TX-32: What Part of Support for Healthcare Reform Doesn't "Taliban Pete" Understand?

When I saw this poll, I was reminded of the fallacy my area's Taliban congressman, Pete Sessions (R-TX-32), and others in his party continue to peddle-- that healthcare reform is not popular with the American people.
Not only is Sessions wrong when he claims that healthcare reform has been "rejected" by the American people, this latest poll, along with a recent CBS News/New York Times survey, show support for reform with a robust public option continues to be strong.
To review, here's what Sessions said in response to President Obama's address on healthcare reform:

“Tonight, President Obama launched another prime time sales pitch for a government-run health care product that the American people have already undeniably rejected."

Actually, contrary to Sessions' claim, healthcare reform support has INCREASED since the summer of screaming, lies, and distortions coming from the Republican party and its allies in the media (most notably right-wing talk radio and the fraud of a "news" channel called Fox), according to a Huffington Post article.
Here's part of what the Huffington Post reported:

The anti-reform town hall anger that dominated the health care reform debate appears to have ebbed. Support for health care reform increased in September after falling over the summer, according to a new poll from the Kaiser Family Foundation.
Fifty-seven percent of Americans now believe that tackling health care reform is more important than ever -- up from 53 percent in August. The proportion of Americans who think their families would be better off if health reform passes is up six percentage points (42% versus 36% in August), and the percentage who think that the country would be better off is up eight points (to 53% from 45% in August).

So what part of this don't anti-reform politicians like Sessions understand? Have these guys become so blinded by their own lies that they can't even acknowledge that they have been proven to be wrong?
Yes, Democratic politicians like Max Baucus, Blanche Lincoln, and Kent Conrad must be held accountable for their demonstrated preference for protecting insurance company profits and discretion at the expense of the public interest, but the same must be said for others who have made a living of fanning the lies of insurance company opponents of real healthcare reform.
That list, sadly, includes my area's Taliban congressman, Pete Sessions, and the sooner this nutjob is retired from his current position by voters, the better we all will be.
I hope folks in my district will see a strong opponent rise up to confront Sessions with his "public be damned" attitude when it comes to healthcare reform and a host of other issues.

TX-Sen, TX-32: Hutchison, Sessions: Out Of Touch and Wrong On Healthcare Reform

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison is the latest Texas Republican who has demonstrated how out of touch she and the rest of her party are when it comes to support for real healthcare reform with a robust public option.
To review, the latest CBS News/New York Times poll shows that 65 percent of the American people support a real public option as part of healthcare reform (including a plurality of REPUBLICANS). That fact seems to have been lost on Hutchison, who's trying to demonstrate her right-wing credentials as part of her campaign for governor in next year's Republican primary against incumbent Rick Perry.
Here's part of the senator's statement that appears on Hutchison's campaign web site:

"I received nearly 1.25 million petitions from Americans including 165,000 Texans who object to a government take over of health care. The President needs to stop and listen. People are sending a powerful message: we want choice, access, and affordability. I hoped that President Obama would have heeded the people’s wishes and announced in his speech that he was willing to wipe the slate clean and abandon the public option. But instead of new ideas the President is repackaging the same bad policies and continuing to promote a government takeover of health care. President Obama’s proposal will increase the size of our government and shrink patients’ choices. It will still drive up taxpayers’ costs and deteriorate our nation’s quality of care. President Obama’s government run health care plan needs to be thrown in the shredder!"

The repeated claim that what President Obama has proposed is "government-run health care" is an outright lie that has been rejected by the American people in poll after poll (with the current CBS News/New York Times survey being the latest). The real question is this: Why are the for-profit insurance companies that have been pushing this canard are so afraid of competition from a not-for-profit government-run entity that will be supported by users' premiums, not taxpayer dollars.
In Texas, public options in post-secondary education (like the University of Texas and Texas A&M systems) sure haven't prevented private institutions like SMU and Rice from providing attractive alternatives that have helped them garner a good number of students.
In the world of package deliveries, the presence of the government-run U.S. Postal Service hasn't prevented two private companies, FedEx and UPS, from gaining large shares of the market with attractive and customer-friendly products that have enabled both to be able to deliver millions of packages daily across the United States and around the world.
If these private education institutions and package delivery companies can do well against public entities, why can't private insurance companies if they offered consumer-friendly and cost-efficient products that don't deny care because of pre-existing conditions or because an insured party gets sick or injured?
Besides being proved totally false when it comes to her claims of public opposition to healthcare reform and what it is (and isn't), Hutchison, like the rest of the Republican gang, is also out of touch when it comes to the facts about the cost of legislation that DOES include a public option.
Reports Congress Daily on House legislation that does include the public option, quoting the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office:

