December 18-21, 2009
Dec 18 03:29 Burgess, Boehner, Kline, Issa vs. The NEA Dec 18 02:51 Rep. McCotter Lays Out An Appealing Vision Dec 18 11:00 Sen. Bill Nelson, Spinmeister Dec 19 10:36 Will He Cave? UPDATE: He Caved Dec 19 15:11 Print Media Noticing Crist Is In Trouble Dec 19 22:24 Collin Peterson, Mary Landrieu & Ben Nelson Dec 20 07:38 Rep. Severson's Op-ed Dec 21 08:06 Ben's Last Big Vote? Dec 21 11:46 Liberal Vitriol Personified
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov
Will He Cave? UPDATE: He Caved
Throughout the health care debate, the Democrats have whined about the GOP being the "Party of No." Thus far, Ben Nelson has been consistently saying no, too. Now it appears that he's put a price at which he can be bought. Based on this AP article , it sounds like he might accept a Landrieu-like deal to cover Medicaid expenses:
Several officials said Nelson was seeking to ease the impact of a proposed insurance industry tax on nonprofit companies, as well as win more federal funds to cover Nebraska's cost of treating patients in Medicaid, the state-federal health care program for the poor. These officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the talks, said the administration and Democratic leaders had offered concessions on those points.Thus far, the difference has been that he isn't changing his position on federal funding of abortion:
Nelson has spoken openly of seeking stricter abortion curbs, and a proposed compromise on that issue has won the tentative support of Catholic hospitals. But the National Right to Life Committee objected during the day, issuing a letter that said it "in no way improves the highly objectionable provisions of the...bill that authorize subsidies for health plans that cover elective abortion, and that authorize federal mandates for private health plans to cover elective abortion."BREAKING NEWS: Sen. Reid apparently figured out what it took for Sen. Nelson to flip :
Sen. Mary Landrieu got the "Louisiana Purchase." Sen. Ben Nelson got the federal government to pick up most his state's future Medicaid tab...forever. As part of the deal to win Nelson's support, the federal government will fund Nebraska's new Medicaid recipients. It's a provision worth about $45 million over the first decade.This isn't health care reform. This is Reform In Name Only, aka RINO. This is looking like a Christmas tree. It'll be interesting to see how many more concessions the House will push for in conference committee. It's practically guaranteed that they'll want their cut of the pie, too, 'pie' that's coming from our pockets.
This isn't a good deal for Nebraskans, something that the Nebraska GOP should remind people of when Nelson's next up for re-election. Nebraskans' insurance costs and health care costs will increase as a result of this legislation. The budget deficits will undoubtedly increase because of this legislation.
Only in Washington, DC, can legislation raise taxes, increase costs and explode the deficit and still be called reform with a straight face.
Posted Saturday, December 19, 2009 11:56 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 19-Dec-09 01:38 PM
By God Harry Reid used the constitution to his advantage in order to get this vote. Nelson's concern was that he didn't want to force Nebraska to pay for abortion. Since the tenth amendment and this compromise gives Nebraska the right to say no on abortion Nelson can try to claim with a straight face that he stopped abortion in Nebraska while keeping it alive in California and states like Minnesota where our Supreme Court forced us to pay for it.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 19-Dec-09 02:38 PM
I've talked with several GOP activists in Nebraska. These activists were telling me that Sen. Nelson should start planning his retirement, that their att'y gen. will run against him next time & defeat him if he runs for re-election.
If there's a lesson to be learned from all this, it's that people aren't in the mood for too-clever-by-half politicians.
Simply put, Sen. Nelson's concessions bought his vote but it also bought Nebraskans higher taxes, higher insurance premiums & higher health care costs. He can tell people that he got concessions till he's blue in the face. IT WON'T MATTER. They'll just know that their insurance premiums & their taxes are alot higher.
Comment 3 by J. Ewing at 19-Dec-09 04:57 PM
We're doomed. Reid and Pelosi will get together, and probably already have, and Pelosi will simply accept the bill over in the House. No conference committee, no wrangling, just a straight 218 votes needed, and off it goes to Obama to sign. Our hopes at this point are two: First, that a forced reading of the bill drags the process out into next year, and second, that this snowstorm keeps one of these Democrat Senators from getting to the vote.
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 19-Dec-09 09:48 PM
Jerry, Enough with the doom & gloom. What Sen. Nelson's sellout means going forward is that we have to remind people that the Democrats voted in lockstep with their leadership & that their votes made health insurance more expensive, tha their votes increased taxes at the worst possible time & that it increased health care costs.
While it's looking like we lost this fight, that doesn't mean there isn't another phase to this, namely, using these votes against Democrats in the next couple elections. That includes wrapping the tax increases against the middle class around President Obama's neck in 2012.
When the GOP retakes the House next year & when we make a strong run at retaking the Senate, it's their obligation to pass legislation that forces the Democrats to vote against middle class tax cuts & force President Obama to veto middle class tax cuts. It's also their responsibility to try eliminating much of the crap that this health care legislation puts in place. If Democrats want to filibuster it, that's just another thing we'll use against them when they're next up for re-election.
Comment 4 by eric z. at 19-Dec-09 05:58 PM
Gary, I agree entirely with you that the situation involving the obstructionist - for a price - Dem senators from Louisiana and Nebraska is shameful. If only the GOP were not so lockstep against true reform it would not be needed to cut offensive deals with the likes of Landrieu, Nelson, and Lieberman.
However, the truth is the GOP is being as it is, and these people are holding up things - in a different sense than the GOP "read the amendment" holds things up, timewise.
It is bad. I think the three of them need to be challenged in the primary by populist-progressives.
If Ned Lamont has another run in him, he would win this time. After that stupidity of Lieberman, at the RNC event.
Response 4.1 by Gary Gross at 19-Dec-09 09:40 PM
Frankly, I think that there will be 2 Republican senators representing Connecticut after the 2012 elections. Dodd's history after his corruption was exposed. Lieberman is hated by the Nutroots, meaning whoever loses the GOP primary this year will have a great shot at picking Lieberman off in 2012.
