The public has a lot of confusion about Gov. Matt Bevin’s actions related to restructuring executive branch boards and commissions such as the University of Louisville’s Board of Trustees and the Kentucky Retirement Systems Board.
The rural landscape is changing. We notice farmland disappearing in Central Kentucky and hear about the decline of coal in Eastern Kentucky every day. Small towns and rural school systems are declining across America.
The Medicaid revamp proposed by Gov. Matt Bevin last week is built on a belief that providing health care to low-income people somehow robs them of their dignity. Also, that 20 percent of Kentuckians lacked health insurance only a few years ago, not because they couldn’t afford it, but because they were disengaged or didn’t understand deductibles.
Without fail, every mass atrocity brings with it a horde of lobbyists and advocates sensing a renewed opportunity to pitch their prefabricated agendas. Thus, familiar ideas like banning AR-15s or immigration are reintroduced to mourners and sympathizers desperate for solutions.
In regard to the June 22 article discussing Gov. Matt Bevin’s right to disband state boards, it bothers me when I hear someone stating that he has “absolute authority,” in this case “to disband any state board and commission.” It bothers me because no one has absolute power over anything simply because they think they do.
Having lived through Sandy Hook, Aurora, Virginia Tech and countless other gun massacres in the United States, I continue to wonder when there might be an outbreak of responsibility and common sense in the Senate and House.
Gov. Matt Bevin’s new proposal to revamp Medicaid rules is a step in the wrong direction. Former Gov. Steve Beshear’s executive order reduced the level of uninsured Kentuckians to 7.5 percent. Bevin’s proposal is mean-spirited and will cause the number of Kentuckians without access to even rudimentary health care to increase.
Today the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional right to abortion -- and laid down a new framework for how courts should evaluate future legislation limiting it. For the first time, the court expressly held that laws limiting access to abortion must be evaluated on a cost-benefit basis, to see if health benefits to women outweigh the costs in making abortion less available. The cost-benefit scheme gives greater precision to the undue-burden test established in the landmark 1992 case of Casey v. Planned Parenthood. But it also raises the difficult question of how, exactly, costs and benefits should be determined if and when other states pass laws that limit abortion access while purporting to protect women's health.
Childhood hunger is an invisible but very real problem in every one of our counties. Although there is not a lack of food in the United States, more than 200,000 Kentucky children can’t count on the nutritious meals they need to lead healthy, active lives.
For most workers retiring means collecting whatever vacation pay is left, if they’re lucky, and walking out the door. For those in the upper reaches of the pay scale the transition into the golden years is often much more generously greased.
Every Memorial Day for 40 years, I have gone to Hillcrest Cemetery in Lexington and removed old flags and placed new ones among the flowers I plant there. I am careful to put the flags among the flowers so nothing interferes with mowing at the cemetery.