We lost one of the good guys today, very sadly. John Murtha (D-PA) was a man who grew up with pretty mainstream blue-collar roots, but he emerged as a champion of the litte guy. He opposed the war in Iraq outspokenly, and with some authority since he had served in the military himself.
He was plagued with ethical scandals, but never found guilty of any wrongdoing.
Indeed, in the end, he was one of the most powerful members of the House of Representatives. And he was a genuine, regular, nice guy. He will be greatly missed. Jennifer
Monday, February 8, 2010
February 25 Summit
Can President Obama break the health insurance logjam? We are about to find out. He will hold a summit on health reform on February 25. It will be televised and bipartisan, but it will start with the proposals on the table, that passed the House and the Senate, so the Republicans area already grumbling because it won't start from scratch.
Is he being naive in thinking a discussion with Republicans can be productive, or will he be hailed as the greatest deal maker in history? We have to wait and see. Jennifer
Is he being naive in thinking a discussion with Republicans can be productive, or will he be hailed as the greatest deal maker in history? We have to wait and see. Jennifer
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
It Can't be Said Any Better
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Keeping Health Insurance Reform on the Front Burner
Today, for the first time in a year or so, there is not one single item on Huffington Post about health insurance reform. If you read the papers closely and carefully, there are short items saying that leadership hasn't given up and they're trying to come up with a strategy. It's really not that hard, folks. Where there's a will, there's a way.
And so the issue is the lack of a will to get it done. Members of Congress worked VERY hard to get only a few days away from passage. The special election in Massachusetts was read as a sign that the public doesn't want reform. I don't believe that's at all true.
First, Massachusetts already has universal health care. So the fact that they don't feel the need as desperately as the rest of us is predictable and meaningless. Indeed, Scott Brown (the Republican winner) voted FOR universal health care in the State Senate. Doesn't sound like an anti-health insurance reform guy to me -- or at least he wasn't against reform when it counted to his constituents.
Second, while there is no question that Americans are afraid because of the jobs that have disappeared from the economy, plenty of that fear has to do with how the jobless are going to pay for health care. I get enough calls every single day from people without two nickles to rub together to prove that this is true.
Indeed, we are given false choices -- do we want Congress to focus on jobs or health care? Both, Dufus. Indeed, electronic health records creates jobs. Increasing incentives for chronic care management creates jobs. The health care sector has continued to grow even as the rest of the economy has tanked. It's not either/or. It's both and they're linked.
Third, I'd like to find ONE person who doesn't have health insurance and who has a pre-existing condition who doesn't think health care is an absolutely top priority. I don't believe there's a single one. The naysayers inside and outside of Washington are insured and/or healthy. They just don't get it.
But most of all, the lies are just outstanding. A government take-over of health care. That's all the anti-reformers had to say, over and over and over. It didn't matter that it wasn't true. Nothing much mattered as long as enough people recited that phrase. After the public option -- which was just that, an option -- died, there was not even the smallest kernel of truth to this "government take-over of health care" mantra. But apparently, truth isn't what matters most; fear matters even more.
I don't know how we're going to get this to the finish line. But I know that, if we don't, premiums will continue to increase, insurers will continue to deny coverage of medically necessary and appropriate treatment, people will continue to lose their insurance because of pre-existing conditions or their claims history or some bogus claim that they lied on their application -- the status quo will thrive. And we as a society simply can't afford that.
I read an article this morning about how our national debt is weakening our standing in the world. Part of that is that we have done NOTHING to rein in the cost of health care, like the rest of the world has done. Part of our debt is attributable to the outrageous cost of health care and health insurance. We cannot continue to outspend the rest of the world on health care, while not getting better health outcomes, if we are to remain competitive in the world.
I don't know how anybody can really dispute any of this. And really, I don't hear much of an argument. I just hear the word "no." The American people need to rise up and say YES to health insurance reform. Jennifer
And so the issue is the lack of a will to get it done. Members of Congress worked VERY hard to get only a few days away from passage. The special election in Massachusetts was read as a sign that the public doesn't want reform. I don't believe that's at all true.
