Wisconsin boys hockey: New Richmond advances to Division 2 state final

posted in: News | 0

MIDDLETON, Wis. — A pair of three-goal flurries was enough to give defending champion New Richmond a shot at a second straight state hockey title.

The top-seeded Tigers gained control with three goals in just over a minute in the second period en route to an 8-4 victory over Tomahawk in the Division 2 semifinals of the Wisconsin boys state tournament Thursday morning.

New Richmond (17-9-2), ranked No.1 in Division 2 in the state coaches poll, advances to Saturday morning’s title game against the winner of second-seeded Fond du Lac Springs (18-9) and No. 3 seed River Falls (14-13) at the Capitol Ice Arena,

After a wild 3-3 opening stanza, Steven Chapman slipped a defender and closed from the right side, punching it past Trevor Seliskar to put the Tigers up 4-3 at 4:05 of the second period.

Zaylin Sweet scored just 17 seconds later to make it 5-3. Brody Jackson scored from just outside the crease to push the lead to 6-3 at 5:16.

“I think that really kind of got us situated and settled in,” New Richmond coach John Larson said of three-goal spurt. “I would attribute a lot of the first period to nerves. Just everything, the first game of the tournament.”

Caleb Dickens brought the Hatchets to within 6-4 with an unassisted, short-handed goal at 15:32 of the second period.

Catcher Langeness regained the three-goal margin for New Richmond with a goal 1:07 into the third period and then tallied the final score at 12:50.

“I thought we played with them, we just ran out of a little bit of depth at the end,” Tomahawk coach Dewey Reilly said. “But when you look at those first couple of periods, you couldn’t ask for a more exciting state game.”

Junior Ryan McGillis had 13 saves for New Richmond, while Seliskar had 26 stops for Tomahawk, making its first state appearance since 1991. New Richmond outshot the fourth-seeded Hatchets 34-17, including 11-3 in the decisive second period.

Tomahawk (18-9) jumped in front 1-0 just 2½ minutes in when Jonah Dickens punched it past McGillis from the left elbow.

“I think it helped our team, actually,” Langeness said. “We’re coming in pretty cocky with a one seed going against a four. So when we got shot in the face, it almost opened our eyes and made us play to our level of hockey that we should be.”

The Tigers answered with three consecutive goals for a 3-1 lead with just under six minutes remaining in the opening period.

The Tigers trailed for just over a minute before Bjorn Bahneman tied it from just outside the right post.

“Just getting that goal, I think, was big for us to kind of settle, just responding,” Larson said. “We took one early, a turnover, but I thought it was a good response and then it kind of snowballed.”

Jackson gathered in a pass from Gage Fox and punched it in from the left side to put New Richmond up 2-1 at 3:43. Jameson Unger’s power-play goal pushed the lead to 3-1.

Tomahawk regained momentum a minute later when Logan Seymour backhanded it in from the right side. Dickens pushed it up the right side and tied the score with an unassisted goal from the right circle at 13:13.

“Give Tomahawk a lot of credit,” Larson said. “They battled back and certainly made it interesting. But I was proud overall, especially in the second period and into the third where we simplified our game a lot.”

Related Articles

High School Sports |


State wrestling: With a chip on its shoulder and ‘no regrets,’ Simley takes aim at a sixth straight title that won’t come easy

High School Sports |


State wrestling tournament primer

High School Sports |


State gymnastics: St. Michael-Albertville’s Jackie Bergeron claims Class 2A all-around crown

High School Sports |


Class 2A state girls hockey: Edina defeats Hill-Murray to claim fifth state championship

High School Sports |


Class A girls state hockey: Warroad reigns, ends Dodge County’s dream season

Biden is too old but Trump is dangerous, swing-state poll shows

posted in: Politics | 0

Gregory Korte | (TNS) Bloomberg News

Swing-state voters across every major demographic group describe President Joe Biden as too old, a Bloomberg News/Morning Consult poll has found, showing that concerns about his age have permeated even the most reliable constituencies of the Democratic party.

Overall, eight in 10 voters in crucial states said Biden was too old, when asked to think about the frontrunners in the 2024 election. The survey was taken after a special prosecutor’s report that cast the 81-year-old president as an “elderly man with a poor memory.”

