If healthcare reform is in big trouble, why is the public option still popular? Check out this latest Research 2000 poll (for Daily Kos). Here's part of what the poll is reporting:
Do you favor or oppose creating a government-administered health insurance option that anyone can purchase to compete with private insurance plans? Favor Oppose Not Sure All 58 34 8
Dem 81 12 7 Rep 26 69 5 Ind 57 33 10
Northeast 69 22 9 South 47 46 7 Midwest 61 31 8 West 59 33 8 The public option remains popular, by a nearly 3-2 margin., Seems like people like the idea of competition in the insurance market, that would help lower premiums and keep currently unaccountable insurance companies honest. What's more, the public option is favored by over a quarter of self-identified Republicans, which is more "bipartisanship" than you'll ever see in DC. And if you look at the regional crosstabs, support for the public option would be even higher if it wasn't for the South, were birtherism and Obama derangement syndrome is at its highest.
And this is the same poll that saw our president's poll take a bit of a tumble. So much for the myth that Democrats are tanking because of "liberalism." The real reason is the lack of progress on healthcare reform and the reports about the possibility of some watered down version of the same getting passed without any real public option. And Markos has this warning if real healthcare reform doesn't get done while Democrats pass a watered-down version:
Opposing the public option is electoral poison in every region of the country except the South, while both Democrats and Independents are willing to punish opponents of the public option at the ballot box. Democrats have a national electoral mandate, they have public opinion on their side, they have dominant majorities in both chambers of Congress, and they have the White House. No wonder Independents and Democrats are abandoning the Democratic Party.
We hired Barack Obama and a Democratic Congress to get things done, especially on healthcare. We didn't hire them to kowtow with Republicans and other monied interests to jam down our throats a semblance of reform but not the real thing. We expect results, and anything else will result in severe electoral consquences in both 2010 and 2012.
We've seen three distinct pages of the Republican playbook in play when it comes to the actions of three Texas congressmen. One part of the playbook-- When caught in a lie and you still don't want to answer tough questions, end the meeting-- was executed excellently by the Houston-area congressman, Rep. Pete Olson from Tom DeLay's old congressional district, during his townhall last week. Here's part of what the Huffington Post reported:
Olson told the story of Britney, a pregnant woman who couldn't find a doctor who would treat her unborn child's heart defect. After being turned away by several, she hunted down a specialist in Detroit who was willing to perform the procedure. Britney is convinced that her son would not have been born if there was a public option then, and she wouldn't have had the choices to find the doctor that she wants. Over applause, a number of audience members audibly groan. "Oh Jesus Crist, that's terrible," says one attendee. "That's not true," says another. "For those of you who say it's not true, don't talk to me, talk to Britney," Olson responded. "The insurance company turned her down, not the government," an audience member says. "The private insurance turned her down, not the government." Others shout back that if there was government-run insurance, she would have been turned away. As the meeting devolves into shouting back-and-forth, Olson just says, "I want to thank you all for coming."