First, Massachusetts already has universal health care. So the fact that they don't feel the need as desperately as the rest of us is predictable and meaningless. Indeed, Scott Brown (the Republican winner) voted FOR universal health care in the State Senate. Doesn't sound like an anti-health insurance reform guy to me -- or at least he wasn't against reform when it counted to his constituents.
Second, while there is no question that Americans are afraid because of the jobs that have disappeared from the economy, plenty of that fear has to do with how the jobless are going to pay for health care. I get enough calls every single day from people without two nickles to rub together to prove that this is true.
Indeed, we are given false choices -- do we want Congress to focus on jobs or health care? Both, Dufus. Indeed, electronic health records creates jobs. Increasing incentives for chronic care management creates jobs. The health care sector has continued to grow even as the rest of the economy has tanked. It's not either/or. It's both and they're linked.
Third, I'd like to find ONE person who doesn't have health insurance and who has a pre-existing condition who doesn't think health care is an absolutely top priority. I don't believe there's a single one. The naysayers inside and outside of Washington are insured and/or healthy. They just don't get it.
But most of all, the lies are just outstanding. A government take-over of health care. That's all the anti-reformers had to say, over and over and over. It didn't matter that it wasn't true. Nothing much mattered as long as enough people recited that phrase. After the public option -- which was just that, an option -- died, there was not even the smallest kernel of truth to this "government take-over of health care" mantra. But apparently, truth isn't what matters most; fear matters even more.
I don't know how we're going to get this to the finish line. But I know that, if we don't, premiums will continue to increase, insurers will continue to deny coverage of medically necessary and appropriate treatment, people will continue to lose their insurance because of pre-existing conditions or their claims history or some bogus claim that they lied on their application -- the status quo will thrive. And we as a society simply can't afford that.
I read an article this morning about how our national debt is weakening our standing in the world. Part of that is that we have done NOTHING to rein in the cost of health care, like the rest of the world has done. Part of our debt is attributable to the outrageous cost of health care and health insurance. We cannot continue to outspend the rest of the world on health care, while not getting better health outcomes, if we are to remain competitive in the world.
I don't know how anybody can really dispute any of this. And really, I don't hear much of an argument. I just hear the word "no." The American people need to rise up and say YES to health insurance reform. Jennifer
Friday, January 29, 2010
Democracy In Action
I just finished watching much of President Obama's session with Republican members of the House of Representatives at their retreat in Baltimore. It was truly remarkable -- it was televised live on television (although FOX news apparently decided to cut away before it was over), and the President fielded GOP questions with a deft and deep knowledge that was truly remarkable. He left no doubt -- he has read the Republican proposals. He has considered their ideas. He has incorporated some of them into his proposals. He could not possibly have taken them and their questions any more seriously. Indeed, he spent more than 20 minutes after the session ended (already 15 minutes late) shaking hands, signing autographs, posing for photographs -- amazing.
What the President said over and over is that the Republicans have to work with him. They can't just oppose everything he proposes because it was his idea. In other words, he really confronted my claim in my post about the State of the Union address that he was naive about bipartisanship. He made it clear that he's not naive, that it's something he strives for, but it's something that can never happen unless the Republicans decide to give up some ground.
There were all kinds of Twitter feeds in the background on Huffington Post, where the session was streamed live. Nobody could think of any other occasion in which a sitting President has taken questions on live television from members of the opposing party. And everyone agreed that it should happen more often.
i can't help wondering, after that incredibly impressive performance, whether the Republicans will invite President Obama to do this again in the future. Jennifer
P.S. - you can read about it here or watch it tonight at 8 pm on C-Span.
What the President said over and over is that the Republicans have to work with him. They can't just oppose everything he proposes because it was his idea. In other words, he really confronted my claim in my post about the State of the Union address that he was naive about bipartisanship. He made it clear that he's not naive, that it's something he strives for, but it's something that can never happen unless the Republicans decide to give up some ground.
