The Choice
Ezra Klein frames the choice that undecided House Dems, conservative and liberal alike, now face:
If you’re a liberal House Democrat, here’s what you’d be voting against: Legislation that covers 32 million people. A world in which 95 percent of all non-elderly, legal residents have health-care coverage. An end to insurers rescinding coverage for the sick, or discriminating based on preexisting conditions, or spending 30 cents of each premium dollar on things that aren’t medical care. Exchanges where insurers who want to jack up premiums will have to publicly explain their reason, where regulators will be able to toss them out based on bad behavior, and where consumers will be able to publicly rate them. Hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies to help lower-income Americans afford health-care insurance. The final closure of the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit’s “doughnut hole.”
If you’re a conservative House Democrat, then probably you support many of those policies, too. But you also get the single most ambitious effort the government has ever made to control costs in the health-care sector.
The House Dem leadership’s game plan all along has been to tell wavering conservative Democrats who voted No last time that they have now gotten their way — a bill with no public option, a bill with stronger cost controls, a bill that’s more fiscally responsible, etc.
Now the CBO has effectively stamped a seal of nonpartisan approval on this argument. Dem leaders are confident that the score will give these Dems the cover they need to vote Yes. Indeed, Dem leaders are confident that many waverers will conclude from the score that voting No is no longer really an option.
The only remaining factor: The actual language of the bill, which Dem leaders hope will make the case for passage even stronger to conservative Dems. Stay tuned for that; we’ll have it for you shortly.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
Erza nailed it. It’s really worthy reading the whole thing.
The Massachusetts delegation has at least three members who are not sure they will vote yes. For some reason this is going unnoticed.
When I think of everything progressives have given up to get the bill to this point and are still actually willing to vote for it, it sure is ironic that we’re still chasing the votes of conservadems. Isn’t this right up Rahm’s alley now that everyone’s giving him so much credit for being right about progressives caving.
Here is what the would be voting for, and those who vote against it, will be voting for the destruction of the Obama Presidency. That is what is at stake. Tolerate no congressional traitors on this bill.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HEALTH_CARE_OVERHAUL?SITE=ORMED&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
” WASHINGTON (AP) — House Democrats are pushing to the brink of passage a landmark, $940 billion health care overhaul bill that would simultaneously deliver on President Barack Obama’s promise to expand coverage while slashing the deficit, a strategy aimed at winning over the party’s fiscal conservatives.
The 10-year plan would provide coverage to 32 million people now uninsured through a combination of tax credits for middle class households and an expansion of the Medicaid program for low income people. Release of the legislation later Thursday sets the stage for a House vote on Sunday, and Democrats have already signaled they plan to go it alone, without Republican support. The GOP has steadfastly opposed Obama’s plan from the outset.
It would restructure one-sixth of the economy, covering 95 percent of eligible Americans, in the biggest expansion of the social safety net since Medicare was created in 1965. It would also impose new obligations on individuals and businesses, requiring for the first time that most Americans carry health insurance and penalizing medium-sized and large companies that don’t provide coverage for their workers.
Hospitals and doctors, drug companies and insurers would gain millions of new paying customers, but they would also have to adjust to major changes. Medicare cuts would force hospitals to operate more efficiently or risk going out of business. Insurance companies would face unprecendented federal regulation. Health care industries would be hit with new federal taxes. Upper-income households would face a new tax on investment earnings.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated the legislation would reduce the federal deficit by $138 billion over its first 10 years, and continue to drive down the red ink thereafter. Democratic leaders said the deficit would be cut $1.2 trillion in the second decade- and Obama called it the biggest reduction since the 1990s, when President Bill Clinton put the federal budget on a path to surplus.
“This is but one virtue of a reform that would bring accountability to the insurance industry and bring greater economic security to all Americans,” Obama said. “So I urge every member of Congress to consider this as they prepare for their important vote this weekend.”
Speaker Nancy Pelosi, was already pleased. “We loved their number,” said the California Democrat, referring to the budget estimate.