As for obstruction on the GOP's part, the truth is that their amendments in the Senate were strategic. They showed who put a higher priority on loyalty to party leadership than on representing their constituents. The Democrats 'moderates' have been exposed as liberals just waiting for their payoff. Ben Nelson got a couple concessions but the fact is that Nebraskans will pay higher premiums & higher taxes because he accepted his thirty pieces of silver.
The American people now know that there isn't a single Democrat who won't abandon their principles for trinkets. Good luck selling that in an election year.
Burgess, Boehner, Kline, Issa vs. The NEA
According to this DC Examiner article , Michael Burgess just introduced a bill to restore the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program. The bill's name is the DC Student Opportunity and Choice Act .
"The DC school voucher program has been undeniably successful for the student who have had the opportunity to participate, so it would make sense to continue the program and expand it to even more students in the District of Columbia," Burgess said.This is one of those rare times when great policy mixes with putting the Democrats in a difficult position. If they oppose this legislation, they'll be rightly characterized as the NEA's puppet. They'd also rightly be characterized as opposing a program that's lifting education outcomes for inner city children. (I wouldn't want to defend a vote that gives students a great opportunity to succeed in life.)
This bill would overwrite the language contained in the recent 1,000 page omnibus spending bill by a joint conference of a House and Senate Appropriations Committee awaiting the President's signature that effectively ends private school choice in the city.Speaker Pelosi and President Obama, welcome to hell's tiny corner -- east of the rock, just barely to the west of the hard place. If I didn't know better, I'd say that the "Party of No" just proposed a bill that would improve the lives of children growing up in abject poverty. Doesn't that contradict the Democrats' characterization that the Republicans' agenda was just saying no all the time?
Co-sponsoring the legislation are Congressmen John Boehner (R-Ohio), John Kline (R-Minnesota), Darrell Issa (R-California), and Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-New Jersey).
For years, the Democrats have catered to the wishes of the NEA. There's emerging a group of savvy GOP politicians, both at the national, state and local levels, who have figured out that this is a winning issue for conservatives. Here in Minnesota, Mitch Berg has been outstanding on education issues, highlighting the shortcomings of the current public school system. Legislators like David Hann, Mark Buesgens and Steve Gottwalt are pushing for edcuation reform that focuses on educational outcomes in exchange for funding.
Saying that this isn't part of EdMinn's agenda is understatement. I'd be surprised if the NEA's reaction to the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program isn't privately met with disdain. (They don't dare say that publicly out of fear for the political hit they'd take.) I'm betting that this bill gets a hearing and that it's amended in committee to include one poison pill after another.
If the NEA and other special interests take that approach, the GOP should challenge them on that. I'd force the Democrats to defend their amendments to the bill.
I'm betting that it gets a hearing because Rep. John Kline is the ranking member of the House Education and Labor Committee. If Chairman Miller tries playing games with this, I'm confident that Rep. Kline can make life miserable for him.
With us heading into an election year, Democrats will be especially jumpy. They know that they're in for a difficult year. Every time that they propose something foolish, I'd highlight the amendment. I'd force them to either withdraw the amendment out of embarassment or I'd make them regret their votes on foolish amendments, especially if they're aimed at appeasing a special interest group.
Posted Friday, December 18, 2009 3:36 AM
Comment 1 by eric z. at 18-Dec-09 07:38 AM
Nothing new.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 18-Dec-09 08:30 AM
Giving people who have no hope isn't a big deal??? The NEA, David Obey & President Obama deserve to get pounded for opposing this program.
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 18-Dec-09 12:22 PM
Eric:
Obama and the Democrats want to give people money to buy cars. They want to give people health care.
It's new that you have an idea to spend money to help blacks that the democrats who claim to represent blacks don't want to support and the Republicans who are suppose to be racists supports.
It shows once again that the teacher vote is more important than the black vote.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Rep. McCotter Lays Out An Appealing Vision
Thursday afternoon, I had the privilege of interviewing House GOP Policy Committee Chairman Thad McCotter on a variety of subjects.
We started with the health care debate going on. I started by saying that, from an outsider's perspective, it looked like Senate Democrats were like a dog chasing its tail. Chairman McCotter said that he wasn't into predicting legislative outcomes, especially in the Senate. He said, though, that he took particular note of Howard Dean criticizing the bill from a left-of-center perspective. Chairman McCotter then said that the AFL-CIO and the SEIU not showing up for the Democrats' pass health care rally was especially noteworthy.
Sticking with health care, I said that I've ended a number of health care posts this way:
Only in Washington, DC, could they pass a bill that increases the deficit, raises taxes and still leaves 25,000,000 people uninsured and still call it reform.
The laughter from the other end of the phone told me that Chairman McCotter appreciated the sarcasm.
I then asked whether signing a health care bill into law might start the next round of layoffs. I said that I was basing that on businessmen and women talking about not hiring because of uncertain labor costs. Chairman McCotter said that he's warned Republicans that just knowing what the labor costs are isn't enough. He said that knowing that you're being taxed too much won't help job creation.
Chairman McCotter said that it's important that we bring certainty to the labor costs but that we also make labor costs affordable enough so that businesses have an incentive to start hiring and growing their companies again. According to Chairman McCotter, that isn't possible without controlling spending and reducing government's intrusion into our lives.
The next subject that we talked about was the day-to-day work that the House GOP Conference was doing in voting against irresponsible spending. Chairman McCotter said that that's a daily fight that they must get right each time so that "the sovereign American people" will trust Republicans to govern again.
I pointed out that they were doing a very good job with that in the House and, most importantly, that they were doing an outstanding job listening to the American people. Chairman McCotter said that "listening to our bosses, the sovereign American people, is a priority." I noted that people were upset with the Democrats for not listening to them on health care. I said that the Democrats' ignoring the American people was fueling a fire that won't be extinguished anytime soon.
