LGBTQ+ people. It is the wrong move, and federal courts have repeatedly struck down such bans for violating U.S. law. The United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) has repeatedly denounced attempts to impose these types of bans.
It is worth noting that the Trump Administration’s unlawful asylum transit ban led to asylum denials and prolonged detention for many with bona fide claims, as well as family separations, permanent limbo, and the elimination of a pathway to citizenship for refugees who were barred from asylum and granted only the inadequate protection of withholding of removal. This is not a history we should repeat.
I urge the Biden Administration to keep its promise to lift restrictions on asylum seekers traveling through other countries. Adjust course immediately and abandon the misguided pursuit of an asylum ban. Thanks.
OK, you did it again! You helped save democracy! You’re amazing.
Talk soon.
Jess
I, too, read the NYT article on exploitation of migrant children and am greatly disturbed by all the companies that "employ" them. Seems like some boycotts of goods is in order 😈 And thanks for the heads up on Medicare Advantage - which I can't stand anyhow - and communicate templates.
After trying to figure out what was going on with the proposed changes to the Medicare Advantage plans, I submitted the following comment. I tried to incorporate all 3 comments into one, as I thought they were all important. Not sure I captured the correct technicalities of the proposed regulations, but this was my best shot given time constraints involved in helping take care of my grandchild. 😂
The Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) has reported that the excess payments in Medicare Advantage plans are $27 billion this year alone, six percent higher than Traditional Medicare while other reports have estimated that they are closer to 20 percent higher than that. These excess overpayments are threatening the integrity of the Medicare Trust Fund. Medicare Advantage (MA) plans have not been provided the efficiencies of the private sector as originally promised when the legislation was proposed and written. In order to keep the Trust Fund solvent and keep Medicare Part B premiums from being raised unnecessarily due to the ineffectiveness of MA plans, I support the CMS proposed 1 percent rate increase for these plans in 2024. With regards to the proposed rate increase, I could not locate an analysis that the 1 percent will cover the additional MA plan expenditures that will be sought to replace revenue received from previous overpayments that will no longer occur with the proposed revisions to MA coding regulations that now eliminate the intentional or unintentional discretionary coding variation or inappropriate coding that has been occurring.