The Democrats’ drive took on a growing sense of inevitability, picking up endorsements Wednesday from a longtime liberal holdout and from a retired Roman Catholic bishop and nuns who broke with church leaders over the bill’s abortion provisions. Leaders appeared increasingly confident of getting the 216 votes they need to pass the bill.”
There are still holdouts even after today’s news ?
Obama is postponing his travel plans again…till JUNE!
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/obama-postponing-trip-to-stay-for-health-care-vote.php?ref=fpa
Good. It is better for him to keep the Media focused on vital domestic issues. After Health Care, we need to fast track Banking reform.
Apologies for a long post, but after hearing reports that Michael Arcuri (D-NY) has told colleagues he will vote against, I wandered over to his web site. The text of his statement on health care is copied below. Most if not all of the criteria he sets out appear to be met by the Senate bill as amended by the reconciliaton package – perhaps he would argue about payment reductions for Medicare Advantage and cost controls, but that is to claim that he would not support a less than perfect bill. For Arcuri and others who would oppose the final package after voting for the House bill, it is clear that they are making a political calculation that voting no helps them in November. I think this is insane, both as an electoral strategy and a complete denial of the importance of the vote they are taking, but there it is. Up to Pelosi, Clyburn and co. to earn their pay.
From the Arcuri web site:
Healthcare Reform
When I first ran for Congress in 2006, I promised the people of the 24th Congressional District that I would work to reform our nation’s health care system. It’s been my goal to pass a bill that lowers costs for everyone who already has health insurance. At the same time, I’ve long recognized the need to pass a bill that provides the millions of uninsured Americans, including more than 139,000 uninsured individuals living in the 24th Congressional District, an opportunity to purchase quality, affordable health insurance. Without action, skyrocketing health care costs will continue to add to our budget deficit and threaten the overall health of our economy.
When an attempt was made to rush a health care bill to a vote back in July, I stood up and said that we were moving too quickly and I would vote against any health care bill until I had a chance to talk face-to-face with my constituents about their health care reform priorities. Since August, I have been a part of nearly 30 public forums, including 10 town hall meetings, across the district. I have also held countless one-on-one meetings with health care professionals, small business owners and concerned citizens to hear their stories and to learn more about how the rising costs of health care are plaguing the finances of working families and damaging our local economy.
When I returned to Washington, I fought non-stop to make sure the needs and priorities of the people and small businesses I’m privileged to represent in Congress were included. After several additional months of work and debate, the House of Representatives passed the Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962) with my support on November 7, 2009. The Senate passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590) on December 24, 2009.
Despite the intensity of the debate surrounding this issue, most Americans can agree that our nation’s health care system is in dire need of repair. As this process moves forward, I will continue to work with my colleagues – Democrats and Republicans alike – to achieve meaningful reforms based on the following key priorities:
Expanding Coverage
Coverage must be expanded to the millions of Americans – including more than 139,000 uninsured individuals in the 24th District – who currently do not have health insurance;
Making Insurance Affordable
Insurance must be more affordable for those who do have insurance. Today, medical problems account for roughly 60% of all personal bankruptcies;
Providing Stability and Peace of Mind
Insurance companies cannot be permitted to deny coverage based on previous illness or to take away coverage when the cost of care is deemed too great;
Preserving Choice
Despite reforms, patients must be allowed to keep their doctor and current health insurance plan if they are happy with the care they received;
Making Fiscally Responsible Reforms
Health care reform goals must be fully paid for and achieved without adding to the federal budget deficit – as a member of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog coalition, this is of the utmost importance to me; and,
Protecting and Strengthening Medicare Coverage for Seniors
I will not support a bill that in any way harms Medicare beneficiaries by reducing access to care or increasing costs. In addition to protecting current coverage, we must remove the burden placed on seniors by fully closing the Medicare Part D prescription drug “Donut Hole.”
More work has to be done before Congress can pass comprehensive health care legislation. However, after decades of failed attempts, I am proud to say that we are closer than ever to reaching that goal. Your comments have gone a long way in helping me prioritize what healthcare measures are most important to Upstate New Yorkers and what reforms I should be fighting for as we move forward. Please continue to share your thoughts with me by clicking the link below.
