Hey Reporters??? It Might Be Worth Pointing Out Lieberman Is Stupid or Lying…

/35 Comments/in , /by

As news outlets are reporting everywhere, Joe Lieberman is threatening to join a GOP filibuster of heath care reform. Brian Beutler reports the news without much elaboration on Lieberman’s stated justification for doing so. (See below for Beutler’s follow-up.)

I told Senator Reid that I’m strongly inclined–i haven’t totally decided, but I’m strongly inclined–to vote to proceed to the health care debate, even though I don’t support the bill that he’s bringing together because it’s important that we start the debate on health care reform because I want to vote for health care reform this year. But I also told him that if the bill remains what it is now, I will not be able to support a cloture motion before final passage. Therefore I will try to stop the passage of the bill.

The AP provides just a hint of Lieberman’s justification.

Lieberman said Tuesday in a telephone interview with The Associated Press that he’s worried a public option would be costly to taxpayers and drive up insurance premiums.

But the Politico reports Lieberman’s stated justification.

“I can’t see a way in which I could vote for cloture on any bill that contained a creation of a government-operated-run insurance company,” Lieberman added. “It’s just asking for trouble – in the end, the taxpayers are going to pay and probably all people will have health insurance are going to see their premiums go up because there’s going to be cost shifting as there has been for Medicare and Medicaid.”

Lieberman said he “very much” wants to vote for health care reform but that he’s worried about stifling “the economic recovery we’re in” or adding to the federal debt.

“I feel this way about a national, government-created health insurance company – whether it’s a trigger or not,” he said. “My answer is – we’re – we have the opportunity to do some great reforms here. These exchanges that we’re talking about, I think, are going to drive competition and probably bring the cost of health insurance down or at least contain the cost increases for a lot of people. Let’s give that two or three years to see how it works to see how it works before we talk about creating another entitlement that will end up increasing the national debt and putting more of a burden on taxpayers.”

So here’s what Joe Lieberman claims the public option will do:

  • Be costly to taxpayers
  • Drive up premiums
  • Involve cost-shifting to private plans
  • Create an entitlement
  • Increase the national debt
  • Put more of a tax burden on taxpayers

As DDay points out, this is utter nonsense.

Lieberman’s justification on this is just nonsense – the public option would SAVE money for the government, to the tune of $100 billion dollars over 10 years according to the Congressional Budget Office. Read more →

Share this entry

Blue Dog PAC Starves During Public Option Fight

/7 Comments/in /by

This is interesting. Funding for the Blue Dog’s PAC (as distinct from Blue Dogs themselves) has dried up even as Blue Dogs have attempted to gut health care reform.

Our analysis of the fiscally conservative and increasingly influential Blue Dog Coalition and its funding noted that the group’s political action committee had averaged more than $176,000 in receipts from other PACs over the first half of 2009. Their monthly haul dropped to a surprisingly low $27,000 in July, rebounded somewhat in August, and but then dropped again to just $12,500 in September.

[snip]

After raising $1.1 million from January to June, the committee raised less than $87,000 between July and September — less than it brought in during any one of the preceding five months. And in just three months, the Blue Dog PAC’s monthly fundraising average dropped by more than $50,000 — probably not the sort of fiscal conservatism the 52-member coalition was hoping for.

Now, that’s the group’s PAC. Individual members seem to be doing just fine. For example, here are some August and September donations to Allen Boyd, who remains opposed to the public option.

  • American College of Radiology PAC, $4,500
  • American Dental Association PAC, $2,500
  • American Osteopathic PAC, $2,500
  • SmithKlineBeecham, $3,500

(Interestingly, Amgen took back $1,000 from Boyd during this period.)

And here’s some PAC donations to Mike Ross.

  • American Medical Association, $1,000
  • American Medical Group, $1,500
  • American Optometric Association PAC, $2,000
  • American Society of Health System Pharmacist, $1,500
  • Assurant, $1,500
  • Fresenius Medical Care, $2,500
  • Healthcare Distribution Management, $2,500
  • RiteAid, $2,500

Both of these men, at least, are still getting a chunk of change from health care companies, even while the Blue Dog PAC is getting nothing.