In a bid to wrangle concessions from the Blue Dog Coalition on healthcare reform, House leaders Thursday released CBO estimates for liberals' preferred version of the public option that show $85 billion more in savings than for the version the Blue Dogs prefer.

What part of this statement doesn't Kay Bailey Hutchison understand?
Hutchison may think the teabagging town-hall rabble rousers who tried to disrupt meetings about the issue constitute a majority of the American people, but if this latest CBS News/New York Times survey serves as any indication, Hutchison and fellow Texas Republicans like Rep. Pete Sessions (TX-32) are the ones who are out of touch with the American people and even members of their own party.
Here's Sessions commenting on President Obama's recent healthcare reform speech to Congress:

“Tonight, President Obama launched another prime time sales pitch for a government-run health care product that the American people have already undeniably rejected."

If this is the best job Hutchison and Sessions (who, I am ashamed to say, represents my congressional district) can do in interpreting the will of the American people, they should seek other employment fast. They, and the rest of the Republican cabal, are the ones who are out of touch and are trying to keep in place a system that has failed the American people badly and has denied needed care to those who needed it the most.

TX-32: Sessions Defends Extreme Teabagger Rhetoric

Excuse me if I get a bit emotional, but I couldn't be more ashamed that Pete Sessions represents my congressional district (TX-32) than I am now.
It's bad enough that Sessions dishonestly claims that healthcare reform has been rejected by the American people when in fact poll after poll shows the completely opposite conclusion. It's also bad enough that Sessions has opposed anything that represents real progressive change in this country, including the Employee Free Choice Act.
Now Sessions has, in effect, allied with those who have toted guns during presidential events and have made hints of violence in placards seen during last week's teabagger protests.
Folks have a right to express their opinions, including those that strongly disagree with President Obama's policies and those of the Democratic leadership. But when my area's representative who also happens to be one of the main House Republicans made the statements that he did, it requires more than just mere comment. It requires that strong action be made to assure his defeat next year.
Sessions made the comments in response to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's stated concerns about the extreme and sometimes violent rhetoric that has been heard across the nation during the past month or so if not beyond.
Here is what Pelosi said and the question that triggered the speaker's response:

Q: Madam Speaker, in terms of the political tone, the tone of the debate, Hoyer said earlier this week he thought it was the most vitriolic since '93-'94. And around that time we also saw acts of domestic violence, domestic terrorism. How concerned are you about the tone of the political debate, in terms of people talking about anti-government rhetoric and so on and the possibility of violence?
Speaker Pelosi: Well, I think we all have to take responsibility for our actions and our words. We are a free country, and this balance between freedom and safety is one that we have to carefully balance.
I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw this, myself, in the late '70s in San Francisco (when then-Mayor George Moscone and County Supervisor Harvey Milk were assassinated). This kind of rhetoric was very frightening, and it created a climate in which violence took place.
So I wish that we would all, again, curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made, so that understanding that some of the people -- the ears that it is falling on are not as balanced as the person making the statement might assume.
But, again, our country is great because people can say what they think and they believe. But I also think that they have to take responsibility for any incitement that they may cause.

As one who was horrified when a junior high school teacher interupted a nutrition period with his announcement of President Kennedy's assassination in 1963 and was equally in shock when the killings of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy in 1968 were announced, I understand what Pelosi meant and the need that now exists to tone down the rhetoric so reasoned debate can prevail and all viewpoints can be heard.
But even after some folks were seen with weapons at presidential events and some placards seen at teabagger protests hinted at violence, Sessions seemed to turn a deaf ear to that. Instead, he irresponsibly blamed Pelosi for expressing her concerns.
Here's what Sessions said:

"The Speaker is now likening genuine opposition to assassination. Such insulting rhetoric not only undermines the credibility of her office, but it underscores the desperate attempt by her party to divert attention away from a failing agenda," Sessions said in a statement. "During one of the most important policy debates of our time, the American people have been completely abandoned by those elected representatives under her control. Voters are justifiably frustrated with Washington, and the Speaker's verbal assault on voters accomplishes nothing other than furthering her reputation for being wildly out of touch with the American people."