Just like a little coward. He got caught in his lie, so he abruptly, like a little boy, takes his bat and ball and goes home instead of deal with his sin and apologize for it. The problem is, Olson IS the government, and his district, as Republican as it may be, deserves far better from its representative than what he delivered in his townhall. Here's the video of Olson in action:
Another part of the playbook-- When confronted with a hard question, change the subject-- was executed by my area's Tom DeLay gerrymandering-imposed congressman, "Taliban Pete" Sessions, during his recent townhall in Irving. Cool Onion, in his excellent blog, "Sessions Watch," provides a riviting transcript of Sessions' encounter with a constituent:
Constituent: Thank you for giving us an opportunity to discuss this issue. Sessions: Yes, ma’am. Constituent: And Congressman, I respect the fact that you have a family member with special needs, and you would do anything you can to make sure that that person in your family is taken care of. I want to tell you my story about someone in my family who I care deeply about, who’s falling through the cracks of our current system and why I think having a public option is so important. Can I do that? Sessions: Yes, ma’am. Absolutely. That’s why you’ve been invited down… Constituent: Thirteen years ago, my husband was diagnosed with liver failure. He was told he needed a transplant to live. Nine months later, he received his transplant. Now, if my story stopped there and was only about health care it would be a wonderful story about how our country is admired around the world for the type of health care we receive. However, my story is not about our health care. My story is about health coverage, pre-existing conditions, and falling through the cracks in the system as it stands. My husband’s a semiconductor engineer, he made six figures a year, we were as middle class as anybody wants to be. And last Fall, when the economy collapsed, he lost his job. Now, we had the choice of staying on COBRA, and at the time, as you recall, at that time was $1500.00 a month for our family. Sessions: Yes, ma’am. Constituent: Okay. His insurance just for him, if I took myself and my two children off, was going to be over $600.00. The medicine to keep a liver transplant alive, without insurance, was going to cost me $700 a month. Now, unemployment was only $1500 a month, and we still had rent, and food, and utilities and everything else. Now, when the new administration came in and the stimulus package came through, we were able to get our—for nine months—insurance reduced. But at the end of those nine months, we’re back up to $1500 and our unemployment is gonna run out. There are no jobs to be had, especially jobs with insurance. The only people that are hiring now are hiring contract labor. Contract labor, they’re not required to insure; it’s a loophole in the business system. Now, without the medication, my husband is going to die. We’re already lost our home, we had to sell our car, I’ve had to cut as many expenses as I can possibly cut, in order to keep my husband alive. Alive. It isn’t a matter of—y’know, people are saying, “Well, why don’t you just go get Medicare.” He doesn’t qualify for Medicare. He’s healthy! He’s been post transplant for almost— Sessions: He’s probably not old enough— Constituent: — fifteen years — Sessions: —for Medicare. Constituent: He’s 54 years old. He’s not old enough. So we are in this black hole where, y’know, without the public option, all this bill does is say everybody has to be covered. If there’s no cost savings on anybody from the…for the insurer, there’s no incentive to make the insurance companies cover us at the same rate that anybody else gets, and all I’m asking for—I’m not asking anybody to take their insurance away from them. I’m just saying I am an American citizen, I deserve the same amount of insurance that anybody else gets… (applause) …we pay taxes… Sessions: Thank you, and I think you’ve spoken very well. Constituent: And I truly would like to know, why aren’t you on this? Please. Sessions: I’ll tell you why I’m not on the bill. I’m not on the bill because people need to speak to the President when he goes around the country and to say, “Mr. President, let’s not do a trillion six hundred billion dollar. Let’s aim where the problem is, and let’s help people and let’s go…(audio drowned out by applause)…this President…this President was told that in thirteen days, he spent more money than George Bush spent in two wars for seven years, Katrina and New York City with 9-11…(cheers and applause)…and…that a person who is gonna be President has to be responsible for the national debt that is taking place that is killing jobs in this country…(unintelligible exchange between Sessions and Constituent, drowned out by applause)…and this President needs to hear from you and others so that he goes back and does something about the problem, not over everybody in here and ruining Medicare. (Cheers and applause from audience). And I—I as a member of Congress am trying to say, I have—I have open town hall meetings. I initiated the meeting with Eddie Bernice Johnson. I openly will say to anybody, including the President, “Mr. President, listen to people, go do something about the problem, don’t try to take over a government run health care plan…(cheers and applause)…I have great empathy. I really do. It doesn’t take a lot for me to figure out, and I started my career working as a paperboy. I worked every day, never missed a day of work when I worked in the private sector and I’ve gotta work for a living now, too. And I know all but for probably five genes that any of us have that are wrong it could be us that would be there, too. I, too, understand that. I’m not a mean, cold-hearted person. But the American public is also kind and generous, but don’t pick on everybody. (applause) Go and find the problem. So I would say that a group of people who were here from all the organizations need to go back and do a huddle with the President, and the President is a great salesman. But he is getting his clock cleaned (wild cheers and applause obscure audio)…dialogue with the President. And I’m very open to having dialogue with anybody here. Please aim for the problem. I would love to have you say to the President, “Mr. President, what we’re trying to sell is not working.” It’s not! You just can’t argue that case. But you still have needs, and we still have a problem, and Sessions agrees with that. Let’s solve the problem. Thank you very much.
