Jonathan Kantrowitz

A new national poll shows broad, bipartisan support for ensuring that all Americans have access to alcohol and drug addiction treatment. More than three-quarters of all Americans, including 72 percent of Republicans, 88 percent of Democrats and 72 percent of Independents, support including addiction treatment in health care reform, according to a new poll released by the Closing the Addiction Treatment Gap (CATG) initiative during National Alcohol and Drug Addiction Recovery month.

Majorities of Americans, including 80 percent of Democrats, 63 percent of Independents and 67 percent of Republicans, support paying two dollars a month more in health care premiums to make addiction treatment more accessible. And 75 percent of Democrats, 67 percent of Independents and 70 percent of Republicans support an additional tax of five cents a drink on beer, wine and liquor.

Lee Stranahan has produced some great videos. Here are 2 of my favorites, targeted against someone we have all come to know and love:

Hey Joe! What ARE you?

Hey Joe! The REAL Reason?

The Google ads are a little annoying – especially fpr Rob Simmons, but I guess they help pay the rent.

Joe has given a couple more reasons to oppose the public option, one totally bogus, and one completely self-serving.

1. He is representing his constituents, who don’t want it. Totally untrue. CT residents favor a public option by stong margins.

2. He’s against it because there aren’t enough votes for t in the Senate. There aren’t enough votes for it because HE won’t vote for it.

During the 2008 presidential election, WWE organized a campaign called WWE’s Smackdown Your Vote! WWWE even published a voter guide to help young voters ‘articulate the issues important to them in this national election.

But WWE CEO Linda McMahon has admitted that she didn’t vote in several major elections, including the 2008 primary and the 2006 general election:

I talk all the time about how important it is for people to vote. And it is. Yet, I haven’t always been the best example myself. I missed a general election vote in ‘06. I missed several local elections. I didn’t vote in the ’08 presidential primary after John McCain was the presumptive nominee. I regret it, I apologize, and I don’t make any excuses for it.

In fact, state records show that McMahon has only voted twice – in the 2002 and 2008 general elections.

But McMahon isn’t alone among Republican non-voters. Republican Senate Candidate Peter Schiff has never voted in Connecticut and Republican Senate Candidate Tom Foley didn’t even vote in the 2004 general election, despite the fact that he was a major fundraiser for George W. Bush, who was on the ballot.

A new report released today by The Justice Project analyzes the cases of twenty innocent Georgians who collectively spent nearly 170 years in prison for crimes they did not commit. Convicting the Innocent in Georgia: Stories of Injustice and the Reforms that Can Prevent Them also presents Georgia with common sense solutions that must be implemented to improve the quality of evidence used in criminal cases and reduce the risk of wrongful convictions.

While DNA evidence can determine guilt or innocence with a great degree of certainty, biological and DNA evidence is only available in a small number of cases. In fact, only seven of the twenty men highlighted is this report were exonerated by DNA testing. While non-DNA exonerations are more difficult to prove, they are similar to DNA cases in that they trace back to the same flawed procedures in need of reform.

Adopting non-DNA related reforms is vital to increasing the fairness and accuracy of Georgia’s criminal justice system. In fact, issues like mistaken eyewitness testimony and false informant testimony are shown to be leading causes of wrongful convictions. Until Georgia enacts the practical reforms outlined in this report, its criminal justice system will remain prone to error.

Twenty innocent Georgians spent roughly 169 years in prison for crimes they did not commit. The average length of incarceration was eight years.

Mistaken eyewitness identification is the leading cause of wrongful conviction in the highlighted cases, playing a role in half of the defendant’s cases.

Other factors leading to Georgia wrongful convictions include: false testimony from informants or accomplices, flawed forensic science, suppression of exculpatory evidence, and inadequate defense counsel.

The report details the enormous impact wrongful convictions have on innocent people, as well as the entire community. For the innocent person, prison is a terrifying experience, and the time spent in prison causes tremendous loss. Public safety is also put at risk when an innocent person is convicted. The investigation stops and the true perpetrator remains uninvestigated, unpunished, and free to commit more crimes.

For the first time ever, the U.S. Census Bureau has released city-, county- and Congressional district-level estimates for health insurance coverage in Connecticut.

Estimates of uninsured rates varied significantly across Connecticut’s cities: Bridgeport (20.0%), Danbury (19.7%), Hartford (14.9%), New Britain (13.1%), New Haven (13.4%), Norwalk (14.6%), Stamford (20.0%), and Waterbury (11.8%). The percentage of children under 18 who were without health insurance in Connecticut cities was also reported: Bridgeport (10.8%), Danbury (13.4%), Hartford (6.4%), New Britain (9.2%), New Haven (3.5%), Norwalk (7.1%), Stamford (9.2%), and Waterbury (8.3%). Uninsured estimates are only available for cities with populations over 65,000. The American Community Survey also provided uninsured estimates for Connecticut’s counties and Congressional districts (summarized in the attached fact sheet).