Imsinca, Chris Bowers has some salient observations about that credit people are giving Emmanuel.
(Hat tip, Sully.)
Just let him know, that if he votes against this bill, he is voting to destroy the Obama Presidency, and that we will make sure that he does not win another term, even if we have to fund and vote fo his Republican opponent.
oddjob – Who besides Ben Smith – who is hardly liberal – is giving Rahm credit for anything?
Basically I wonder why anyone stays mad at Rahm for saying something egregiously rude, since that’s his defining characteristic. But Rahm is just one of those figures = he’s a lightning rod and I know he isn’t liked for more than his mouth. I just haven’t seen any praise heaped on Rahm anywhere.
If I missed it, which is entirely possible, sorry.
Great catch, Bill, thanks.
Glenn Greenwald and Jane Hamsher have both posted that Ben Smith is right.
I saw that oddjob, I read Bowers piece yesterday regarding Rahm as well. Not sure whom I agree with yet but I will say Emmanuel is not one of my faves. I do agree progressives got a few perks via Sanders and not taking Rahm’s bait of incrementalism.
“Glenn Greenwald and Jane Hamsher have both posted that Ben Smith is right.”
Greg, are you frakking with my head?
Tena, there were a couple of articles praising Rahm a couple of weeks ago, although some suggested he may have been the unnamed source and contributor to said articles.
lmsinca = I had no idea. But Glenn and Jane jumped on the Rahm was Right Wagon?
I’m sorry but that just gave me whiplash and I may have to file suit against both of them for that.
Rahm serves at the pleasure of The President. So those who are attacking Rahm, and calling for his ouster, are really attacking The President, and trying to weaken him.
How many people voted for President Obama?
How many voted for Calamity Jane Hamsher?
The President gets to have the Chief of Staff that he wants,
Regardless of if Calamity Jane thinks that she is the little Firedog Tail that gets to wag The Big Dog.
Ezra Klein doesn’t know what he is talking about, which probably helped, but only a committed propagandist could juxtapose those two paragraphs. In the first one we are giving away more and more “free” government money, but in the second we are “also get[ting] the single most ambitious effort the government has ever made to control costs in the health-care sector.”
In canceling his trip again, Obama is going for the unprecedented “Reverse Copenhagen”.
Don’t forget to pledge your support to Connie Saltonstall, primary challenger to Bart Stupak at:
http://www.actblue.com/page/defeat-bart-stupak
Huge Baby dropped in to go Wah Wah Wah.
I Love The Smell Of Desperate Right Wingers In The Morning!
AS – thanks – did that yesterday. IT would be stupendous if we could primary Stupak out of there.
Where were Republicans and DINO’s when Bush and the Republicans passed an unfunded deficit bill allowing Medicare to make payments to insurance companies? I opposed it then. The GOP, Tea Parties and Republicans do not tell you, that, this is what the Democrat party and Obama want to cut from Medicare. They use a broad term “cut Medicare”. These payments forces the federal government to pay $1.15 to insurance corporate fat cats for every $1.00 spent on medical issues. In simple math, for every $1.00 spends using a government sponsored Medicare payment, the insurance corporations get an additional 15 cents. The idea then, was that having insurance companies provide part of Medicare, rates would go down: THEY HAVE NOT!
The insurance lobby and the Chamber of Commerce got the Republicans to pass this unfunded deficit behemoth with no opposition. I am a Republican who supports healthcare reform. The issue affects me since I am a medical student. The idea that bureaucrats will “take over healthcare” is poppycock. Day to day, I see insurance company bureaucrats deny care to patients, and withholding payments for what the doctor and patient deem necessary for care. These insurance bureaucrats are like customer service representatives who have no background in health policy, yet make decisions that override a Doctor’s decision about care that patients’ need.