In contrast, less than half of respondents said his almost-certain rival, 77-year-old Donald Trump, was too old. Still, Trump faces his own vulnerabilities with swing-state voters, with a majority saying the former president is dangerous.

In a sign of how top-of-mind Biden’s age and acuity are for swing-state voters, more than 1,000 poll respondents mentioned those themes even before they were asked about them directly. They referenced them in reply to an open-ended question about what they had seen, read or heard about the candidate recently.

Their responses underscore the depth and ubiquity of a voter concern that has sometimes overshadowed Biden’s policy achievements and proved difficult for his campaign to assuage.

Biden continues to trail Trump in all seven states most likely to decide the election, with swing-state voters’ perceptions of an improving national economy failing to translate into a significant increase in support for the incumbent. The poll of 4,955 voters was conducted Feb. 12 to Feb. 20 and has a margin of error of 1 percentage point.

Trump maintains his lead over Biden if other candidates — independent Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Jill Stein of the Green Party and independent Cornel West — are included.

‘Too old’

When asked about the two likely major candidates in November’s presidential election, majorities of Black voters, young voters and women labeled Biden too old. Even among those who say they plan to vote for Biden, seven in 10 said he fit that description. Voters were more likely to describe Trump as being mentally fit or in good health. Biden’s Economic Message Falls Flat in Must-Win Pennsylvania

“Biden’s age is clearly a sticky narrative that the president’s campaign is going to have to contend with,” said Caroline Bye, a vice president at Morning Consult. While the candidates are only four years apart in age, “it’s clearly stickier for Biden than it is for Trump.”

The White House has pointed to the president’s doctor’s notes, demanding schedule and foreign trips as evidence of Biden’s fitness for office. A report Wednesday from White House Physician Kevin O’Connor described Biden as “a healthy, active, robust 81-year-old male, who remains fit to successfully execute the duties of the presidency.”

The candidate frequently makes jokes about his age and touts his decades-long U.S. Senate career as a sign of his experience. When the special counsel’s report suggested Biden had a poor memory, the president forcefully rebutted those claims and his aides sought to cast the findings as politically motivated.

Almost six in 10 swing-state voters labeled Trump as dangerous — a concern far more pronounced among undecided voters, who make up less than one-tenth of the swing-state electorate. Even 28% of those who plan to vote for him in November agree that Trump is dangerous. Fewer than half as many Biden supporters said the same about their candidate.

Swing-state voters who volunteered that they had heard something about his recent comments degrading NATO were especially lopsided in thinking Trump was the more dangerous of the two candidates.

Trump also fell short of Biden on other key attributes, with fewer voters calling the Republican compassionate or honest.

Criminal cases

As many as half of swing-state voters say they would be unwilling to vote for Trump if he’s convicted in any one of the criminal cases in which he faces charges. Those include accusations of paying hush money to porn star Stormy Daniels, mishandling classified documents and separate state and federal cases alleging a conspiracy to overthrow the results of the 2020 election.

Those numbers don’t vary much from one case to another. Just as voters frequently cited Biden’s age in an open-ended question about him, the same question about Trump yielded hundreds of mentions of his court cases. Trump supporters, though, were more likely than other voters to be dismissive of the charges.

Border blame

The economy — and especially inflation — remains the top issue among swing-state voters in the latest iteration of the monthly poll. But as economic fears ebb slightly, voters have found room to turn their attention to the border.

A majority of swing-state voters still holds Biden and Democrats in Congress responsible for the migrant surge. But blame for congressional Republicans and the Trump administration each increased by 5 percentage points among swing-state voters compared to the previous month. That shift comes after House Republicans tanked a bipartisan border bill with encouragement from Trump.

Biden policies

One potential advantage for Biden is how voters perceive some of the provisions of his signature Inflation Reduction Act, with a majority of respondents saying Medicare’s ability to negotiate drug prices and the extension of insurance subsidies under Obamacare have helped them or their communities.

Other Biden policies — like a 15% tax on corporations or a 1% tax on stock buybacks — have not had as much impact, swing-state-voters said.

The poll also showed gradual improvement in swing-state voters’ assessment of the national economy, with 31% saying it’s heading in the right direction. That’s up from 26% in October.