Obviously, this is not just about health care–Blue Dogs suck at the teat of a range of onerous business interests. But at a time when Blue Dogs might be exercising maximum influence, they’re not getting any return as a group. I wonder if that stems from a lack of leadership as a block–particularly Stephanie Herseth Sandlin’s repeated embarrassment as Raul Grijalva repeatedly out-whipped her on the public option.

“Yes, I think there’s momentum, “ said Blue Dog leader Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-S.D.). “They don’t have the votes for a public option with Medicare rates.”

But Grijalva noted that 46 members recently signed a letter pledging to vote against the centrist plan. In the numbers game of the House, that is significant, because Republicans are expected to unite against the healthcare bill. So if 39 Democrats oppose the plan, it wouldn’t get the 218 votes needed to pass. There are 52 Blue Dogs, as well as many other centrist members not in the coalition.

“With negotiated rates, you lose votes on the left,” Herseth Sandlin said. “ I don’t know that either public option can get 218 votes.”

Not to mention by Herseth Sandlin’s own squishiness on the public option?

Obviously, this is just two or three months data. But it raises the possibility that the Blue Dogs, as a block, are losing some of their clout.

Share this entry

Alan Grayson v. the Insurance Industry Hack

/95 Comments/in /by

Greg Sargent reports the totally unsurprising fact that Alex Castellanos, one of CNN’s talking heads, is sucking at the insurance industry teat.

CNN has acknowledged in a statement to me that a high-profile Republican commentator who frequently discusses health care on the air is also the media buyer for one of the ad campaigns bankrolled by America’s Health Insurance Plans, the major industry trade group currently waging war against the White House and Dem reform proposals.

CNN tells me his ties to the industry will be disclosed in the future.

The CNN contributor, well-known GOP consultant Alex Castellanos, is best known for producing the racially-charged “Hands” ad, has repeatedly appeared on the network attacking Dem health care plans and the public option, which is strongly opposed by AHIP.

Castellanos’s consulting firm, National Media, also recently placed over $1 million of TV advertising for AHIP, according to info obtained by Media Matters. AHIP’s most recent $1 million ad buy attacks the health care plan as a threat to Medicare.

Given that news, take a close look at Alan Grayson’s appearance on the Situation Room a few weeks ago. Castellanos keeps claiming there’s a Republican plan. But, as Grayson points out, the plan Castellanos describes is simply a bunch of policies the insurance industry supports.

Seems to me CNN–in its newfound spirit of transparency–ought to give Grayson another opportunity to point out how Castellanos used a “news” show to pimp the industry’s policies.

Share this entry

Harry Reid’s Price Of Failed Leadership

/14 Comments/in , , , /by

Harry Reid is in trouble in his reelection effort in Nevada. From the Las Vegas Review-Journal’s report on a new poll by Mason Dixon:

Nevadans say they’re ready to replace longtime Democratic incumbent Sen. Harry Reid with an untested Republican.

Which Republican? Undecided.

But of their top two picks — former GOP party official Sue Lowden and real estate developer Danny Tarkanian — either one would unseat Reid if the election were held today, according to a poll commissioned by the Review-Journal.

Lowden and Tarkanian are in a statistical tie atop a list of nine primary candidates, according to the survey of Nevada registered voters.
…
In one general election scenario, 49 percent of respondents picked Lowden and 39 percent chose Reid. In another, 48 percent picked Tarkanian to 43 percent for Reid. That poll, which surveyed 500 voters Tuesday through Thursday, has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.

In Clark County, where Reid needs to dominate to win another term, he is in a statistical tie with either Lowden or Tarkanian.

“That is the bad news,” UNLV political science professor David Damore said of Reid’s Clark County numbers. “That tells you there is a disaffected base there.”

For months the perception of Reid among voters has been fixed, with near 100 percent name recognition and a high number of voters viewing him unfavorably. In the latest poll, 38 percent of voters viewed Reid favorably compared to 50 percent with an unfavorable view.

Chris Cillizza, the David Broder wannabe and heir apparent, draws the knee jerk Villager conclusion that Reid’s troubles result from Nevada voters viewing him as too liberal and carrying too much water for Barack Obama.