The GOP calls for competition across state lines. I support this to some extent. However, the GOP plan does not create a baseline as to what basic care should be covered under these plans, nor does it provide a baseline for cost. It means that like credit card companies, insurance companies will flock to states that have little or no regulations, states that have the least basic coverage, and states whose costs are at higher premiums to customers. Example: the credit card companies. Credit card companies are primarily based in Delaware and South Dakota because regulations there allow credit card companies to charge exorbitant and creative fees. The same would happen with insurance, except that patients’ lives would be at the mercy of these fees from so-called competition across state lines. What the Democrats want, is a baseline set of items that would be covered by these insurance companies?
Real competition should also include allowing foreign corporations to establish cheaper insurance companies here, than the American insurance corporations. As with the autos, technology, motor cycles, steel and textile industries, we would get a higher quality product at cheaper costs. Even it means failure of the American Insurance Companies; I want foreign competition for insurance companies.
Creating High Risk Pools: The GOP likes this idea. How many of you have children? That is considered a pre-existing condition. Yes. The party of “family values” and their insurance lobby considers the act of having children a pre-existing condition. As such, women will be at a disadvantage for higher premiums under the GOP plan. Elderly people would not be able to afford rates if they are placed in a high risk pool, as the GOP plan calls for. How many of you have Grand Parents? It is true that the GOP plan would offer coverage to “everyone in the pool”, however, most working Americans would not be able to afford these plans because of the pre-existing loopholes. The plan put forth by my party, the GOP, does not provide limits on costs to American patriots who need insurance most.
Tort Reform: The issue of tort reform is also moot. I see infections due to preventative mistakes by medical professionals. Most inpatient infections are caused by a lack of washing hands by medical staff. Other negligent medical costs come from errors by physicians such as operating on the wrong side or wrong thing. Should innocent patients who seek medical care be denied a financial recourse as the legal system provides?
In Texas and California, which has the most stringent Tort Reform laws (limiting liability to $250, 000 max), so-called [defensive] diagnostic tests have increased, while the number of medical errors continue to increase in both states. Moreover, Texas leads the nation in uninsured working Americans. Recently, I was an unemployed mechanical engineer. Prior to attending medical school, I saw my insurance rates increase from $1200 in 2006 to $3600 in 2010, and I have never filed a medical claim, in my previous job for an oil company. This year Shell Oil will be moving their operations and 13000 American jobs to India and Brazil. The reason issued was the high cost of healthcare benefits to American employees. The issue of tort reform is moot when one looks at the supposed cost savings from these reforms. Both states Texas and California lead the US in uninsured Americans.
The farce of Death Panels: The provision in the bill was placed by a REPUBLICAN Congressman from Georgia at the request of insurance companies and the American Medical Association. End of life consultations are already being performed in hospitals around the US every day, would be paid for under the bill. Currently, these expenses are paid for out of pocket by families since it is not covered. Unless one works in the medical field, or is faced with end of life decisions, it is easy to label these “Life Panels” as death panels. The Healthcare bill in Congress provides payments to medical professionals and their families who receive counseling during the palliative phase of life. Consultation in many cases also means extending life of loved ones. Today we already have [death panels] within the insurance companies via their bureaucrats, many of whom have no background in the medical field, nor social services fields. These Customer Service Representatives and clerical staff at insurance companies make life and death decisions based on costs, and which overrides patients and Doctors’ recommended care. These insurance clerks and bureaucrats deny care every day to working families, costing the US 45000 deaths per year.
Obama is right when he links high insurance costs to shrinking jobs. Most major oil companies that once viewed Texas as a bastion of free market enterprise are shifting more workers in expatriate jobs overseas, because of never ending increases in insurance prices per each employee. Why would anyone start businesses here in the US when they can incorporate themselves overseas to avoid paying high insurance costs for employees? As a conservative who with experience on both sides of the issue, I believe that without healthcare reform, the US is doomed to failure when it comes to reestablishing jobs.
Jane’s mistake was whipping Congressional progressives to commit to vote only for a bill with a public option and then raising money for them based on that promise. 61 house dems $430,000, naive maybe but good intentioned in that effort. The rest, I’ll not debate anymore. Been there done that. My path diverged from hers in December.