Still, Biden continues to receive little credit for those improving numbers, with voters trusting Trump more on a wide range of economic issues.

Methodology

The Bloomberg News/Morning Consult poll surveyed 4,955 registered voters in seven swing states: 798 registered voters in Arizona, 800 in Georgia, 702 in Michigan, 445 in Nevada, 705 in North Carolina, 803 in Pennsylvania and 702 in Wisconsin. The surveys were conducted online from Feb. 12 to Feb. 20 and the aggregated data across the seven swing states were weighted to approximate a target sample of swing state registered voters based on gender, age, race/ethnicity, marital status, home ownership, 2020 presidential vote and state. State-level data were weighted to approximate a target sample of registered voters in the respective state based on gender, age, race/ethnicity, marital status, home ownership, and 2020 presidential vote. The margin of error is plus or minus 1 percentage point across the seven states; 3 percentage points in Arizona, Georgia and Pennsylvania; 4 percentage points in Michigan, North Carolina, and Wisconsin, and 5 percentage points in Nevada.

———-

(—With assistance from Akayla Gardner, Jennah Haque and Elena Mejia.)

___

©2024 Bloomberg L.P. Visit bloomberg.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

If you’re poor, fertility treatment can be out of reach

posted in: News | 0

Michelle Andrews | KFF Health News (TNS)

Mary Delgado’s first pregnancy went according to plan, but when she tried to get pregnant again seven years later, nothing happened. After 10 months, Delgado, now 34, and her partner, Joaquin Rodriguez, went to see an OB-GYN. Tests showed she had endometriosis, which was interfering with conception. Delgado’s only option, the doctor said, was in vitro fertilization.

“When she told me that, she broke me inside,” Delgado said, “because I knew it was so expensive.”

Delgado, who lives in New York City, is enrolled in Medicaid, the federal-state health program for low-income and disabled people. The roughly $20,000 price tag for a round of IVF would be a financial stretch for lots of people, but for someone on Medicaid — for which the maximum annual income for a two-person household in New York is just over $26,000 — the treatment can be unattainable.

Expansions of work-based insurance plans to cover fertility treatments, including free egg freezing and unlimited IVF cycles, are often touted by large companies as a boon for their employees. But people with lower incomes, often minorities, are more likely to be covered by Medicaid or skimpier commercial plans with no such coverage. That raises the question of whether medical assistance to create a family is only for the well-to-do or people with generous benefit packages.

“In American health care, they don’t want the poor people to reproduce,” Delgado said. She was caring full-time for their son, who was born with a rare genetic disorder that required several surgeries before he was 5. Her partner, who works for a company that maintains the city’s yellow cabs, has an individual plan through the state insurance marketplace, but it does not include fertility coverage.

Some medical experts whose patients have faced these issues say they can understand why people in Delgado’s situation think the system is stacked against them.

“It feels a little like that,” said Elizabeth Ginsburg, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Harvard Medical School who is president-elect of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, a research and advocacy group.

Whether or not it’s intended, many say the inequity reflects poorly on the U.S.

“This is really sort of standing out as a sore thumb in a nation that would like to claim that it cares for the less fortunate and it seeks to do anything it can for them,” said Eli Adashi, a professor of medical science at Brown University and former president of the Society for Reproductive Endocrinologists.

Yet efforts to add coverage for fertility care to Medicaid face a lot of pushback, Ginsburg said.

Related Articles

Health |


As millions wait on food stamp approvals, feds tell states to speed it up

Health |


Autism diagnoses are soaring. Here’s how some colleges are responding

Health |


Pregnancy care was always lacking in jails. It could get worse

Health |


About as many abortions are happening in the US monthly as before Roe was overturned, report finds

Health |


‘It was the life raft’: Transgender people find a safe haven in Florida’s capital city

Over the years, Barbara Collura, president and CEO of the advocacy group Resolve: The National Infertility Association, has heard many explanations for why it doesn’t make sense to cover fertility treatment for Medicaid recipients. Legislators have asked, “If they can’t pay for fertility treatment, do they have any idea how much it costs to raise a child?” she said.

“So right there, as a country we’re making judgments about who gets to have children,” Collura said.