And again (for at least the third time in this blog), here's the video of Sessions in action:
And if all that wasn't enough, a third Texas congressman (and the second from the Houston area)-- executed the GOP playbook as perfectly as you can get it-- when confronted with a question you don't want to answer and the interviewer persists with it, don't answer the question still. Blame the media instead. Here's Rep. John Culberson in action as he is interviewed by MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell:
If you don't already know the Republican party's lack of concern toward average folks like me and complete lack of interest in passing real healthcare reform, all you have to do is watch all three of these video clips and you'll quickly get the picture.
Watch all the cherry picking that will be done by those in the media looking for trends against healthcare reform. On the heels of a SurveyUSA Poll indicating 77 percent support for the choice of a public option, a new ABC News/Washington Post poll shows an erosion of support for not only the public option, but President Obama himself and how poorly he and those around him have handled the battle for healthcare reform. Here's an exerpt from the Washington Post story on the ABC News/WaPo poll:
Disapproval of Obama's handling of the health-care issue reached 50 percent in the new poll, the highest of his presidency, and 42 percent of those surveyed say they now "strongly disapprove" of the way he is dealing with his main domestic priority. Views of the president's actions on reform have dropped most sharply among seniors and independents.
The story then goes to discuss its public option findings:
The poll was completed just as a new debate about a public health insurance option erupted after administration officials appeared to signal their willingness to jettison the proposal as part of an eventual compromise. White House officials later insisted that there had been no change in their support for the public option as they sought to reassure Democrats furious about what they regarded as an administration cave-in. In the survey, 52 percent of Americans said they favor the government's creation of a new health insurance plan to compete with private insurers, while 46 percent are opposed. That is a big shift from late June, when 62 percent backed the notion and 33 percent opposed it. The drop in support for the public option has been particularly steep among political independents, the closely watched group so critical to the Democratic takeover of Congress in 2006 and Obama's victory last year. Two months ago, independents supported the public option by a 2 to 1 ratio. Now, 50 percent are in favor, and 47 percent are opposed. Seniors have also become decidedly negative toward the proposal: In June, seniors were evenly split on the plan, but now a majority strongly oppose the idea.
There is one BIG problem with the ABC News/Washington Post poll: It fails to deal with the REASONS for the opposition to healthcare reform. It also fails to check into WHERE those surveyed got their health insurance reform information from. The latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal expanded on that, as Rachel Maddow so brilliantly reported earlier in the week:
And King One Eye in Daily Kos expanded on Maddow's report further:
new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll featured on the Rachel Maddow show included questions centered on the recent health care debate. What made this poll unique was that four of the questions sought to ascertain whether the respondents believed statements that were known to be untrue. Here are the results broken out by which news sources the respondents favored:
On Health Care Reform, Those Who Believe That It Will... MSNBC/CNN Viewers Fox News Viewers Give Coverage To Illegal Immigrants: 41% 72% Lead To A Government Takeover: 39% 79% Pay For Abortions: 40% 69% Stop Care To The Elderly: 30% 75%
Let me repeat: These are statements that are known to be untrue, yet Fox News viewers believe them in overwhelming numbers. It's bad enough that approximately 40% of MSNBC/CNN viewers believe these myths, but clearly Fox is producing an audience of vastly misinformed, cultural illiterates. The problem with having a national news organization that is polluting the population with lies about critical public issues is that it makes democracy impossible. And that, of course, may be the goal of Fox and its corporate overseers. Democracy is such a messy affair, what with all the people voting and stuff. If your objective is to manipulate government, you can't get very far if voters are actually familiar with the issues and are capable of making sound judgments. So Fox News found it necessary to invent a platform of fake agendas to create fear and then purposefully indoctrinate their predominantly Republican and southern viewers to believe in them.