HELP SEND RUSH LIMBAUGH TO COSTA RICA AND MOVE HEALTHCARE FROM THE HINTERLANDS OF GLENNBECKISTAN AND RUSHLIMBAUGHSTADHT
Tell Republican Obstructionists and DINO’s that mainstream conservatives support healthcare reform now. The issue of Tort reform is moot. In Texas where there are the most stringent Tort Reform laws, so-called defensive diagnostic tests are on the rise. Insurance rates have increased with no end in sight, and Texas has 6 million uninsured middle class working Americans.
Tell Republican and DINO Congressmen that we want negligent errors by Doctors decreased. Innocent Americans who go to Americas hospitals for treatment should not be limited in judicial recourse due to doctors’ errors. Most doctor errors are preventative: washing hands to prevent infections. All liability cases are brought to court in the most severe circumstances such as operating on the wrong side of the patients’ body. In Congressman John Murtha’s case, it was a snip of his intestines during a routine bladder surgery that cost him his life. Should his family be prohibited from financial recourse due to so called tort reform?
I oppose my party on this issue because I have seen my insurance rates go from a deductible of $1200 in 2006 to $3600 in 2010. I have never filed a medical claim. That is why I urge our silent majority of conservatives to let Congress know that we are CONSERVATIVES FOR HEALTHCARE REFORM NOW!
CALL ALL THE SENATORS IF YOU ARE TIRED OF RISING INSURANCE RATES.
Daniel Akaka, Hawaii (HI) 202-224-6361
Max Baucus, Montana (MT) 202-224-2651
Evan Bayh Indiana (IN) 202-224-5623
Mark Begich, Alaska (AK) 202-224-3004
Michael Bennet, Colorado (CO) 202-224- 5852
Jeff Bingaman, New Mexico (NM) 202-224-5521
Barbara Boxer, California (CA) 202-224-3553
Sherrod Brown, Ohio (OH) 202-224-2315
Roland Burris, Illinois (IL) 202-224-2854
Robert Byrd, West Virginia (WV) 202-224-3954
Maria Cantwell, Washington State (WA) 202-224-3441
Ben Cardin, Maryland (MD) 202-224-4524
Thomas Carper, Delaware (DE) 202-224-2441
Robert P. Casey, Jr., Pennsylvania (PA) 202-224-6324
Kent Conrad, North Dakota (ND) 202-224-2043
Christopher Dodd, Connecticut (CT) 202-224-2823
Byron Dorgan, North Dakota (ND) 202-224-2551
Richard Durbin, Illinois (IL) 202-224-2152
Russell Feingold, Wisconsin (WI) 202-224-5323
Dianne Feinstein, California (CA) 202-224-3841
Al Franken, Minnesota (MN) 202-224-5641
Kirsten Gillibrand, New York (NY) 202-224-4451
Kay Hagan, North Carolina (NC) 202-224-6432
Tom Harkin, Iowa (IA) 202-224-3254
Daniel Inouye, Hawaii (HI) 202-224-3934
Tim Johnson, South Dakota (SD) 202-224-5842
Ted Kaufman, Delaware (DE) 202-224-5042
John Kerry, Massachusetts (MA) 202-224-2742
Herb Kohl, Wisconsin (WI) 202-224-5653
Amy Klobuchar, Minnesota (MN) 202-224-3244
Mary Landrieu, Louisiana (LA) 202-224-5824
Frank Lautenberg, New Jersey (NJ) 202-224-3224
Patrick Leahy, Vermont (VT) 202-224-4242
Carl Levi, Michigan (MI) 202-224-6221
Joseph Lieberman, Connecticut (CT) 202-224-4041
Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas (AR) 202-224-4843
Claire McCaskill, Missouri (MO) 202-224-6154
Robert Menendez, New Jersey (NJ) 202-224-4744
Jeff Merkley, Oregon (OR) 202-224-3753
Barbara Mikulski, Maryland (MD) 202-224-4654
Patty Murray, Patty, Washington State (WA) 202-224-2621
Bill Nelson, Florida (FL) 202-224-5274
Ben Nelson, Nebraska (NE) 202-224-6551
Mark Pryor, Arkansas (AR) 202-224-2353
Jack Reed, Rhode Island (RI) 202-224-4642
Harry Reid, Nevada (NV) 202-224-3542
John Rockefeller, West Virginia (WV) 202-224-6472
Bernie Sanders, Vermont (VT) 202-224-5141
Charles Schumer, New York (NY) 202-224-6542
Jeanne Shaheen, New Hampshire (NH) 202-224-2841
Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania (PA) 202-224-4254
Debbie Stabenow, Michigan (MI) 202-224-4822
Jon Tester, Montana (MT) 202-224-2644
Mark Udall, Colorado (CO) 202-224-5941
Tom Udall, New Mexico (NM) 202-224-6621
Mark Warner, Virginia (VA) 202-224-2023
Jim Webb, West Virginia (WV) 202-224-4024
Sheldon Whitehouse, Rhode Island (RI) 202-224-2921
Ron Wyden, Oregon (OR) 202-224-5244
The CBO report indicates that $923 Billion dollars is spent in six years with this program. And the CBO has stated that its deficit projections past ten years are worthless. If you believe that spending that kind of money is going to lower the deficit over six years, you are an idiot. There is a reason the Dems are not spending money on subsidies until 2014. It is because they know that if the subsidies kicked in at the same time the taxes did, it would cost well over a trillion dollars and the the notion that this bill cuts the deficit would be exposed as the fraud it obviously is. Again, the CBO states the bill takes only six years to spend $923 out of the $940 this piece of sh*t supposedly costs. Lowers the deficit? Yeah, sure it does.
PS Both Michael Arcuri and Stephen Lynch has switched their votes from yes to no since the CBO report came out.
“Tell Republican Obstructionists and DINO’s that mainstream conservatives support healthcare reform now.”
Start naming the “mainstream conservatives” that have come out in support of this bill. Let me know when you can provide more than one or two names.
If true, as if Echo In A Chamber Pot can be believed; remember when he claimed he was doctor, then those two guys will be ousted in November. If they vote against the bill, we will make sure that they do not win reelection. We will even vote for their Republican opponents, to make sure that they do not get away with their treachery.
Whichever Dems vote against this will be forever described as “responsible for killing health care reform”.
I do not think they will want that if this fails, because insurers will just go back to denying coverage and raking premiums up sky high. And sooner, rather than later, more and more of their constituents will be affected.
“Start naming the “mainstream conservatives”
Just that, please.
Greg, an update from David D. He thinks all the leaners will firm up in the next few hours, then all that’s left are the undecided.
And Dems need to hold this vote whether they have the votes or not. Let everyone know where each Democrat stands. No hiding this time.
I’ve heard tell that my Rep., Stephen Lynch (MA), is switching to no. I literally can’t believe it. Heavily union district, so maybe they are secretly leaning on Reps. not to sign on. This would be truly unforgivable.
Not a Member: Only one or two ‘mainstream conservatives’ actually exist. the rest are baggers, loons, liars, charlatans, phonies, hypocrites, Palins, Bachmanns, Boehners, Hugoes, Bilgemen and Bilgewomen, Limbaughs, Hannities and Coultergeists. In other words, today’s shrinking and irrelevant GOP, the New Confederate Party.
Thanks, Nick.
I think I was too cryptic by half.
mikegoetz, apparently Lynch won’t vote for the bill because of its “cadillac tax” provisions.
“today’s shrinking and irrelevant GOP, the New Confederate Party”
More or less.
I’d like to see a campaign calling on Democrats in the House who just can’t bring themselves to vote for the bill to sit out the vote. Every abstainer on the “Nay” side would mean one less “Yea” that needs to be whipped up to offset them. There might even be a few Republicans you could pick off that way.
When the vote happens, we need a list of Dems who vote no that can be readily available.