Again, Chairman McCotter said that it's their job to be responsive to the people and to walk the walk, that that's the only way that the American people would start trusting them again.
Chairman McCotter said that the House Republican Policy Committee has worked diligently to put together the principles that Republicans would govern by. He told me to check out their website , which I plan on doing this afternoon. He said that everyone should "order a free copy of the Policy Committee's pamphlet We the People: WIDE AWAKE." I've already ordered my copy. I'd suggest that you follow this link to order your copy today, too.
Here's a brief excerpt from Wide Awake:
We Are Wide AwakeLadies and Gentlemen, Those are the underlying principles that guide the House GOP's policy proposals. Frankly, they're the type of principles that inspire me to work hard to elect more men and women to the House and Senate. These principles are the type of principles that should guide the next generation of conservatives.
They were "Wide Awakes" - Americans marching through sleepy hamlets for candidate Abraham Lincoln and the cause of human freedom. They were "Republicans!"
Today, Republicans continue to embrace our enduring duty to:
1. Expand human liberty and self-government;
2. Conserve our cherished way of life and its foundations of faith, family, community and country;
3. Empower Americans to achieve constructive, necessary change; and
4. Defend America's national security.
And we act upon five permanent principles:
1. Our liberty is from God not the government;
2. Our sovereignty is in our souls not the soil;
3. Our security is from strength not surrender;
4. Our prosperity is from the private sector not the public sector; and
5. Our truths are self-evident not relative.
In September, 2007, I wrote a post titled " Without a Vision, the People Perish ." Thanks to Chairman McCotter's leadership, conservatives have a new vision to aspire to and uphold.
Another topic that we discussed was the role out-of-control spending is playing in hurting the economy. Chairman McCotter said that people and small businesses know that tax increases are inevitable once they see spending rising at the level that it's increased already this year.
I asked whether the Bush tax cuts expiring next year was having a negative effect on the economy. Chairman McCotter said that the Bush tax cuts expiring, Cap And Trade, Stimulus II and health care, combined, were dragging the economy down. He said that, as a rule, the private sector needs to know that government spending is under control.
He then said that it's important to start from the right premise, which is that the private sector is the only path back to a healthy economy and sustained prosperity. Chairman McCotter mentioned several times that government's job is to get spending controlled so that the private sector could start putting their innovation to work in reviving the economy.
I mentioned that the Democratic leadership, as it's currently configured, would never admit their errors and change directions. I said that's why the 2010 elections were important to changing policy. (Again, the conversation didn't stray into campaign strategy. This was just something mentioned in passing as part of the solution for our policy woes.)
The other thing that I found refreshing was Chairman McCotter's enthusiastic support for the TEA Party movement. In fact, to the House GOP leadership's credit, they're all enthusiastic supporters of the TEA Party movement.
The interview confirmed my hunch that Rep. McCotter is one of the GOP's rising stars. I've heard numerous times that Paul Ryan is "the smartest guy in the room on policy." Having interviewed him, I can attest to the fact that he's an exceptional talent policywise. After Thursday's interview, though, I think that there isn't a dime's worth of difference between Mssrs. Ryan and McCotter. Together with Conference Chairman Pence, the House GOP has an impressive trio at the top of the leadership chain.
Originally posted Friday, December 18, 2009, revised 01-Feb 10:04 PM
Comment 1 by eric z. at 18-Dec-09 07:36 AM
Work as cheap as the Chinese is the GOP message to the US workforce?
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 18-Dec-09 11:17 AM
Where did you come up with that? We'd rather see small businesses create jobs because they've discovered the next big thing. Cutting taxes gives entrepreneurs an incentive to start innovating. Innovation will drive wages higher.
Sen. Bill Nelson, Spinmeister
During an interview with Greta van Susteren Wednesday night, Bill Nelson told a whopper or two. Follow this link to read the entire transcript. Here's the whopper Sen. Nelson told:
VAN SUSTEREN: Does the bill -- does the bill cut Medicare?Medicare won't be solid because of the Medicare cuts. That's because the money being cut from Medicare is going to insure the uninsured. Sen. Nelson knows that because that's what the CMS actuary testified to recently.
NELSON: What it does is...Medicare Advantage, that is a 14 percent boost to insurance companies, which is Medicare Advantage, it's a Medicare HMO...what it does is it tapers that out over time. But what I did was in the Finance Committee say that we need to certainly get the efficiencies over time, but it's not fair to take it away from the people that already have this additional 14 percent. And so in the Finance Committee, I grandfathered in those that have it, particularly with regard to my state.
So that's the lay of the land. That was done for some other states, as well.
VAN SUSTEREN: All right, that's the Medicare Advantage. What about Medicare itself? Are people going to lose some of the benefits that they have had under this Democratic bill?
NELSON: Well, the answer to that is no. As a matter of fact, what this bill does is save Medicare in the future because if you don't change Medicare right now, it's going bust within a few years. This brings the cost curve down over time, so that Medicare will be solid. And where it gets the efficiencies is the doctors, the hospitals, other health care providers have to come off of some of the reimbursements that they get under Medicare. That's how you get the efficiencies.
More significantly, though, is the fact that Sen. Nelson essentially said that the way to saving Medicare is cutting re-imbursements to doctors and hospitals.
MEMO TO SEN. NELSON: Doctors are already losing money on Medicare patients. That's why they're cutting down on the number of Medicare patients they treat. If Medicare is cut more, hospitals will go bankrupt. Meanwhile, doctors will either go bankrupt or retire, leaving seniors without the health care they need.
Sen. Nelson would be wise lining up a lobbyist's job while he's still a senator. Voting to cut Medicare isn't the way to endear himself to Florida's seniors. On the contrary, it's the fastest path to joining the retirement community.