In 2008, 15.1 % (45.1 million) of Americans were uninsured at the time of they were surveyed, according to the American Community Survey. Among children in the U.S., 9.9% (7.3 million) were uninsured.

“The recession and job loss started in cities like Bridgeport well over a year ago. With job loss comes the loss of health insurance. We are deeply concerned about the consequences of the lack of health insurance for children and parents. National health reform, particularly a public option, is critical to ensure that all residents have equal access to affordable health care,” commented Barbara Edinberg, Acting Director of the Bridgeport Child Advocacy Coalition.

Also, the median household income in Connecticut in 2008 was an estimated $68,595, according to the Census data. There was no statistically significant change in median income in Connecticut from 2007.

This survey marks the first time the US Census Bureau included a question on health insurance coverage in its annual American Community Survey (ACS). The question asks whether the respondent is currently covered by any type of insurance. Since 2008 was the first year the ACS gathered this data, evaluating change over time in this measure is not yet possible. This “point in time” uninsured question in the ACS is different from the health insurance question asked in the Census Bureau’s 2008 Current Population Survey (CPS), released on September 10, 2009. The CPS asks whether respondents were uninsured for the entire previous year. CPS estimates of the uninsured are available only at the national and state levels.

Links to additional national, state, and local data on demographic, social, and housing indicators from the American Community Survey are available through the CT Voices site.

State also ranks poorly in housing affordability measures

As Connecticut’s recession strains the financial resources of the state’s families, a new report indicates that Connecticut has among the worst gaps in the nation in family assets between racial, ethnic, and income groups. The Connecticut Family Asset and Opportunity Scorecard was released by Connecticut Voices for Children, a research-based policy think tank. Additional data here.

While most surveys of family economic well-being focus on income, this report focuses on how well families are developing and preserving assets – in the form of savings, home equity, business ownership, access to health care, and educational attainment. The report concludes that low family asset resources have diminished economic opportunities for many families and have left them poorly prepared to manage effects of the economic downturn. Connecticut Voices calls for state policies that would boost family assets and opportunities, including a state earned income tax credit, improved access to health insurance, homeownership incentives, supports for small business development, and a strategic economic development plan.

While Connecticut continues to rank high among states on average measures of net household worth and educational achievement, inequalities and unaffordable housing brought down Connecticut’s overall scores on the Scorecard. Among the 58 asset measures evaluated in the Scorecard, Connecticut ranked among the lower half of states with available data for 24 measures. More than one in five households (22%) in Connecticut is asset poor, meaning they do not have sufficient resources to survive at the poverty level for three months without any income.

Connecticut has among the worst racial and ethnic inequalities in family assets in the nation. For example, the median net worth of white-headed households ($195,771) in Connecticut is 65 times the median net worth of minority-headed households ($3,000). Indeed, racial and ethnic minorities in Connecticut aren’t just worse off than whites in their net worth; they are worse off than minorities in most other states. Connecticut’s minorities had lower net worth than their counterparts in 32 of 33 states with available data. Connecticut’s homeownership rate among minorities is 42%, compared with 78% among whites, leaving the state with a rank of 45th of 50 states and D.C. in homeownership disparity by race. Inequalities extend to access to health care – 7.6% of the state’s white population was uninsured for the entire previous year, compared to 19% of the state’s minority population, ranking Connecticut 41st among states in health insurance inequality.

The state also has among the worst gaps in the nation between higher- and lower-income groups in family asset measures. Connecticut ranked 25th in gap in net worth between high- and low-income residents among 33 states with available data. While 92% among households in the top twenty percent of income were homeowners, only 22% of those in the bottom twenty percent of income were homeowners. Connecticut ranked 49th among 50 states and D.C. in homeownership disparity by income. One in four (25%) of state residents under 200% of the federal poverty level were uninsured for the entire year, compared to 5.8% of those above this income level, giving Connecticut a rank of 47th of 50 states and D.C. in health insurance disparities by income.

Connecticut received its worst grade in the area of housing and homeownership. The state received a grade of “D” in the scorecard in the area of homeownership, because of its racial and income gaps in homeownership and because of the high cost and low affordability of housing. Connecticut was ranked 34th of 43 states with available data in affordability, 40th of 50 states and D.C. in housing cost burdens for homeowners, and 44th of 50 states and D.C. in housing cost burdens for renters. In Connecticut, 36% of homeowners and 49% of renters spent more than 30% of their incomes on housing costs in 2007. According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, people who spend more than 30% of their income on housing costs are cost-burdened and may have difficulty affording other necessities.