Then, primary challenges should be investigated.
But what I really hope will happen is that the NO voters on the Dem side make hay out of the bill’s benefits, they’ll be called swiftly on it.
YOU KNOW they are going to reap the benes EVEN AFTER they vote no.
Disgusting.
“is that when the NO”
****.
I am a mainstream conservative who do not subscribe to Boner’s tea party terrorist wing nut branch of my party.
Many like me read and to not regurititate talking points from that ALASKAN DING BAT.
Don’t forget to donate to Connie Saltonstall at: http://www.actblue.com/page/defeat-bart-stupak
Great Benen piece summing up the above plus Ezra:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_03/022927.php
Here’s the conclusion:
“I have no idea what’s going to happen when the final roll call is held, but Democrats have no reason, no excuse, no coherent rationale for killing the best chance the United States has ever had to pass health care reform.”
CalD, I’m not so sure that abstentions actually do that. Resignations do (because then the representative’s seat is vacant), but I think the majority threshold is a function of the number of actively serving representatives, not the number who decline to vote one way or the other. If so, then functionally an abstention is still a “no” because it’s one less vote towards the majority threshold.
Tell Republican Obstructionists and DINO’s that mainstream conservatives support healthcare reform now. The issue of Tort reform is moot. In Texas where there are the most stringent Tort Reform laws, so-called defensive diagnostic tests are on the rise. Insurance rates have increased with no end in sight, and Texas has 6 million uninsured middle class working Americans.
Tell the Chamber of Commerce, Republicans and DINO Congressmen that we want negligent errors by Doctors decreased. Innocent Americans who go to Americas hospitals for treatment should not be limited in judicial recourse due to doctors’ errors. Most doctor errors are preventative: washing hands to prevent infections. All liability cases are brought to court in the most severe circumstances such as operating on the wrong side of the patients’ body. In Congressman John Murtha’s case, it was a snip of his intestines during a routine bladder surgery that cost him his life. Should his family be prohibited from financial recourse due to so called tort reform?
I oppose my party on this issue because I have seen my insurance rates go from a deductible of $1200 in 2006 to $3600 in 2010. I have never filed a medical claim. That is why I urge our silent majority of conservatives to let Congress know that we are CONSERVATIVES FOR HEALTHCARE REFORM NOW!
CALL ALL THE SENATORS IF YOU ARE TIRED OF RISING INSURANCE RATES.
TELL CLEARANCE THOMAS AND HIS TEA BAGGING WIFE THAT CONSERVATIVES OPPOSE CORPORATIONS BUYING OUR VOTES!
Have any No votes switched to Yes votes yet?
Nicely done AS. Thank you for putting the interests of the American people, and your own self-interest, above that of the Republican Party.
All, check this out, hammer coming down on wavering Dems:
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/labor/afl-cio-to-bring-hammer-down-on-wavering-house-dems/
Whoo-hoo!
Where’s newsref, by the way?
Oops. Sorry, Greg. Your comment wasn’t there when I posted mine.
SBJ,
How come you disappeared right after your Right Wing compatriot, Bilgey, referred to you as ” a poofer”. How pathetic must your life be, if you will not even stand up for yourself!
@Liam: I “disappeared” into a meeting. And, as a Monty Python fan, I have no problems whatsoever with the term “poofter.”
My life is grand! Thanks for asking.
@ oddjob | March 18th, 2010 at 02:26 pm:
I am almost certain that in both houses of the US Congress, only the votes of a majority of those present and voting are necessary to approve a law — subject to quorum rules and excepting things that specifically require a super-majority. But I could definitely be wrong about that. I’d be the first to admit that I’m about as far from being an expert on parliamentary procedure as you could get while still being a member of the same species.
I love how “the choice” neglects any of the negative aspects of the bill. It’s such a clear-cut black-or-white choice between “saving the puppies” and “being a Nazi.”
It’s clear with this farce that principled objection no longer has any home in the Democrat party. Of course it NEVER had a home in the Republican party, so I guess that means…