I haven't talked much about Sen. Nelson of Florida but I'll take the opportunity to expand on him here. I've never trusted him because he isn't a principled politician. In short, he's slippery. That isn't where the American people are at. After dealing with President Obama, they're looking for principled politicians whose statements don't come with an expiration date. They want politicians that aren't looking for the next too-clever-by-half angle to exploit.
The bottom line is that Bill Nelson is dishonest. What he isn't is a man of gravitas.
Posted Friday, December 18, 2009 11:10 AM
Comment 1 by eric z. at 19-Dec-09 08:22 AM
With your assessment of Nelson as harsh as it is, should you be questioning his judgment or his motives?
Just so you know, Gary, every so often, once in a blue moon, I do step a bit beyond questioning your judgment.
Seldom, of course. In all this, we are both gentlemen.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 19-Dec-09 08:55 AM
Eric, We've had our disagreements but I've ALWAYS THOUGHT that you're a decent guy.
What I don't put up with is people who think they're slick, that think they can flash a cheesy smile like Nelson, then expect us to believe everything he says.
Cutting $500,000,000,000 from Medicare & reducing payments to hospitals & doctors will certainly affect seniors.
Comment 3 by eric z. at 19-Dec-09 06:23 PM
Thanks Gary. On some things we are not far apart. Your later post on Nelson, etc., it is shameful how the squeeze can be applied.
I tried one comment, with links, about how the Dems are themselves having concerns over too much of a Munich appeasement to the holdouts that need to be wheedled because of the GOP not breaking the Dr. No ranks.
Too many playing politics. Too few really wanting the system to run better and be fairer to the bulk of the people.
But this new thing, a house where a majority is required but now it is sixty and that's not in the Constitution. Make the bastards actually stand 24/7 and filibuster if that's the thought.
It's stupid, as it stands.
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 19-Dec-09 09:32 PM
Eric, I've rejected the "Party of No" monicker that the Democrats & their media allies have given the GOP. Just because Democrats act like we haven't offered solutions & just because the Agenda Media hasn't reported about the GOP's proposals doesn't mean the GOP hasn't offered solutions.
In fact, I'll bet most Democrats don't know that the House & Senate GOP put together their alternative to the stimulus bill & that the CBO's appraisal was that it cost less than half of the Democrats' payoff bill & that CBO said that it'd create twice as many jobs as the Democrats' payoff bill.
Print Media Noticing Crist Is In Trouble
This Miami Herald article declares that Charlie Crist is in trouble. The interview Crist had with them will only hurt him more. Here's a partial transcript of the interview:
What are your priorities?What a pathetic interview. This is how panicked candidates react under pressure. Gov. Crist understands that he's in trouble, in the polls and in perception. He's in danger of losing his fundraising edge, too.
"Jobs. jobs jobs. These are difficult times. I think we're all very cognizant of that fact, but I think my duty and the duty of all of us in public service is to strive to do everything we can to try to improve that situation for our fellow Floridians."
But how do we create those jobs?
"Jobs, jobs, jobs...It really is all about the economy. There's no question about it."
Referring to a sweeping plan to expand rail lines, he added, "This is not a panacea for all jobs and all unemployment. I understand that, but it's certainly a great step forward. It's continuing to provide hope for people and that's important to do, too. People need some encouragement during these difficult times in order to see that that there's a brighter day ahead."
I haven't heard you offer a single specific.
Crist bristled and reiterated his commitment to investing in rail and bio-technology.
"There's only so much I can do," he added. "I'm not the king. I can't change the global meltdown in the economy."
Do you have a bio-tech initiative?
"There are things already set in motion that I think we can augment and improve upon, and that's my goal."
What can the state do about foreclosures?
"I'm a very open-minded guy. I try to approach any issue with an attitude of -- `Is there a way we can be helpful? Is there a way that we can make a difference?'"
Where are we in this [economic] recovery?
"I'm not an economist by training. I'm a lawyer. But it seems to me that there are indicators that it's getting better...We all need to work on this together to improve the plight and the future of our people to make it bright rather than the opposite.
This article tells me that Gov. Crist is panicking:
Feeling the chill wind of conservative displeasure in his US Senate race, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist is floating the idea of a cut in the state's corporate income tax, which generates $1.7 billion annually.It's apparent that Gov. Crist is panicking. It's apparent because he's proposing this with Florida facing a big deficit. Gov. Crist knows that that big of a tax cut won't be passed right now. This is what desperation looks like. Gov. Crist's proposal fits the political definition of flailing.
Crist told the editorial board of the South Florida Sun Sentinel Thursday he thought a tax cut might free up more money for hiring. But with the state's budget already in the red, he will likely have a hard time selling the idea to legislators next year.
The only question left is this: When will Gov. Crist drop out for the good of the party? Marco Rubio has already caught him in the polls without him having statewide name recognition. If Gov. Crist insists on playing this out until the primary, he'll lose by high double digits.
Finally, it's worth noting that unprincipled politicians won't do well in a TEA Party world. That's why I'm saying goodbye to Gov. Crist.
Posted Saturday, December 19, 2009 3:17 PM
Comment 1 by eric z. at 19-Dec-09 06:06 PM
Grateful Dead "Easy Wind"
Gotta find a woman be good to me
Won't hide my liquor try, to serve me tea.
Any room in the tea baggie movement for Deadheads?
There is something of a civil war going on in the GOP, and now the progressives are rising up against the appeasers.
Gary, make plenty of popcorn. It's showtime, going into the new year.
Will they be any further along and resolved, by All Fool's Day?
Comment 2 by eric z. at 20-Dec-09 07:25 AM
Turning your headline around, does Crist realize the print media are in trouble?
Sometime you should take a break from looking at immediate developments day to day, and week to week, and decide from either party's perspective - how concentration and refocus of the media outlets might affect diverse messages and whether it might lead to greater polarization and divisiveness, or to some emerging consensus. I wonder over that from time to time. I really cannot say there's any apparent answer. Too cloudy a crystal ball. Is your's any better?