It sure makes you wonder about the validity of the negative ABC News/Washington Post findings on the public option since that survey did not delve into what folks believed or didn't believe about the proposal. The ABC News/Washington Post poll also failed to take into account discontent with Obama because of his failure (and especially that of those around him) to enunciate a clear vision of what they wanted from the start and sticking to it. Notice also the timing of the ABC News/Washington Post poll-- it was taken when both Obama and his HHS secretary-- Kathleen Sebelius-- were giving signals that they were willing to ditch the public option if that's what it took to pass healthcare reform. That would make anyone, including me, wonder about the commitment of someone to stand by his principles and fight for them even if it meant costing them legislation or popularity points. Given also the findings of the NBC News/WSJ poll, it's a big mystery why the ABC News/Washington Post surveyers didn't ask their respondents what they believed about the president's healthcare reform proposal and how they'd feel once they were explained what the proposal really was. In the light of something I've heard Chuck Todd of NBC said, that once folks were explained what the Obama proposal really was (with the public option), 53 percent would support it, it's a mystery why the ABC/Washington Post poll didn't do the same. The corporatists opposing healthcare reform may be gleeful about the poll, but I wonder what they'll feel when their house of lies is fully exposed and the American people revolt against them because of how they've been misled. And when that reality hits, watch the flimsy house of lies crash before us.
Why are some in the White House so anxious to make a deal with a Republican party that has no interest in passing any real healthcare reform. That's what I'm wondering after seeing this Daily Kos diary quoting an Obama aide as backing away from pronouncements last night that Democrats in Congress were going to press for healthcare reform without Republican support. From the New York Times earlier today:
Given hardening Republican opposition to Congressional health care proposals, Democrats now say they see little chance of the minority’s cooperation in approving any overhaul, and are increasingly focused on drawing support for a final plan from within their own ranks. Top Democrats said Tuesday that their go-it-alone view was being shaped by what they saw as Republicans’ purposely strident tone against health care legislation during this month’s Congressional recess, as well as remarks by leading Republicans that current proposals were flawed beyond repair. Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, said the heated opposition was evidence that Republicans had made a political calculation to draw a line against any health care changes, the latest in a string of major administration proposals that Republicans have opposed. “The Republican leadership,” Mr. Emanuel said, “has made a strategic decision that defeating President Obama’s health care proposal is more important for their political goals than solving the health insurance problems that Americans face every day.”
Now here's what the Daily Kos diarist is reporting:
The Hill is reporting that this morning Robert Gibbs said the NY Times article about the Dems going it alone on health care is wrong. He actually gave credit to Republican members of the Senate Finance Committee for working in good faith on reform. I wish this administration would get its story straight. My head is spinning. Bottom line: we're going to have to fight harder than ever before to make this happen.
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said the administration remains committed to drawing Republican support for the bill, particularly in the Senate. "I don't know why we would short-circuit that now," Gibbs told reporters. He said the White House believes some Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee "are still working in a constructive way to get reform through the Senate and ultimately to the president's desk."
I hate to go comical on this, but these two seemingly contradictory stories are making me think there's a real Abbott and Costello game going on here with the question being "Who's on first?" when it comes to who is really speaking for the Obama administration on what is becoming an increasingly messy issue for them. I'd love to know which Republicans have really been working to get a real health insurance bill through Congress since one of them that had been cited by President Obama-- lying Sen. Chuck (pull the plug on Grandma) Grassley-- has been spreading lies and disinformation against the bill. I'd also like to know what sorts of behind the scenes negotiations are taking place between the White House and anti-healthcare reform Republicans to get a real bill past Congress and onto the president's desk. I can't say it enough. Healthcare reform isn't healthcare reform without a real public option.