But Cillizza typically ignores that Barack Obama won Nevada over McCain by a huge margin, 55% to 43% ten short months ago. And Cillizza ignores that Nevada is populated by a huge community of service employees in the Las Vegas and Reno metropolitan areas, and generally a poor to middle class populous in the remaining areas, all of whom are dying for healthcare reform and relief. It is not that Democratic votes are not there for Reid; it is that Nevadans are fed up with his inability to get the things done that they want, and healthcare with a strong public option that will actually help them, is undoubtedly the leader in their clubhouse of reasoning.

The depth of Reid’s problem should not be underestimated. Nor should the challenge of Republican businessman Danny Tarkanian. Tarkanian grew up in Las Vegas, was a top student and Rhodes Scholar candidate, and was point guard on the first of the famous UNLV Runnin Rebel basketball teams that held forth for the better part of two decades at or near the top of the NCAA standings. Oh, by the way, those famous UNLV teams were coached by Danny’s father Jerry “Tark the Shark” Tarkanian, probably the most beloved name in Nevada sports history. Tarkanian’s mother was a Las Vegas City Councilwoman and active philanthropist. The guy has some serious juice from his name and background and will get major support from the GOP assuming he continues to climb in relation to GOP official Sue Lowden, which he is expected to do.

The conclusion here is that Reid has serious problems and they are of his own making. Unless Reid gets with the program, exercises some party discipline from his Majority Leader position and starts working earnestly for the causes, first and foremost the strong public option, of Democratic voters, he will not get any support from the activist base. As Jane Hamsher says: Read more →

Share this entry

Dems’ And Dole’s Flaccid Healthcare Advocacy

/52 Comments/in , /by

Last week, former Senator and GOP Presidential candidate Bob Dole went public endorsing President Obama’s attempt to reform healthcare. Dole did so over already existing objections by Mitch McConnell and other Republicans. It spite of those objections, Dole publicly issued a joint statement with Tom Daschle saying:

The American people have waited decades, and if this moment passes us by, it may be decades more before there is another opportunity

Dole further personally reiterated a previous statement made to the Kansas City Star, to the effect

I don’t want the Republicans putting up a ‘no’ sign and saying, ‘We’re not open for business.

Well that was then; this is now. Now, as of yesterday, less than five days after Dole issued a joint ballyhooed statement to the press supporting Obama’s effort to reform healthcare, he suddenly does not want his words used in an advertisement supporting Obama’s effort to reform healthcare. The Sunday New York Times reports:

At the request of former Senator Bob Dole, Democrats are scrapping plans to broadcast a new commercial that touted Republicans like Mr. Dole speaking in support of overhauling the health-care system.

Mr. Dole lodged a complaint with the White House Saturday night, saying that the new commercial, set to run on national broadcast stations on Monday but available online on Saturday, was deceptive.

“He believes it is deceptive, it was not authorized, and he asked that it be pulled,” Michael Marshall, a spokesman for Mr. Dole, said Sunday morning. “He was told late last night by the White House that it would not run.”

The ad has now been pulled not just from broadcast and cable, but from the internet as well. Except the ad was shown on the Sunday news shows and FDL has it. Take a look, the entire Bob Dole part of the ad lasts less than five seconds and consists of a stock still of Dole and a voice over of his printed earlier statement to the Kansas City Star in the exact words

I want this to pass – we have got to do something.

It was a public statement, given to a newspaper of record, on the record, and Bob Dole has the unmitigated gall to demand that the ad be yanked as being “deceptive”??

And the White House leaped into action immediately and killed the ad??? Simply amazing.

This candy ass bufoonery from the same White House that routinely insults and demeans its own activist base that got it elected and is busting their rears to get meaningful healthcare reform passed.

With this type of consistently weak tea, not to mention the wholesale sell out to the healthcare lobby interests, it is little wonder the reform effort is floundering. If only those little blue pills Dole shills for would work on his, and the White House’s, spine.

Share this entry

Jay Rock Demands 90%

/67 Comments/in /by

This is delectable politics. Fresh off a meeting with Ob-Rahma, Jay Rock has come back to the Senate and demanded 90% loss ratio for any coverage the subsidies pay for. "Loss ratio" is insurance-speak for what they actually have to spend providing actual health care. That means the insurance companies can’t steal 20% of our tax dollars to pay for executive salaries. They get 10%.

They’re peeing their pants right now.

But I suspect Jay Rock has offered this as an outcome of his meeting with Ob-Rahma. I’m sure at that meeting they said, "Jello Jay, We’d like you to pitch other ways to save money. We’d like to come up with a way to keep costs down."