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 20-Dec-09 07:58 AM
Eric, Most politicians don't understand that the print media is dead.
Talk radio, the blogs & Fox News, which actually does real reporting, Drudge & Andrew Breitbart are changing media forever.
As recently as the 1990s, name recognition & fundraising were keys to a successful campaign. Today, not so much. A Barack Obama, a Ron Paul or a Sarah Palin can raise tons of cash & develop a monstrous list of supporters by putting together an appealing message.
BTW, the TEA Party movement is changing party politics, too.
Collin Peterson, Mary Landrieu & Ben Nelson
It isn't a mistake to say that Collin Peterson, Mary Landrieu and Ben Nelson are a band of idiots. Each of them voted for legislation that will raise taxes on their constituents. In exchange for their abandoning their principles, each got concessions .
Peterson accepted his thirty pieces of silver after getting a couple minor concessions on disposing of manure. Landried accepted her thirty pieces of silver by putting together the second Louisiana Purchase. Last, and certainly the most expensive, was Sen. Nelson getting major concessions on Medicaid payments from the federal government.
If these sound like great deals, think again.
In Rep. Peterson's case, yes, he got a couple superfluous concessions. That's what HE got. Unfortunately, if Cap and Tax is signed into law, his constituents will get higher gas prices and higher home heating and electric bills. That isn't a fair tradeoff.
In Sen. Landrieu's case, she got $300,000,000 in additional federal payments for the proposed Medicaid expansion. If that sounds like a good deal, think again. Once that $300,000,000 runs out in 3-4 years, then Louisiana gets stuck with a major expansion of Medicaid. Not only that but Louisiana residents will be subjected to higher insurance premiums, higher taxes and higher health care costs.
In Sen. Nelson's case, he got a major concession on Medicaid. His constituents get a huge spike in insurance premiums and higher taxes.
In addition, everyone across the United States, especially the generations that are coming up next, get saddled with hundreds of billions of dollars of new debt, which will lead to higher inflation and bigger tax increases.
The good news is that Rep. Peterson, Sen. Landrieu and Sen. Nelson got concessions. The bad news is that We The People get stuck with paying for their concessions. If that doesn't sit right with you, then the right response is to vote these spineless politicians out the next time they're up for re-election.
Posted Saturday, December 19, 2009 10:29 PM
Comment 1 by eric z. at 20-Dec-09 07:21 AM
Out of curiosity, where do you see the confrence committee and the final balancing of the two versions of that bill ending up.
Will there be streamlining or increased complexity by trying to be all things to all people from both bills.
Will there be any coherent core set of changes - or will it be total smoke and mirrors with everyone saying "We won. It's great. Next problem."?
Do you see any greater indicator of who really won, beyond how the market values the future of the insurer group, the big pharma group, and the HMO - provider group?
Do you anticipate that it will become easier or less costly to get a wound sewn up, a tetanus booster shot, and two week's worth of antibiotics if you slip on the ice this winter?
I do not see that happening, regardless of what the pack of windbags, both parties do or say.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 20-Dec-09 07:53 AM
Will there be any coherent core set of changes?No. There isn't a core set of principles now. In fact, the minute they started buying votes is the minute the Democrats lost control.
Do you see any greater indicator of who really won?The insurance companies won & out-of-control government won. PERIOD. Everyone else lost, especially Medicare patients & future generations. That's a horrible-looking 'scorecard'.
One last thing: the signing of this bill will trigger the next round of layoffs.
Rep. Severson's Op-ed
Rep. Dan Severson, (R-HD14A), has an op-ed in this morning's St. Cloud Times that needs highlighting. Rep. Severson's op-ed highlights (surprise, surprise) the DFL's my-way-or-the-highway governing approach:
After the 2008 elections, legislators understood the clear message from voters for bipartisan solutions. To meet that expectation, we offered dozens of specific proposals for improving the economy, cutting the cost of government and reforming the way your money is spent.At the St. Cloud stop of the Cherrypicked Testimony Tour, the DFL didn't even bother hearing about ways to improve Minnesota's business climate :
Those ideas were neither Republican nor Democrat, but ideas from Minnesotans who we listen to and represent. They were offered with the expectation they would be judged based on their merits, not partisan politics. That is what the public expects.
Unfortunately, nearly every idea was dismissed out-of-hand by a DFL majority interested in only its own agenda during the 2009 legislative session. This partisan "leadership" led to a historic breakdown of the budget process, which served no one well.
Yet on the brink of the 2010 legislative session, it seems little has changed, as evidenced by these four meeting in one day in St. Cloud. This event, arranged with no input or consultation with Republicans, appeared to be a tightly orchestrated remake of February's so-called "listening sessions."
Many of us attended those meetings only to learn that some speakers received advance talking points while honest, everyday citizens were told there wasn't enough time to speak.
The testimony taken was broken down into categories, including segments dealing with education, HHS, the judicial system and county governments.In short, the testimony was broken down into talking about government. The DFL is so devoted to solving government's problems that they didn't bother eliciting testimony on improving Minnesota's business climate or Minnesota's economy.
The other thing that's noteworthy is that the DFL didn't bother eliciting testimony on reforming how government operates. This is proof that the DFL is the party of the status quo. The only thing that changes year-to-year is their desire to increase spending and increasing taxes.
The documentation on the DFL's incompetence is substantial. Let's start with the DFL's hodgepodge budget that technically balanced Minnesota's budget for about half a day. Technically, it was scored to give Minnesota a $3,625 budget surplus at the end of this biennium. It was a budget so flimsy that WCCO and KSTP didn't even take it seriously in terms of eliminating the deficit.
This past session, the DFL's 'leadership', specifically Sen. John Marty, ignored health care reforms that would've already been saving us tens of millions of dollars in savings to the taxpayers. Rep. Gottwalt's Healthy Minnesota Plan received unanimous DFL support in its first committee hearing. That didn't matter to Sen. Marty. He didn't even give the legislation a hearing. It should be noted that Sen. David Hann of Eden Prairie was the bill's sponsor on the Senate side.