Here's our president's weekly address in which he explains (again) his healthcare proposal:
What impressed me about this message is how our president speaks about what's really going on despite the news media's obscession with the right-wing hooligans whose only agenda is to prevent any real health care reform from happening: Here's part of what the president said:
Now, I know there’s been a lot of attention paid to some of the town hall meetings that are going on around the country, especially those where tempers have flared. You know how TV loves a ruckus. But what you haven’t seen – because it’s not as exciting – are the many constructive meetings going on all over the country where Americans are airing their hopes and concerns about this very important issue. I’ve been holding some of my own, and the stories I’ve heard have really underscored why I believe so strongly that health insurance reform is a challenge we can't ignore. They’re stories like Lori Hitchcock’s, who I met in New Hampshire this week. Lori’s got a pre-existing condition, so no insurance company will cover her. She’s self-employed, and in this economy, she can’t find a job that offers health care, so she’s been uninsured for two years. Or they’re stories like Katie Gibson’s, who I met in Montana. When Katie tried to change insurance companies, she was sure to list her pre-existing conditions on the application and even called her new company to confirm she’d be covered. Two months later, she was dropped – after she’d already gone off her other insurance. These are the stories that aren’t being told – stories of a health care system that works better for the insurance industry than it does for the American people. And that’s why we’re going to pass health insurance reform that finally holds the insurance companies accountable. But now’s the hard part. Because the history is clear – every time we come close to passing health insurance reform, the special interests with a stake in the status quo use their influence and political allies to scare and mislead the American people.
Notice the last part of this passage. Just as the news media seems incapable of reporting the straight facts about President Obama's popularity (which is still at 60 percent despite media claims of eroding support), it doesn't want folks to know that our president has respectfully and in a clear and to the point manner fielded even the most skeptical of questions about his proposal in BOTH the New Hampshire and Montana townhalls. It's time the news media stopped presenting fringe right-wing hooligans who'd rather obstruct and prevent any meaningful discussion of healthcare reform as representative of mainstream America and instead listen to folks like those highlight by our president both at his townhalls and in his latest weekly message.
For those bent on cherry picking only for the polls that reflect negatively on President Obama and Democrats in Congress, you will find no solace with this poll. According to the latest Research2000 poll posted in Daily Kos:
Given that the dominant story in the public conversation over the past week has been the health care townhall meetings, it is not completely unreasonable to suggest that the protest tactic employed by the opponents of reform (and at least tacitly cheered on by Congressional Republicans) has not had the desired effect of cratering Democratic numbers and resurrecting Republican ones. Quite the opposite, this weeks shows a continuation of two trends apparent over the last month: a slow but palpable recovery in support for Congressional Democrats, and the perpetuation of a long slide in support for Congressional Republicans.
The finding shows President Obama's popularity still steady at 60 percent while the Republican slide continues. The finding also confirms the latest Gallup finding I discussed that had our president's approval numbers at 63 percent. If anything, these numbers prove that the rabble rousers the Fox propaganda channel, Republicans, and their insurance companies represent only a fringe of American society and not the mainstream when it comes to healthcare reform or anyone else. It's time CNN and others stop legitimizing the right-wing goons and rabble rousers and expose them for what they are-- a fringe group that's clearly in the minority on healthcare reform despite the heavy dose of lies and disinformation they have unleashed against it.
Slinkerwink at Daily Kos wrote an excellent piece today on the further Republican efforts to scare folks against President Obama's health care proposal. It's well worth reading, and I'm glad people are catching up to the GOP ruses. When your congressman and senator shows up at any Town Hall meeting, stand up and be counted FOR real health insurance reform and make sure these GOP bullies are defeated and humiliated in the process.