There were all kinds of Twitter feeds in the background on Huffington Post, where the session was streamed live. Nobody could think of any other occasion in which a sitting President has taken questions on live television from members of the opposing party. And everyone agreed that it should happen more often.
i can't help wondering, after that incredibly impressive performance, whether the Republicans will invite President Obama to do this again in the future. Jennifer
P.S. - you can read about it here or watch it tonight at 8 pm on C-Span.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
The State of the Union
The handful of people who actually follow this blog probably, I'm guessing, expect me to say something about the State of the Union address given by the President last night. I've been trying to figure out what to say all day, and I'm not sure I'm there yet, even now.
Of course, I'm disappointed that we went a half-hour without hearing about health care, although I didn't hate what the President said when he finally got there. But still, I'm saddened, not only by the fact that he has backed off health care's importance to the American people and our economy, but by the fact that the entire speech seemed to carry with it the naive optimism that has undermined President Obama's progress for the past year. I say naive because he still seems to believe that bipartisanship is possible with a far-right Republican party that represents a very small part of our society, and that has, as its primary goal, the defeat of anything that might look like a victory to President Obama. This naivete was demonstrated most clearly when the President actually broke from his script to express surprise that the Republicans did not applaud when he said he favored some tax cuts. Why is he still surprised?
I don't want to turn this blog into a partisan political comment and I rarely talk here about Republicans and Democrats for that reason. But it's important to keep in mind that the Republicans in Congress are pretty far to the right of those members of the American public who identify themselves as Republicans. While the Democrats in Congress span the spectrum, from far left to Blue Dog moderate/right, the Republicans in Congress are not representative of Republicans generally; they are right-wing idealogues who have hijacked the party, causing the ranks of Independents to swell. And so although there may be the possibility of bipartisanship out there in the heartland, there is no interest in bipartisanship on the right side of the aisle in Congress. President Obama's refusal to accept this reality and persuade Democrats -- who do, in fact, hold a significant majority in Congress -- to just run their agenda is very distressing. It makes me feel as though he is standing in wet cement that is quickly drying.
It's not that I didn't agree with a lot of what the President said. It's that I disagree with who he thinks his audience is. He's trying to persuade people who have pledged to make health care his Waterloo, people who think the Tea Party movement is centrist and populist rather than just a fairly small handful of noisy nuts. In the process, he's failing to hold the Democratic majority together around a set of principles upon which he was elected -- and yes, health care is at the very top of that list.
The reason we don't have health reform is not the Massachusetts special election; the reason we don't have health reform is that the White House allowed Senator Baucus to dither all summer to get Olympia Snowe's one and only Republican vote on the Senate Finance Committee -- a vote that was not sustained when the Senate as a whole voted on the bill. The reason we don't have health reform is that this vision of bipartisanship is so naive and wrong as to completely undermine the President's entire first year.
I wanted to hear President Obama say "screw you who stand in the way of doing the right thing. We WILL have health care, even if it takes using reconciliation, and passing the bill with 51 Senate votes." I wanted to hear President Obama say, as he used to, that NOT passing health reform simply is not an option. I wanted him to argue, as he has in the past, that we cannot fix this economy, create jobs, and put America on equal footing with the rest of the world when we are spending ridiculous amounts of money on health insurance that doesn't cover the care we need, that refuses to cover people who actually get sick, that raises premiums 25% per year. I wanted him to stand with us -- we who have chronic illnesses -- and reflect an understanding of what we live with every single day of our lives.