Connecticut ranks poorly in business creation. The state was ranked worst (51st of the 50 states and D.C.) in business creation, a measure of new business establishment openings per 1,000 workers. Connecticut’s low business creation rate may in part be a result of its poor ranking on the amount of private loans to small businesses, ranking 34th of 50 states and D.C.

The Connecticut Scorecard, drawn from the national Assets and Opportunity Scorecard, was prepared in partnership with the Corporation for Enterprise Development (CFED), a national organization that works to expand economic opportunities. The national report measures the financial security of families in the United States based on level of savings, investments, home equity, and protections against financial setbacks. States are ranked on 46 measures of family assets in the areas of financial assets and income, businesses and jobs, housing and home ownership, health care and education.

To help families build assets and improve economic opportunities, Connecticut Voices for Children recommends:

Policies to reduce racial and income disparities in the state, such as a state earned income tax credit, home ownership initiatives, and improved access to health insurance.

Implementation by the state of a comprehensive, strategic economic development plan that includes regular evaluations of the economic returns of current state economic development initiatives and supports for small business development.
Increased public supports that make higher education more affordable and achievable.

Connecticut Voices for Children is a research-based policy think tank committed to promoting leadership, policy change, and investment on behalf of Connecticut’s children and youth.

The Corporation for Enterprise Development (CFED) is a national economic nonprofit that expands economic opportunity by helping Americans and their children build assets, save for the future, start and grow businesses, pursue education and become homeowners.

For more information on CFED and national comparison data.

Inhaling secondhand smoke greatly increases risk of heart attack, even among young and nonsmokers

Public smoking bans appear to significantly reduce the risk of heart attacks, particularly among younger individuals and nonsmokers, according to a new study published in the September 29, 2009, issue of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology. Researchers find that smoking bans can reduce the number of heart attacks by as much as 26 percent per year.

“Even breathing in low doses of cigarette smoke can increase one’s risk of heart attack,” said David Meyers, M.D., M.P.H., professor of Cardiology and Preventive Medicine, University of Kansas School of Medicine and lead investigator of the study, which is the most comprehensive analysis of related studies to date. “Public smoking bans seem to be tremendously effective in reducing heart attack and, theoretically, might also help to prevent lung cancer and emphysema, diseases that develop much more slowly than heart attacks. The cardiac benefits increased with longer ban duration.”

According to projections by the authors, a nationwide ban on public smoking could prevent as many as 154,000 heart attacks each year. These findings are particularly important in light of mounting evidence that second-hand smoke exposure is nearly as harmful to the heart as chronic active smoking. Direct smoking doubles the risk of heart attack. Second hand smoke increases the risk by 30 percent.

“Interestingly, public smoking bans had a stronger effect in reducing heart attacks among women and younger individuals, which may be explained, in part, because younger people tend to frequent clubs, restaurants and bars where smoking is a likely part of the social scene,” said Dr. Meyers. “Heavily exposed people like those working in the entertainment or hospitality industries are likely to accrue the greatest benefit from smoking bans.”

Dr. Meyers adds that smoking remains the leading preventable risk factor for heart attack. Secondhand smoke is thought to increase the likelihood of a heart attack by making the blood “sticky” and more prone to clotting, reducing the amount of “good” (HDL) cholesterol in the body, and putting individuals at greater risk for dangerous heart rhythms, among other factors.

The good news is that the beneficial effects of smoking bans appear to be fairly immediate, with declines in reported heart attack cases within 3 months. The impact of bans was strengthened if compliance was good, if baseline smoking prevalence was low and if air quality was good.

“Several years ago, the idea that secondhand smoke was harmful to the heart was a theory and one with some controversy attached, but this article moves us from the theoretical to fact and to practice. The reduction in heart attacks associated with public smoking bans is a big deal,” said Steven Schroeder, M.D., director, Smoking Cessation Leadership Center University of California, San Francisco. “While cardiologists routinely screen for lipid disorders and high blood pressure, they also need to become vigilant about asking patients about tobacco use and secondhand smoke exposure and provide counseling as needed.”

Drs. Meyers and Schroeder encourage clinicians to support community smoking bans and other tobacco control measures including tax increases on cigarettes, expanded cessation services including telephone quitlines and educational campaigns. So far, bans on smoking in public places and workplaces have been instituted in 32 states and many cities across the country. As the United States increasingly institutes policies to protect nonsmokers from second hand smoke, authors say these efforts will yield great public health benefits in the form of reduced disease, disability and deaths.

The researchers performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of 10 reports from 11 geographic locations in the United States (MT, CO, NY, IN, OH), Canada and Europe to compare the rates of heart attacks before and after public smoking bans were instituted. Collectively, the studies involved 24 million people and observations of the effect of the bans ranged from two months to three years.

CT Blue describes how bad the Baucus bill is, (VERY informative) and analyzes why the Democrats are programmed to fail in passing a meaningful health-care package (VERY funny).