I'm 57 years old, have pretty good health insurance, and have had two relatives die of cancer. In one of those cases, the relative was constantly checked by a hospice nurse who came and made sure he was comfortable and we were doing all right. In the other, the relative's cancer had spread so badly that there was nothing the doctors could do but be sure he was comfortable in the hours before he died. With that in mind, I'm angered and incensed by attempts by Republicans, their allied talk show hosts, and members of the religious right to deceive and scare folks against the health insurance reform proposal President Obama and Democrats in Congress are advancing. Putting it mildly, the attacks are dishonest, despicable, and should not have been given the dignity and credence a Washington Post reporter and others in the mainstream media have given them. Here's what the Washington Post is reporting about the Republican's latest scare tactics:
A campaign on conservative talk radio, fueled by President Obama's calls to control exorbitant medical bills, has sparked fear among senior citizens that the health-care bill moving through Congress will lead to end-of-life "rationing" and even "euthanasia." The controversy stems from a proposal to pay physicians who counsel elderly or terminally ill patients about what medical interventions they would prefer near the end of life and how to prepare instructions such as living wills. Under the plan, Medicare would reimburse doctors for one session every five years to confer with a patient about his or her wishes and how to ensure those preferences are followed. The counseling sessions would be voluntary.
The Washington Post piece also quoted right-wing nut case Randall Terry of Operation Rescue fame as calling the legislation an attempt to "kill Granny." If Terry, his Republican pals, and the Washington Post scribe thought I'd be gullible to such poppycock, they are badly mistaken, to put it mildly. The descriptions being presented by right-wing talk radio hosts as reported by the Post AREN'T euthanasia or even end-of-life rationing. At best, they are insults to families of those who have been confronted with what to do when a loved one has to deal with a terminal condition such as cancer or even ALS (better known as Lou Gehrig's disease). What's being talked about here is NOT what the misleaders on the right are projecting. It's what's known as "hospice." Here's a definition of what hospice care is:
Care designed to give supportive care to people in the final phase of a terminal illness and focus on comfort and quality of life, rather than cure. The goal is to enable patients to be comfortable and free of pain, so that they live each day as fully as possible. Aggressive methods of pain control may be used. Hospice programs generally are home-based, but they sometimes provide services away from home -- in freestanding facilities, in nursing homes, or within hospitals. The philosophy of hospice is to provide support for the patient's emotional, social, and spiritual needs as well as medical symptoms as part of treating the whole person. Hospice programs generally use a multidisciplinary team approach, including the services of a nurse, doctor, social worker and clergy in providing care. Additional services provided include drugs to control pain and manage other symptoms; physical, occupational, and speech therapy; medical supplies and equipment; medical social services; dietary and other counseling; continuous home care at times of crisis; and bereavement services. Although hospice care does not aim for cure of the terminal illness, it does treat potentially curable conditions such as pneumonia and bladder infections, with brief hospital stays if necessary. Hospice programs also offer respite care workers, people who are usually trained volunteers, who take over the patient's care so that the family or other primary caregivers can leave the house for a few hours. Volunteer care is part of hospice philosophy. The word "hospice" comes from the Latin "hospitium" meaning guesthouse. It was originally described a place of shelter for weary and sick travelers returning from religious pilgrimages. During the 1960's, Dr. Cicely Saunders began the modern hospice movement by establishing St. Christopher's Hospice near London. St. Christopher's organized a team approach to professional caregiving, and was the first program to use modern pain management techniques to compassionately care for the dying. The first hospice in the United States was established in New Haven, Connecticut in 1974. Today more than 3,000 hospice programs across the country offer comprehensive hospice care. Most insurance plans in the US include hospice as a covered benefit.
This is not anywhere close to what the Republicans and their allies are claiming about the sort of thing being advanced in this legislation. Furthermore, they are insults to folks like me who had relatives and even a co-worker go through some sort of hospice care before death. Instead of giving these scare tactics credibility, those in the media should understand that what's being referred to is NOT euthanasia or "granny killing." It's called "hospice," and it's been most valuable to those like myself who have seen the help such services have provided for patients and their families in guiding them through the crisis of impending losses of loved ones. I'm having no part of these lying Republican scare tactics, and those who give them any legitimacy should be boycotted.