I didn't hear that. And so, I am disappointed. My heart did not soar as it did when candidate Obama said YES WE CAN!!! Instead, I heard President Obama say, well, maybe we can do a little something here and there. And that simply is not good enough. Jennifer
Of course, I'm disappointed that we went a half-hour without hearing about health care, although I didn't hate what the President said when he finally got there. But still, I'm saddened, not only by the fact that he has backed off health care's importance to the American people and our economy, but by the fact that the entire speech seemed to carry with it the naive optimism that has undermined President Obama's progress for the past year. I say naive because he still seems to believe that bipartisanship is possible with a far-right Republican party that represents a very small part of our society, and that has, as its primary goal, the defeat of anything that might look like a victory to President Obama. This naivete was demonstrated most clearly when the President actually broke from his script to express surprise that the Republicans did not applaud when he said he favored some tax cuts. Why is he still surprised?
I don't want to turn this blog into a partisan political comment and I rarely talk here about Republicans and Democrats for that reason. But it's important to keep in mind that the Republicans in Congress are pretty far to the right of those members of the American public who identify themselves as Republicans. While the Democrats in Congress span the spectrum, from far left to Blue Dog moderate/right, the Republicans in Congress are not representative of Republicans generally; they are right-wing idealogues who have hijacked the party, causing the ranks of Independents to swell. And so although there may be the possibility of bipartisanship out there in the heartland, there is no interest in bipartisanship on the right side of the aisle in Congress. President Obama's refusal to accept this reality and persuade Democrats -- who do, in fact, hold a significant majority in Congress -- to just run their agenda is very distressing. It makes me feel as though he is standing in wet cement that is quickly drying.
It's not that I didn't agree with a lot of what the President said. It's that I disagree with who he thinks his audience is. He's trying to persuade people who have pledged to make health care his Waterloo, people who think the Tea Party movement is centrist and populist rather than just a fairly small handful of noisy nuts. In the process, he's failing to hold the Democratic majority together around a set of principles upon which he was elected -- and yes, health care is at the very top of that list.
The reason we don't have health reform is not the Massachusetts special election; the reason we don't have health reform is that the White House allowed Senator Baucus to dither all summer to get Olympia Snowe's one and only Republican vote on the Senate Finance Committee -- a vote that was not sustained when the Senate as a whole voted on the bill. The reason we don't have health reform is that this vision of bipartisanship is so naive and wrong as to completely undermine the President's entire first year.
I wanted to hear President Obama say "screw you who stand in the way of doing the right thing. We WILL have health care, even if it takes using reconciliation, and passing the bill with 51 Senate votes." I wanted to hear President Obama say, as he used to, that NOT passing health reform simply is not an option. I wanted him to argue, as he has in the past, that we cannot fix this economy, create jobs, and put America on equal footing with the rest of the world when we are spending ridiculous amounts of money on health insurance that doesn't cover the care we need, that refuses to cover people who actually get sick, that raises premiums 25% per year. I wanted him to stand with us -- we who have chronic illnesses -- and reflect an understanding of what we live with every single day of our lives.
I didn't hear that. And so, I am disappointed. My heart did not soar as it did when candidate Obama said YES WE CAN!!! Instead, I heard President Obama say, well, maybe we can do a little something here and there. And that simply is not good enough. Jennifer
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Three Cases This Week
I want to tell you about three calls I got this week.
First, I heard from a family living in their car -- no home, no money, no job, no health care.
Second, I heard from a lovely man -- a senior citizen -- who lost his home to foreclosure. he thought he had prepared for retirement, but sadly, he had not prepared for illness, and that broke him.
Third, I heard from a lung transplant recipient who lost her health insurance and cannot afford anti-rejection medications. I think I was able to help her -- I sure hope so.
Now, tell me ONE GOOD REASON we should not have health insurance reform in America. I challenge you. Don't we want to be better than this? Jennifer
First, I heard from a family living in their car -- no home, no money, no job, no health care.
Second, I heard from a lovely man -- a senior citizen -- who lost his home to foreclosure. he thought he had prepared for retirement, but sadly, he had not prepared for illness, and that broke him.
Third, I heard from a lung transplant recipient who lost her health insurance and cannot afford anti-rejection medications. I think I was able to help her -- I sure hope so.
Now, tell me ONE GOOD REASON we should not have health insurance reform in America. I challenge you. Don't we want to be better than this? Jennifer
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