I extensively documented the DFL legislature's intraparty fight on taxes, including here , here , here and here . In fact, Rep. Gene Pelowski's opposition to raising taxes has 'earned' him a primary fight this year.
Here's another key observation in Rep. Severson's op-ed:
Those events produced absolutely no progress toward a balanced budget or a better economy. It may have provided a venue for hand-picked testifiers to criticize Gov. Tim Pawlenty, but that only served to poison the relationship between the governor and the DFL-controlled Legislature.Last winter, many MOBsters wrote about the DFL constantly criticizing Gov. Pawlenty. It's unfortunate that the DFL didn't put a priority on having a real discussion with Minnesota on what's most important to them. A line President Bush used against John Kerry in their final debate fits perfectly into this discussion. After listening to Sen. Kerry whine about what President Bush hadn't done in terms of national security, President Bush simply replied that "A laundry list of complaints isn't an agenda."
When Rep. Tom Emmer highlighted the DFL's refusal to put out their own budget , Speaker Kelliher suggested that this was just a GOP gimmick:
It happened again Thursday. The Minnesota House was meeting in full session, running through some routine business, when Rep. Tom Emmer, R-Delano, rose, cleared his throat and said to DFLers, "We've been here a month; why are we still waiting for your budget proposal?"Speaker Kelliher's refusal to offer a substantive plan tells thinking people that the DFL didn't have an appealing, positive agenda. The DFL's agenda, other than criticizing Gov. Pawlenty, contained spending increases and tax hikes. Again, a laundry list of criticisms isn't an agenda. The DFL doesn't have new ideas. They're the party of the status quo. That's why they're peddling their agenda of tax increases and saying yes to everything on their political allies' wish lists.
There were some head shakes, but no response. The House got back to the business at hand.
Emmer's question has become the mantra of state Republicans. In every public forum, at least one or two Republican legislators raise the question: If DFL legislators don't like Gov. Tim Pawlenty's proposed budget, why don't they come up with one of their own?
"It's strategic," said House Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher, DFL-Minneapolis, of the Republican cry. " It's designed to freak people out on our side , and it takes attention off the governor's budget."
As Rep. Severson and Rep. Gottwalt frequently point out, setting priorities is important in putting a budget together. Living within our means is another thing Reps. Severson and Gottwalt highlight frequently. Clearly, saying no isn't something that the DFL does. (Perhaps it's genetic? Perhaps you've noticed that their DC brethren don't seem able to say no to anything on the liberals' wish list.)
The bigger point in this discussion is that the Minnesota GOP has a long list of ideas, ranging from strengthening Minnesota's economy to fixing health care by using market-driven solutions to fixing Minnesota's tax code to education reforms that focus more on educational results and accountability than on increasing funding and raising taxes.
When the DFL took total control of the legislature, Minnesota's economy was structurally solid. A short 4 years later, it's in shambles. If voters give our next governor a GOP legislature, Minnesota's economy will improve both in terms of structural soundness and in terms of creating wealth and sustainable prosperity.
Anything less than that is unacceptable. The DFL won't improve the economy because they're the party of ever-expanding government.
Posted Sunday, December 20, 2009 7:38 AM
No comments.
Ben's Last Big Vote?
It's apparent that Ben Nelson doesn't have a spine. The notion that he's a courageous moderate just got torched. Now that he's been outed as just another spineless politician, it's time for him to go. According to this article , the Nebraska GOP is getting started with defeating him:
The chairman of Nebraska's Republican Party predicts that Sen. Ben Nelson's decision to back sweeping health care legislation will be his downfall.I'd be wrong in saying that Ben Nelson is a wild-eyed hardline progressive. The facts don't bear that out. What the facts do tell us is that he's spineless, unprincipled and willing to sell out his constituents when his puppetmaster starts pulling the strings. Sen. Nelson's lack of principles is apparent. What it isn't is flattering.
Mark Fahleson says, "I think this is the end of his political career in the state of Nebraska."
On Saturday, the state party launched a Web site, Give Ben The Boot , to collect funds to oust the Democrat in the 2010 election.
Nelson said earlier Saturday that he decided to support the measure after winning concessions to limit the availability of abortions in insurance sold in newly created exchanges, as well as tens of million in federal Medicaid funds for Nebraska.
Fahleson says Americans are outraged by the legislation and "they're going to punish politicians at the polls."
What we desperately need in Washington are politicians (a) with spines, (b) with wisdom and (c) with the courage to say no to bad legislation. Sen. Nelson is missing these three things.
It won't be difficult talking Nebraska AG Jon Bruning to run against Nelson. He was prepared to challenge Chuck Hagel in a GOP primary because Hagel was a spineless politician who marched to the beat of a different drummer. If he jumps in, Bruning would be immediately competitive. In fact, he might be the immediate favorite.
If the elections were held today, the GOP would pick up seats in Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Nebraska, Nevada and Pennsylvania, with California, Indiana, New York, Oregon and Washington being possibilities. North Dakota will flip, too, if Gov. Hoeven runs against Sen. Dorgan.
The thing that this debate has done is that it's exposed to the nation that supposed Democratic moderates are nothing of the sort. It'll be difficult for Evan Bayh to sell himself as a moderate in Indiana. The only question left there is whether the Indiana GOP can recruit a high quality candidate. If they do, then they'll put Bayh in a difficult position of defending voting for this health care monstrosity.
While the initial topic of this post was Sen. Nelson, it's really about all Democratic senators. Each of them cast the vote that imposed the tax increases contained in this health care legislation on the American people. Because it was a straight party-line vote, the American people will know that the Democrats are the politicians to blame.
Sen. Nelson will undoubtedly attempt to rebuild his moderate image with other votes. People in Nebraska won't buy it the minute their tax increases and their higher premiums hit their wallets.