Let's see the Republicans spin their way through this survey. Contrary to the drivel peddled by Republicans and their news media agents, President Obama is doing quite well in maintaining a high popularity rating. Now that the GOP has a healthcare solution that sounds more like a pitch for snake oil than real reform, I wonder when the American people will see through the smoke generated by Republicans and their insurance company donors and press Congress to pass strong legislation with a robust public option.
I have never seen a politician get played as bad as Sen. Max Baucu$ (D-Montana) was by Republicans in his bid for so-called "bi-partisan" health care legislation. It reminded me of the Ralph Cramden character on the old "Honeymooners" TV series in which he was constantly played by schemers and then gets forced into buyer's remorse afterwards. For more, check out this.
I couldn't have said things better than President Obama did in discussing health care during today's press conference. A lot of things the president said have been said before, but they are well worth repeating. I liked how the president spoke about the concerns some have about how to finance what he is proposing, and I really liked how he framed the do-nothing Republican approach. I would have liked to have seen some more individual examples of how the current system has screwed ordinary folks like me, but overall, he was excellent. In case you missed it, here is the Obama press conference on tape:
Cross-posted at Daily Kos The so-called "Blue Dog" Democrats have become totally and completely despicable. How could these guys ever throw a party over their seemingly efforts to stall meaningful health insurance legislation in the face of some sobering news that came from a Gallup poll? Here's what the Gallup organization found:
A survey of more than 29,000 individuals in June by Gallup shows that 16 percent of Americans over the age of 18 are currently without health insurance. That number reflects what the survey's authors describe as a "small but measurable uptick in the percentage of uninsured adults." Indeed, the average number of uninsured adults recorded by Gallup in 2008 was 14.8 percent. In September 2008, the monthly total recorded was at a yearly low of 13.9 percent.
That is very, very troubling. And it should be troubling for anyone even thinking of opposing President Obama's health insurance legislation that includes a strong public option. And what do the "Blue Dog" Democrats in name only really think about serving American interests over those of private insurers. Check out this passage from the Huffington Post:
The House Committee on Energy and Commerce was supposed to be the third leg supporting health care reform legislation already approved by two other House committees. Instead, this week it's become more of a fifth wheel. The committee's markup sessions for Tuesday and Wednesday have been canceled in the face of opposition to the bill from the panel's conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats. So Monday's markup may have lasted past midnight, but on Tuesday evening the committee's Blue Dogs were free to party, and party they did! Reps. Mike Ross (D-Ark.) and Jim Matheson (D-Utah) feted fellow Blue Dog Rep. John Barrow (D-Ga.) at Ruth's Chris Steakhouse in Northwest Washington from 6 to 7:30 p.m. Ross is the lead Blue Dog on health care reform.
If you needed any more evidence that these Blue Dogs don't give a rat's a-- about folks like me, how do they even justify their partying over their stalling of health insurance legislation? These Blue Dogs may feel well at home dealing with Republicans and their health insurance company allies, but when it comes to serving folks like me, they didn't even come close. In fact, their conduct strikes me as sheer gutter. It's time we stopped playing nice with these Blue Dogs and contest them in every way possible. Partying while Americans suffer without decent health care is as tasteless and boorish as it gets, and these Blue Dog boors must be so badly shamed that they are actually forced to allow the passage of meaningful health insurance legislation WITH a meaningful public option.
I just ran into this interesting post on Daily Kos. Here's part of it:
One of the biggest, most profitable and unnecessary component in the current system is a highly profitable middle man, the health insurance industry. This industry IS NOT needed and is the single biggest cause of skyrocketing costs and immoral denials of coverage. The billions save annually, along with other proposals, would likely be enough to provide basic coverage for all Americans.