It's bad enough that Sessions showed his fact-deafness toward public sentiment on healthcare reform, as witnessed by recent polls showing SUPPORT of real reform that includes a robust public option, but when he misstates what Pelosi said and even defends those who have displayed placards such as the ones alluding to violence against our leaders, it calls into serious question whether he is truly fit to represent my district in anything, even dog catcher.
I was grieved enough after both Kennedys and Dr. King were killed, and I was also saddened when Moscone and Milk were killed. Sessions' statements justifying the actions of those protesting President Obama (including those hinting of gun violence) are totally unworthy of the office he was elected to in my district.
Putting it mildly, Pete Sessions doesn't speak for me, and I hope that more than just rhetoric is used to condemn him. It's time to hit him hard where it can really hurt, by helping to fund a strong opponent who can really take the fight to him next year.
Pete Sessions may think that we'll forget the despicable things he said when election time comes next year, but this latest comment is too much for me and I suspect many others to take. Putting it mildly, this scumbag must be retired from office with a resounding election defeat in November of 2010.
NOTE: MSNBC's Rachel Maddow had an excellent report on what Pelosi said and Sessions' irresponsible response during her Thursday newscast. In case you missed it, here's the story:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

TX-32: "Taliban Pete" Moves Townhall To Ranchview High

O.K. folks, there are two days away from the "Taliban Pete" Sessions (TX-32) townhall now scheduled to start at 7 p.m. Wednesday at Ranchview High School, 8401 Valley Ranch Parkway, Irving, TX 75063 (it's been moved from Irving City Hall to accommodated a larger expected crowd).
There is already a template for making things rather uncomfortable for Pete as he defends his position in opposing any real healthcare reform.
Remember Lawrence O'Donnell's brilliant interview of another Texas Republican congressman on "Hardball" last Friday? In case you haven't seen it, here it is:

Is "Taliban Pete" also opposed to two already-established government-run health care programs-- the Veterans Administration (for veterans) and Medicare (for seniors) since he thinks that a "public option" will lead to a government takeover of health care?
As for the oft-propagated myth "Taliban Pete" continues to peddle about a public option leading to a government takeover of the health industry, he leaves out the fact that a "public option" (the U.S. Postal Service) sure hasn't taken UPS or FedEx out of the package delivery business.
Both FedEx and UPS (private entities) have garnered massive chunks of the national and international package delivery market even with competition from a public option.
If a "public option" can work so well in the world of package deliveries, why can't it work when it comes to providing top-rate and affordable healthcare without leaving people out.
I suspect that's something neither "Taliban Pete" nor his Republican and insurance company friends contemplated when they began to irresponsibly oppose any kind of real healthcare reform that includes a public option.
I hope someone at Ranchview High really presses "Taliban Pete" on this and see how he tries to evade the issue the way another Texas Republican tried and failed to do so on "Hardball" last week.

TX-32: Imagine if we had someone like Maxine Waters (D-Calif) representing us instead of Pete Sessions

I remember when my wife and I first came to Irving, our area's congresswoman was Eddie Bernice Johnson. Now, after Tom DeLay's morally irresponsible gerrymandering of some years back, we have been subjected to the public-be-damned, let them eat cake representation of Pete Sessions (R-TX-32).
I wish we had representation like we had when Johnson represented us. Clearly, Pete Sessions doesn't speak for either me or my wife.
Here's the type of congress representative we need, not some out-of-touch Republican, but a representative who truly represents us.
Imagine if we had a representative like Maxine Waters representing us instead of this nitwit Sessions. I dare say things would be happier in our district.
Well, she's in California, and we're stuck here with Sessions...unless someone comes forward fast to challenge him. And I pray and hope someone challenges him seriously and forces him to explain his morally bankrupt positions on things like health care.