Only in Washington, DC would they call a bill that increases health insurance premiums, hikes taxes and leaves 25,000,000 people uninsured health care reform.
Posted Monday, December 21, 2009 8:15 AM
Comment 1 by eric z. at 21-Dec-09 08:18 AM
Gary, Ben doesn't have a heart.
He wants to force unwanted children on people. That's sick.
He and Lieberman ought to have progressives challenging them in primaries, although Lieberman should run as a Republican. It's where he lives, insurance love and all.
I think if three or even one of the GOP Senators had a spine, and would have broken rank then a much better result would have been attained. Ditto for the GOP House members. They are impediments to progress. They are not part of any solution - indeed, they are not part of the problem, they are the problem.
If people nationwide realized that Michele Bachmann is not really out of step with the others of them, as some have off-the-record said, then their minority would shrink.
They delude people, as do the Liebermans of the world.
Dayton was right. DC is a cesspool.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 21-Dec-09 10:15 AM
Eric, STFU. Who appointed you God??? "Forcing unwanted children" on people??? Maybe we should get rid of adults who rail against unwanted children instead. The world would be a better place without hatemongers that think that human life isn't precious.
As for the delusion that GOP senators breaking with their party producing a better result, I cna't believe you're that gullible. The product wouldn't have changed much at all.
Response 1.2 by Gary Gross at 21-Dec-09 10:17 AM
Ditto for the GOP House members. They are impediments to progress.Careful now. This year's "impediments" will be 2011's majority party.
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 21-Dec-09 09:16 AM
Hey Gary:
I got two more persons who we can target not on your list. Here's the commercial:
Show a plane where people are sitting and there's a bald man about fifty talking on the phone.
The stewardess walks over and tells him to turn off the phone because we're about to take off.
The man stays on the phone and says, "You can't tell me what to do you bitch"
Then put a message on the screen.
If you thinks that rude that's what Senator Charles Schummer recently did and Senator Gilbrand who was on the plane never demanded that Senator Schummer resign.
Lets resign them November 2010 with our votes.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 3 by walter hanson at 21-Dec-09 09:20 AM
Hey Eric:
Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi wrote their bills in private and ignored Republican imput such as real tort reform which the CBO scored will save money unlike this lie which the Democrats claim this is paid for.
They weren't looking for real reform ideas just government control of health care. DC is cesspool because the politicans you like want to control our lifes.
They'll tell us what to eat!
They'll tell us what to drive!
They'll tell us how much of our hardearned money we're allowed to have.
People like Michele Bachmann because she doesn't support that nonsense!
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 4 by eric z. at 21-Dec-09 10:21 AM
Walter - The problem with tort reform is that the doctors do not police their own. What weeds out the hacks is the litigation, but only at extreme costs. The insurance industry loves the existing tort law. They write the errors and omisions policies, and the underwriters are well aware of any particular individual's litigation history and prior cost record. It is like the bonding companies being relied upon to weed out the inept or crooked contractors.
Walter, how can you have tort reform without a mechanism to weed out the incompetent doctors? And, what mechanism would you propose given that self-regulation has been a farce - the reason that the errors and omissions rates are sky high and that unneeded CYA tests and procedures get done?
I am serious, how Gary or Walter, would you police out bad medicine if you curbed the plaintiffs' bar?
.......
Gary, whichever of the GOP people, you might remember, said that healthcare would be Obama's Waterloo, may have been prescient.
Do you see any chance he can sell the mess as progress and meeting the desires the polls showed people wanting?
Surely the insurance companies will be funding the same politicians they've been funding; you buy and the goods are delivered, you tend to keep the ongoing business relationships.
I'd be interested on a perspective of what timeframe the mop-up will take, I say at least a decade and a half; and that's being hopeful.
I understand we disagree on what will be needed in a mop up, and that in part is why I think two and a half decades might also be a sound guess.
Any thoughts, beyond what appears to be general agreement that Ben Nelson is worthless and that Nebraskans might recognize that despite pork amounts.
Finally, Walter, Pelosi and Ried, I have not a single word in defense of either. Both were deficient. The only thing is the GOP had Bush-Cheney, and that majority during Clinton's time, and did not do jack for the nation. Two costly wars, and an Af-Pak situation where the US is being laughed at, is not Obama's fault - but for the surge decision.
And, GOP guys, the Turkmenistan pipeline, the Chinese got the pipeline, and the US oil firms did not get the lion's share of Iraqi oil contracts, so Bush's constituency lost big time.
Any words, Walter or Gary, in defense of Bush-Cheney? I know Gary's done some disavowing that way, but vaguely.
Response 4.1 by Gary Gross at 21-Dec-09 10:29 AM
The GOP senator that talked about HCR as Obama's waterloo is Jim Demint, one of the most decent people in the Senate. His statement wasn't a vindictive statement, just a political observation.
Lawsuit Abuse Reform:
The lawsuit abuse reform enacted in Texas & other states simply limits 'Pain & Suffering' awards & nothing else. It doesn't have anything to do with income loss damages. It doesn't have anything to do with capping payments for doctor treatments, either.
Comment 5 by eric z. at 21-Dec-09 10:22 AM
Gary if human life is precious, why do you oppose social programs aimed at making it better for real people, instead of this embryo nonsense?
Response 5.1 by Gary Gross at 21-Dec-09 10:44 AM
Because embryos are the start of human life. Besides, you talked about forcing "unwanted children" on parents. There's a difference.
Comment 6 by walter hanson at 22-Dec-09 10:49 AM
Eric:
Where do I begin. George Bush 43 proved to be a much better president than Obama. George Bush cared about protecting the United States of the America in the real world. Obama wants people to praise him and love him so bad he wants to destroy the country. After all why tell the enemy what tatics we might use on them and attack the agency whose job it is to find Bin Laden and stop their possible future terrorist attacks. Last time I looked Bin Laden wasn't working in the CIA in the United State of America.