And voila!!! 90%!!! Insurance companies have to actually provide health care without gobs of executive subsidies. We’re actually going to demand a certain amount of health care in exchange for the half trillion MaxTax!!!

After Max Tax and Blanche vote it down, it will be crystal clear this is about profits profits profits. 

I don’t know whether Ob-Rahma will pull their head out of Jay Rock’s amendment. 

But I do know this. Jay Rock is intent on fucking with the narrative that MaxTax and Rahm are intent on spinning. If we do our jobs, it’ll be clear why they’re rejecting common sense ways to deliver health care at lower costs and instead are just interested in subsidizing the insurance companies. 

Share this entry

George Steph Wrings His Hands

/104 Comments/in , /by

George Stephanopoulos, clutching his pearls, wants to know why it was necessary for Alan Grayson to call out Republicans on the floor of the House for their stubborn defense of the status quo failed health care in this country (note, in his post, Steph uses Eric Cantor’s YouTube of this speech, which ought to tell you on whose behalf he decided to cover this).

Why Is This Necessary?

Rep. Alan Grayson , D-Fla., says GOP plan is for people to "die quickly." House Republicans are demanding an apology. Don’t they deserve one? Watch here: UPDATE: At Noon today. Rep. Tom Price plans to introduce a new resolution admonishing…

I’m going to pretend Steph is asking sincerely why this is necessary. 

Exhibit One: What Steph had to say about Joe Wilson’s outburst.

If you needed any more evidence that passions run high on health care and America’s partisan divide cuts deep, it came tonight.  When was the last time you heard a member of Congress (Joe Wilson of S.C.) call the President a liar during a joint session address? (Rahm Emanuel has already approached the GOP Congressional leadership and demanded an apology. John McCain has said Wilson should apologize, too. And just moments ago, Wilson bowed to the inevitable and apologized). For that matter, when was the last time you heard a President use the word “lie” in a joint session address? 

No mention of the fact that Wilson was the one lying here. Instead, an excuse for Wilson because "passions run high." No mention of Wilson’s lie–or those of his Republican colleagues–the following day, either (though, once again, Steph highlights what Eric Cantor wants out there). No mention of Wilson’s lie in Steph’s discussion of Wilson’s opponent’s financial bonanza for his outburst either.

Exhibit Two: George Steph’s "outrage" in response to much more incendiary comments from Republicans–such as when Mike Huckabee said that Democrats would have forced Teddy Kennedy to "go home to take pain pills and die." 

Mike Huckabee tossed a hand grenade into the debate over who’s politicizing Ted Kennedy’s death Thursday morning when he told his radio audience that under Obamacare, Kennedy would be told to "go home to take pain pills and die."

Which Democrat will toss it back first?

Read more →

Share this entry

The Senator Henceforth to Be Known as Jay Rock

/110 Comments/in /by

I’ve been threatening to do this for a while: ditching the moniker "Jello Jay." And while I was going to hold out until we actually got a public option through the Senate, I gotta say that nothing seems to have gotten under MaxTax Baucus’ skin so much as Jay Rock picking apart, detail by detail, the many ways in which the MaxTax is a big giveaway to the health care industry. Here’s Jay Rock echoing Wendell Potter.  And here he is noting how impotent Congress has been at trying to reign in the helath care industry with measly little laws. 

Update, via Digby: Jonathan Cohn explains why Jay Rock showed up to champion health care.

Over the last few weeks Jay Rockefeller has emerged as the Senate’s most visible spokesman for a public insurance option. And, purely from a public relations standpoint, this is something of a mixed blessing. He comes from West Virginia and is pretty popular there, so that certainly helps bring non-coastal credibility to the cause. But Rockefeller speaks in a plodding, rambling style that doesn’t always make for great television. He’s also pretty stubborn, which makes him a loud advocate but not necessarily an effective one, at least given the way the U.S. Senate works.

But Rockefeller gets something better than almost anybody I’ve seen–something he’s expressed in interviews and, most recently, during this weeks hearings of the Senate Finance Committee. It’s how everyday people, particularly those without a lot of money, interact with the health care system. It’s easy to treat health care as an abstraction–to make it all about economic theories and Congressional Budget Office projections. (I’m surely guilty of this myself.) Rockefeller sees it through the eyes of West Virginians making $30,000 a year–people who just want to know they can pay their premiums and that, if they do, the insurance they get will protect them when they get sick. 