The legacy of the eugenics movement of the early 20th century, when states passed laws that permitted poor, nonwhite, and disabled people to be sterilized against their will, lingers as well.

“As a reproductive justice person, I believe it’s a human right to have a child, and it’s a larger ethical issue to provide support,” said Regina Davis Moss, president and CEO of In Our Own Voice: National Black Women’s Reproductive Justice Agenda, an advocacy group.

But such coverage decisions — especially when the health care safety net is involved — sometimes require difficult choices, because resources are limited.

Even if state Medicaid programs wanted to cover fertility treatment, for instance, they would have to weigh the benefit against investing in other types of care, including maternity care, said Kate McEvoy, executive director of the National Association of Medicaid Directors. “There is a recognition about the primacy and urgency of maternity care,” she said.

Medicaid pays for about 40% of births in the United States. And since 2022, 46 states and the District of Columbia have elected to extend Medicaid postpartum coverage to 12 months, up from 60 days.

Fertility problems are relatively common, affecting roughly 10% of women and men of childbearing age, according to the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Traditionally, a couple is considered infertile if they’ve been trying to get pregnant unsuccessfully for 12 months. Last year, the ASRM broadened the definition of infertility to incorporate would-be parents beyond heterosexual couples, including people who can’t get pregnant for medical, sexual, or other reasons, as well as those who need medical interventions such as donor eggs or sperm to get pregnant.

The World Health Organization defined infertility as a disease of the reproductive system characterized by failing to get pregnant after a year of unprotected intercourse. It terms the high cost of fertility treatment a major equity issue and has called for better policies and public financing to improve access.

No matter how the condition is defined, private health plans often decline to cover fertility treatments because they don’t consider them “medically necessary.” Twenty states and Washington, D.C., have laws requiring health plans to provide some fertility coverage, but those laws vary greatly and apply only to companies whose plans are regulated by the state.

In recent years, many companies have begun offering fertility treatment in a bid to recruit and retain top-notch talent. In 2023, 45% of companies with 500 or more workers covered IVF and/or drug therapy, according to the benefits consultant Mercer.

But that doesn’t help people on Medicaid. Only two states’ Medicaid programs provide any fertility treatment: New York covers some oral ovulation-enhancing medications, and Illinois covers costs for fertility preservation, to freeze the eggs or sperm of people who need medical treatment that will likely make them infertile, such as for cancer. Several other states also are considering adding fertility preservation services.

In Delgado’s case, Medicaid covered the tests to diagnose her endometriosis, but nothing more. She was searching the internet for fertility treatment options when she came upon a clinic group called CNY Fertility that seemed significantly less expensive than other clinics, and also offered in-house financing. Based in Syracuse, New York, the company has a handful of clinics in upstate New York cities and four other U.S. locations.

Though Delgado and her partner had to travel more than 300 miles round trip to Albany for the procedures, the savings made it worthwhile. They were able do an entire IVF cycle, including medications, egg retrieval, genetic testing, and transferring the egg to her uterus, for $14,000. To pay for it, they took $7,000 of the cash they’d been saving to buy a home and financed the other half through the fertility clinic.

She got pregnant on the first try, and their daughter, Emiliana, is now almost a year old.

Delgado doesn’t resent people with more resources or better insurance coverage, but she wishes the system were more equitable.

“I have a medical problem,” she said. “It’s not like I did IVF because I wanted to choose the gender.”

One reason CNY is less expensive than other clinics is simply that the privately owned company chooses to charge less, said William Kiltz, its vice president of marketing and business development. Since the company’s beginning in 1997, it has become a large practice with a large volume of IVF cycles, which helps keep prices low.

At this point, more than half its clients come from out of state, and many earn significantly less than a typical patient at another clinic. Twenty percent earn less than $50,000, and “we treat a good number who are on Medicaid,” Kiltz said.

Now that their son, Joaquin, is settled in a good school, Delgado has started working for an agency that provides home health services. After putting in 30 hours a week for 90 days, she’ll be eligible for health insurance.

One of the benefits: fertility coverage.

(KFF Health News, formerly known as Kaiser Health News (KHN), is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs of KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling and journalism.)