You said Bush got us into two wars. One war was Iraq where Richard Clark (a Bush critic if you don't remember) had basically admitted that Iraq was just months from having the atom bomb in the early 1990's. Thus using that as basis alone Bush never lied to go to war with Iraq which Democrats claim. As for Afghanistan are you saying that after 9-11 that we shouldn't have even made an effort to go after Bin Laden.
If you want to blame somebody there was this man by the name of President Bill Clinton who cared more about being at a golf tournament than killing Bin Laden.
As for tort reform you're dead wrong!
I had a doctor who ordered me to the hospital this year. That I can live with it. So even though I had driven from my office to see him and my house was just a couple of minutes away he ordered an ambulance. Why? He made the medical judgement that I couldn't drive a car. He didn't give me a say in that. Oh but what if something happened to you on the way to the hospital you needed that ambulance. That same doctor if I had come with somebody would've let that person drive me to the hospital thus proving my claim that my health wasn't in immediate danger.
This same doctor ordered me to take two tests which cost the insurance company thousands of dollars because he thought that I was bleeding to death. This despite the fact that a blood test indicated I might have a virsus which he immediately ordered medication.
What started this mess was because I had a low iron level in my blood test. I actually had to write him a letter pointing out that my eating habbits had changed since he had ordered me to lose weight about a year and half earlier and I wasn't probably eating the dail amount of iron. I suggested shouldn't I be taking an iron supplement. After the expense of these tests and apparently the virsus going away the doctor seeing that I wasn't bleeding to death ordered me to take an iron supplement.
This same doctor had ordered his nurse to call me after 5 and wanted me in the next day to tell me about taking the two tests.
After writing a letter to the clinic pointing out what I thought was bad conduct we had a much better and detailed talk about what he was worried about. It's quite obvious based on the talk he had lost at least one patient who had bled to death. He ordered these tests because of a low iron level which was obviously caused by my eatting and by the virsus. In the process thousands of dollars had to be spent. Now multiply that out by millions of people and you're talking lots of money.
A major problem with health care and this bill will do nothing to solve it is people aren't forced to think much at all about how their health care dollars are spent.
If you need a car and there's a small compact and a fancy convertible to drive everybody will take the fancy convertible especially if they don't think they have to pay for it.
In my case the doctor litterally shoved these tests down my throat in part because we're suppose to trust the doctor. He shoved them down my throat because he was afraid of being sue for malpractice.
And one other point about weeding out doctors. Years ago I actually served as a juror for a medical malpractice lawsuit. The doctor was given what you could say was a not guilty verdict for malpractice because two doctors said the patient would've died anyway and the lawyer for the family did a poor job! One thing she did to show the jury her case was to give us the death certificate, but the jury got a copy of the death certificate which wasn't certified. Technically it was useless as evidence!
I hope that doctor learned his lesson because he had treated his patiently very badly, but I doubt it. The lawsuit here I don't think weeded out this bad doctor.
In short I have a better understanding of tort reform than you do. I've seen the doctors who
order tests to say in case something bad happens that they were trying to figure out what was wrong and shouldn't be sued.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Liberal Vitriol Personified
President Obama promised to be a postpartisan, post-racial president. That myth disappeared last January. Now we've got irrefutable proof that some Democrats are hatemongers :
Voting 'no' and hiding from the vote are the same result. Those of us on the floor see it. It was clear the three of them who did not cast their yes votes until all 60 Senate votes had been tallied and it was clear that the result was a foregone conclusion. And why? Why all this discord and discourtesy, all this unprecedented destructive action? All to break the momentum of our new young president.Sen. Whitehouse just accused people who have a policy dispute with President Obama of being Nazi racists. That's the Twentieth Century definition of Aryan. Sen. Whitehouse also insinuated that President Obama's political opponents of being gun-toating violence-mongers.
They are desperate to break this president. They have ardent supporters who are nearly hysterical at the very election of President Barack Obama. The birthers, the fanatics, the people running around in right-wing militia and Aryan support groups , it is unbearable to them that President Barack Obama should exist. That is one powerful reason. It is not the only one.
The party of tolerance and enlightenment strikes again.
If Sen. Whitehouse served when Pat Moynihan and Hubert Humphrey served, he'd be taken to the woodshed for saying this. It's a shame that giants like Moynihan and Humphrey have been replaced by Al Franken and Chuck Schumer.
It's a bigger shame that President Obama didn't deliver on his initial promises:
The best and most rigorous cost analysis was recently released by the insurer WellPoint, which mined its actuarial data in various regional markets to model the Senate bill. WellPoint found that a healthy 25-year-old in Milwaukee buying coverage on the individual market will see his costs rise by 178%. A small business based in Richmond with eight employees in average health will see a 23% increase. Insurance costs for a 40-year-old family with two kids living in Indianapolis will pay 106% more.This actuarial data proves that the Democrats' legislation won't reduce health care or health insurance costs. The good news is that health insurance costs will go down for some. The bad news is that that's only because the costs are hidden by subsidizing people. Not coincidentally, that's paid for by raising people's taxes. In some instances, the people getting subsidized are seeing their taxes increased.
King , is that the definition of robbing Peter to pay Peter?
This paragraph should infuriate everyone:
"The Senate isn't hearing those of us who are closest to the patient and work in the system every day," Brent Eastman, the chairman of the American College of Surgeons, said in a statement for his organization and 18 other speciality societies opposing ObamaCare. For no other reason than ideological animus, doctor-owned hospitals will face harsh new limits on their growth and who they're allowed to treat. Physician Hospitals of America says that ObamaCare will "destroy over 200 of America's best and safest hospitals."That's shocking. Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Speaker Pelosi and President Obama think they know better than medical professionals? Who would've guessed?
It's time we stripped these egomaniacs of their power. There's only one way to do that, namely by defeating them when they next come up for re-election.
Posted Monday, December 21, 2009 12:15 PM
No comments.