Rockefeller’s ability to channel these feelings may seem odd, given his privileged pedigree. But it makes sense given what he’s done with his career. Remember, West Virginia didn’t choose him. He chose West Virginia, starting with his service as a VISTA volunteer. He knows his constituents very well. And he acts that way.

It’s a great piece, but I’d add one thing. I actually think Jay Rock’s stubbornness may be effective, partly because others in the Senate can explain it in terms they understand. Read more →

Share this entry

Chris Christie’s Death Panels for “Exceptions”

/21 Comments/in /by

Seven years ago October 16, at the age of 34, I was diagnosed with breast cancer. After six rounds of pretty harsh chemo, surgery, radiation, and five years of hormonal treatments, I am still clean of cancer.

I’m almost getting to the point where I believe I won’t have a recurrence.  As I prepare to move my mother into her new retirement home, I’m beginning to believe I might outlive her.

Except.

Except for the fact that twelve years ago, when I was 29, my breast cancer was misdiagnosed. I had a palpable lump that my primary care physician agreed merited concern. But when I went to the referral doctor, he refused to send me for a mammogram. He refused to send me for an ultrasound. He refused to send me to aspirate what he assumed was "just a cyst."

That doctor, like NJ GOP Gubernatorial candidate Chris Christie, believed that women in their twenties just don’t get breast cancer. Or rather, those 5% of women who are diagnosed with breast cancer at a young age–like both Jane (diagnosed at 32) and me–are "exceptions." Exceptions for whom we should not require insurance companies to offer diagnostic tests like mammograms. Never mind that my insurance company would have had to spend far less than the $75,000 it eventually spent to treat my cancer if we had treated the lump when I first discovered it. Never mind any costs to treat the heart disease that chemo might eventually give me. Never mind the costs if–god forbid–cancer left untreated for five years shows up in the future in a vital organ or something.

Chris Christie thinks it’s smart to end the requirements on NJ insurance companies that they cover things like mammograms for the "exceptions" like me and Jane. He’s a walking death panel for "exceptions" like me and Jane.

And that’s what those of you from NJ can look forward to if he wins the gubernatorial election this November.

Share this entry

Bill Clinton on Student Loans and Health Care

/33 Comments/in /by

me-and-bill.thumbnail.jpegI told you all that I was going to cover Bill Cinton’s Clinton Global Initiative this week. What I didn’t tell you is that I was invited to attend a meeting between Clinton and a group of about 15 bloggers. On the eve of his big shindig, Clinton generously spent an hour and a half with us last night, answering at least one question from each of us.

I’ll talk about what he said about CGI last night as I cover the event itself. For now, I want to point out an inconsistency between what Clinton said about student loans and what he said about a public option for health care.

In response to a question on education, Clinton hailed the House’s recent action to give Federally-guaranteed loans directly to college students rather than via private loan companies. Clinton noted that under his Administration, he provided this as an option, as opposed to the required change now before Congress. Even with just the optional program, students who took their loans directly from the Federal government saved $9 billion in loan repayments. And the Federal government saved $4 billion because fewer people defaulted on the loans held by the Federal government than defaulted on private loans (this was partly because the Federal government could build in flexibility to keep loan payments affordable). If the Senate succeeds in passing this bill, Clinton noted, it would make college more accessible and affordable for the middle class, and would be a crucial element in keeping America competitive internationally.

In short, Clinton argued that by bypassing the private sector in supporting a critical service to taxpayers, both the users of that service and the government could save money and achieve better outcomes.

Clinton was much less insistent on bypassing the private sector with health care, though. While Clinton made it clear that he personally supports the public option, he suggested that those insisting health care reform must have a public option were being unreasonable. "If it’s not a net negative," Clinton said, "we ought to pass it," repeating a sentiment he voiced at Netroots Nation. Of note, Clinton also pointed out that the public option had been largely gutted by limiting access to it to those who buy their own insurance, suggesting that that made it more expendable in the bill itself.

To explain his stance, Clinton invoked an op-ed Paul Begala wrote last month. Read more →

Share this entry