TX-32: My Area's Congressman Makes Things Up About Healthcare Plan

My area's congressman, Pete Sessions (TX-32) lives in an alternative universe from residents like myself who live in his district and struggle to make a living.
Instead of facing reality and supporting President Obama's realistic health care proposal, Sessions has chosen to support the current bankrupt system that keeps folks uninsured by announcing his opposition to the plans.
In doing so, he stuck to a script of well-rehearsed lies inventing things about the president's proposal that really aren't.
Here's what :Sessions is claiming on his taxpayer-supported web site:

"Yet the Majority has produced a job-killing, government-mandated health care plan financed on the backs of every American family, senior citizen, small business and employer. With a price tag of over $1 Trillion dollars, the Democrats’ plan would cut Medicare options for seniors and raise taxes on any employer or individual who does not embrace a government-run health care program. The result: an additional 4.7 million Americans could lose their jobs.
“More than 100 million Americans will lose their current private health insurance under a government-run health care system. Unsurprisingly, when the government competes with the private sector, patients lose and the government wins. By diminishing patient-choice, government-run health care empowers Washington to decide the access and care patients receive from their doctors.
“This is not change that Americans families and small businesses can afford.

It's clear with no real arguments to present against the president's proposal, Sessions is forced to resort to making things up to justify his morally and financially irresponsible position.
So much for Sessions being a conservative. When it comes to protecting insurance company's rights to deny coverage of pre-existing conditions and ending the practice of insurance companies denying care using the power of "recission," Sessions is as ultra-liberal as they get.
What is the reality about the legislation that Sessions is against? Here's some facts
one House committee came up with:

America’s Affordable Health Choices Act would provide significant benefits in the 32nd Congressional District of Texas: up to 15,500 small businesses could receive tax credits to provide coverage to their employees; 7,300 seniors would avoid the donut hole in Medicare Part D; 700 families could escape bankruptcy each year due to unaffordable health care costs; health care providers would receive payment for $159 million in uncompensated care each year; and 140,000 uninsured individuals would gain access to high-quality, affordable health insurance.
• Help for small businesses. Under the legislation, small businesses with 25 employees or less and average wages of less than $40,000 qualify for tax credits of up to 50% of the costs of providing health insurance. There are up to 15,500 small businesses in the district that could qualify for these credits.
• Help for seniors with drug costs in the Part D donut hole. Each year, 7,300 seniors in the district hit the donut hole and are forced to pay their full drug costs, despite having Part D drug coverage. The legislation would provide them with immediate relief, cutting brand name drug costs in the donut hole by 50%, and ultimately eliminate the donut hole.
• Health care and financial security. There were 700 health care-related bankruptcies in the district in 2008, caused primarily by the health care costs not covered by insurance. The bill provides health insurance for almost every American and caps annual out-of-pocket costs at $10,000 per year, ensuring that no citizen will have to face financial ruin because of high health care costs.
• Relieving the burden of uncompensated care for hospitals and health care providers. In 2008, health care providers in the district provided $159 million worth of uncompensated care, care that was provided to individuals who lacked insurance coverage and were unable to pay their bills. Under the legislation, these costs of uncompensated care would be virtually eliminated.
• Coverage of the uninsured. There are 160,000 uninsured individuals in the district, 24% of the district. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that nationwide, 97% of all Americans will have insurance coverage when the bill takes effect. If this benchmark is reached in the district, 140,000 people who currently do not have health insurance will receive coverage.
• No deficit spending. The cost of health care reform under the legislation is fully paid for: half through making the Medicare and Medicaid program more efficient and half through a surtax on the income of the wealthiest individuals. This surtax would affect only 10,320 households in the district. The surtax would not affect 96.3% of taxpayers in the district.

At least where I live, the proposal isn't even close to what Sessions described with the effects that Sessions claimed. In fact, this report raises serious questions (as if they didn't exist already) about whether Sessions is in turn with not only the needs of his district but the facts.
Instead of making things up and inventing facts to suit his reality, Sessions should apologize to folks like me in his district who he has dishonestly represented ever since Tom DeLay gerrymandered my area into his district.
Pete Sessions is a disgrace to this area and state and I pray a strong reality-based opponent can be found who can send this scumbag down to a well-deserved defeat next year.

Is There Hope For Folks Like Me Who Want To Unseat "Taliban Pete"?

Will "Taliban Pete" Sessions finally meet his match next year? Read this item.