©2024 KFF Health News. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Chicago Cubs and Cody Bellinger remain an ideal pairing — but can the two sides find common ground?

posted in: News | 0

The best fit for the Chicago Cubs remains available in free agency.

And yet the waiting game continues for outfielder Cody Bellinger and the Cubs. A reunion after a stellar one-year partnership in 2023 makes a lot of sense between the two sides.

Bellinger, 28, was a dynamic force in the middle of the Cubs lineup, giving them much-needed power from the left side they still haven’t adequately addressed even with the trade acquisition of top-50 prospect Michael Busch. For Bellinger, it would be a return to an environment and hitting infrastructure where he thrived in a bounce-back season that showed what he is still capable of when fully healthy.

President of baseball operations Jed Hoyer, though, has demonstrated over his three-plus years in this position that the Cubs will be principled in how they operate in free agency. Bellinger’s agent Scott Boras has also not been afraid to wait things out, even if it means his top players do not sign until spring training is underway. The Cubs ideally would like to have their roster in place by the time pitchers and catchers report to Mesa, Ariz., on Feb. 14. Given how much work still needs to be done with three weeks to go, that might not happen, especially if the Cubs are willing to wait and see how Bellinger’s free-agency courtship plays out.

“We don’t have any fixed deadline,” general manager Carter Hawkins said earlier this month. “I think in a perfect world you have your team going into spring training. I think a lot of these players that sign in March and into the season, there’s just a tough transition phase to get back up to speed when you’re behind the eight ball that way. It doesn’t mean that it can’t work, but just seems like it’s harder to work. That’s anecdotal of course.

“We wouldn’t rule it out. That’d be foolish for us to rule anything out. But, yeah, we’d much prefer to get our team sooner than later.”

If Bellinger’s Cubs teammates had any influence on whether the slugger returns, he garnered unanimous support for a reunion recently during the Cubs Convention.

Right-hander Kyle Hendricks credited Bellinger’s role in a collectively strong defense that took pressure off the pitching staff and what it would mean to have that type of dynamic player come back to Chicago, though the veteran also understands this is a business. Center fielder Pete Crow-Armstrong hopes Bellinger re-signs, regardless of the impact it would have on his playing time.

Left fielder Ian Happ applauded Bellinger for going through what has become a prolonged free-agent process and being in the tough part of negotiations at this point of the offseason, still not knowing where he will play in 2024 and beyond. Happ said part of why he agreed to a shorter three-year extension was so the front office could pursue bigger, longer-term free-agent deals in a win-now environment. Bellinger would certainly fit those parameters.

“If they want to move on from me in three years, that’s their prerogative and they can do it so I think they’re going to build the team in the best way that they see fit and as players, we trust Jed and Carter to do that and give us a chance to compete at the top of the division and into the playoffs,” Happ said.

Left-hander Justin Steele said it was hard to describe the impact Bellinger had last year but that the Cubs would have a sizable hole to replace if he doesn’t return.

“Everybody saw what he did on the field and it was obviously magnificent what he was able to do, but the teammate and the person behind the player is by far the best attribute he has,” Steele said. “The guy showed up in the locker room every day with a smile on his face, good vibes, everybody wants to show up and talk to him that day. So that for me, that’s something that goes such a long way, especially with young guys coming up.”

Bellinger’s defensive flexibility would be a coveted asset for manager Craig Counsell and the Cubs’ roster construction. Playing at an elite level in center field and first base did not go unappreciated by Dansby Swanson, particularly with how it can help with mixing and matching with the lineup, allowing a manager to “press a few different buttons that not maybe any other team could.”

Since signing with the Cubs last offseason, Swanson has been in regular communication with Hoyer and Hawkins, bouncing ideas off each other, communicating openly and being honest with the shortstop when moves might be happening. Swanson is confident that, Bellinger or no Bellinger, the front office isn’t done improving a roster that fell one game short of the postseason.

“At the end of the day, they have a plan, they know what they want,” Swanson said. “They know what they’re looking for. The market overall has been slow. I mean, other than, the billion dollars out west, there really hasn’t been a ton. … They know that we need to get better and we will get better and I think you’ve started to see that recently with some things starting to fall in place and I think that’s only going to continue to grow from there.”

()