I don't know if anyone wants to complete the private insurers, but this statement brings out one BIG point-- there are ALREADY bureaucrats making decisions about what healthcare we get, and these bureaucrats aren't government ones. They are from insurance companies, and these are the folks empowered to deny coverage because of pre-existing conditions or some other undefined as emphasized in a company's power to deny coverage under the classy name of "recissions." I sure hope the rest of the media is more thorough in discrediting the lies and other manipulations of Republicans and their big business allies as this health care debate moves forward.
I sometimes wonder whether Republicans realize that we exist. I wonder whether Republicans really believe that folks like us with not the greatest of means have needs that need to be addressed. After watching how Republicans are fighting so hard to see that any efforts to achieve meaningful health insurance are defeated, one must wonder whether this party cares about us at all. This is a part that barks so loud about being pro-life, but while they fight so hard for folks before they are born, they wind up throwing these same folks down the tubes through their callous and heartless opposition to meaningful health insurance legislation and efforts to make working conditions better for average folks like me. This is also the same party that cries tons about deficit spending while failing to admit their roles in railroading the budget-busting Bush tax cuts for the richest 1 percent down our throats. These are heartless hypocrites, and it's time that those who cover them in the media stop giving them velvet glove treatment and confront them with the issues that matter most to folks like me.
It's a crime that 47 million folks in the United States have no health insurance. Republicans in Congress and their Democratic allies can throw canard and canard at how expensive a national health insurance endeavor can be, but if these folks could spend even a little time at the emergency room of the taxpayer-supported Parkland Hospital in Dallas, they may think twice about the current system they seem to want to preserve. If they were to go to that hospital, they may see folks who are forced to wait as long as five hours (if not more) for treatment. And if the emergency room closes down for even a few hours with folks still waiting for care, those folks are forced to find a nearby non-taxpayer-supported hospital to wait even more hours just to see if they're going to get the care they need. Many of those folks don't have any kind of health insurance, and when they can't pay the bill for their treatment at Parkland, taxpayers like myself have to share the load. So much for taxpayers not having to support the current health care system. No wonder Republicans and their "Blue Dog" Democratic allies fail to mention this when they try to con the American people into thinking that the current system is fine while that proposed by President Obama will cost tons while bringing untold hardships to patients. I heard one Republican congressman throw a chart during one speech in which he decried the Obama proposal, saying that it would "bureaucrats" in the middle between patients and their doctors. What the congressman didn't mention is that there are already bureaucrats making decisions between patients and their doctors-- namely representatives of for-profit insurance companies with the power to deny coverage of patients either because of pre-existing conditions or simply because the insurance company doesn't want to cover it even in the face of medical necessity (that's the power of "recission" that we've been hearing about a lot). Contrary to the misinformation Republicans, their Democratic allies, and their mouthpieces in the mainstream media, the Obama proposal DOESN'T impose an overbearing public plan down our throats, nor does it put bureaucrats between patients and their doctors. Instead, the Obama plan emphasizes some simple principles-- if you like your current health insurance plan and your current doctor, you can keep it. The only difference is with the Obama plan, you will wind up paying less in premiums in part because of competition from a public plan that will keep private insurers honest. And if you don't like your plan, you will be given a choice of other plans, including a public one. This is not socialized medicine, and this is not a plan that puts bureaucrats in betwen patients and their doctors. It's time the false and misleading campaign being waged by Republcans and their allies in the media and elsewhere come to an end. It's time they stopped throwing up smokescreens about how much the Obama plan could cost and face the reality of how much we, as taxpayers, are already paying because of the millions of Americans still uninsured. Congressional footdragging must end and real healthcare reform with a robust public option must pass. It's that simple.
Texas ActBlue on the Move
-
Great news from the ActBlue team.
Well done!!! Now that we've crossed $5k in funds for our work in Texas
we're full speed ahead.
Will keep you up to date...
