A recent LTE in the Washington Missourian called for "tough" abortion language in the federal health care/insurance reform bill and read like a memo from Bart Stupak. How did we allow anti-abortion zealots to become so powerful? They can terrorize the entire Congress of the United States just by stamping their feet.
In my reply to the Missourian, I pointed out that these are often the same people who attend "freedom" rallies and spout nonsense about Obama being a socialist/fascist. (Which is like being a vegetarian and a carnivore simultaneously)
But when it comes to things they don't want the rest of us to do, "freedom" isn't even part of the equation. Their definition of freedom - good. Anyone else's definition of freedom - bad.
Our friends at Fired Up posted on this Twitter item by Renee Hulshof, spouse of former Congressman and unsuccessful gubernatorial candidate Kenny Hulshof (r):
My husband is convinced that the dems will get healthcare passed. This educated prediction from him is freaking me out.
[Note: according to Twitter - "This person has protected their tweets."]
Huh? Why, because millions of Americans might be able to get access to affordable health care and just might be able to do so even if the have a pre-existing condition?
Kenny Hulshoff (r) was elected to Congress in 1996 with 49.4% of the vote. He served until January 2009, not seeking re-election and instead deciding to lose to Jay Nixon in the 2008 gubernatorial race by only garnering 39.5% of the vote. Kenny Hulshof (r) served in Congress for twelve years.
While in Congress Kenny Hulshof and his spouse were eligible to participate in the federal health insurance program [pdf] for members. Among its provisions:
...Members meeting minimum enrollment period requirements who are also eligible for an immediate annuity may continue to participate in the health benefit program when they retire...
Okay, Kenny Hulshof has "retired", but we don't know if continues to participate. Do you think anyone will bother to ask him?
...enrollees are not subject to pre-existing condition exclusion...
If it's good enough for Congress it's too good for anyone else?
...At the time of retirement, members...receiving an immediate annuity have a one-time election to continue to participate...provided they have been enrolled for at least five years before retirement (or if less, must have been enrolled from the last day in the period in which the employee became eligible to enroll in the plan up to the date on which the employee became an annuitant) and are eligible for an immediate annuity. Like active workers, retirees may enroll as individuals or may elect family coverage for themselves, their spouse...
Now, we don't know if former Congressman Kenny Hulshof (r) and his spouse were ever enrolled in the federal health insurance program for Congress or if they are presently eligible as "retiree and spouse" for coverage, but in as far as the former, wasn't it nice to have that option? Too bad that option isn't available to everyone else. Apparently the prospect of this happening is enough to freak out Renee Hulshof.
Roy Blunt may be a little too obsessed with Robin Carnahan; she may not be quite as powerful as he thinks. According to Big Bucks Blunt, he is opposing not "Obamacare" which seems to be the bane of most members of the Party of No, but Carnahan's government takeover - as he twittered earlier:
According to @RasmussenPoll 60% of Missourians support our position on health care. Only 37% want Carnahan's govt-takeover.
Carnahan has recently expressed support for health care reform; she is after all a reasonably sane individual, and there is no reason to oppose it unless you are unhinged (Tea-Party) or lying about it as a tool to regain power (other Republicans). However, she might be a little surprised to know that she is the entity responsible for what so many of the cowering right wing consider a government takeover.
If Blunt does manage to establish that Carnahan should be credited for health care reform, he may live to regret it. He cites the Rasmussen polls, which many consider to have a Republican bias because they so consistently perform as an outlier in the direction of Republican druthers, to claim that health care reform is not popular in Missouri. Other polls show, however, that the national trend is now moving in the President's favor and once health care is passed - and the news tonight is that reconciliation will start Monday - approval rates in Missouri will likely climb. Which, oh frabjous day, may well leave Roy Blunt out on a limb while Carnahan picnics underneath.
Earlier, I noted that State Senator Jane Cunningham attended Todd Akin's kill-health-care-reform pep rally to push her Health Care Freedom Act. This bill would put a constitutional amendement on the Missouri ballot this fall that is based on fringewingers' wistful reading of the tenth amendment, which they insist permits states, Civil War to the contrary, to opt out of federal legislation they don't like - in this case, health care reform legislation.
The Beacon's Jo Mannies reported that Cunningham got a standing ovation for this ill-conceived, last-ditch effort to subvert the will of the people who voted for Obama and his promises of health care reform. Do you wonder whether any of those fools applauding Cunningham had the teensiest, tiniest idea about what effect opting out of health care reform could possibly have on Missouri were it to prove possible?
Just take a look at this interactive map prepared by the Center for American Progress. Under the health care reform proposed by the Senate, 200,957 more people in Missouri would be newly eligible for Medicaid, individuals who will continue to be uninsured given the status quo. The loss of federal funds for Medicaid that would result from "opting" out would mean that Missouri's uninsured would continue to exceed 700,000.
Nor, as has been amply demonstrated over the past few years, can Missouri effectively address the problem of the uninsured at the state level. As Ivor Volksy of the Wonk Roomputs it:
Political considerations, special interest influence and budgetary strains have doomed previous state-based health care reform efforts and governors who believe that nullifying federal reform is in the best interest of their citizens are placing politics ahead of sound policy.
Substitute "legislature" for "governors", and you have Missouri in a nutshell, with its 2008 nonelderly, uninsured rate of 14.5% - a rate that is probably quite a bit higher right now.
The Senate health care reform package would extend Medicaid coverage massively, providing subsidies that would reduce costs for state governments, employers, and individuals. It would also include incentives and reformulated payment systems that would work to make Medicaid more efficient. And yet there are people who will stand up and applaud a ideological nitwit like Jane Cunningham for her efforts to deny Missouri citizens needed benefits that give us good returns on our tax dollars.
I don't know why the President let the Republicans get eight months ahead of him in selling health care reform to the public. Now that he's started, though, he's saying all the right things. He needs to convince people that if we don't make these changes, even middle class people who currently have health insurance are going to be priced out of the market. And he needs to allay their fears that, in these recessionary times, we can pay for the plan without raising the deficit.
But you know what's happened over the last several decades. What's happened is, is that more and more businesses are saying, we can't afford to provide health care to our workers because the costs are skyrocketing. So they just drop health care altogether. A lot of small businesses, they don't provide health care to their employees anymore. And large businesses, what are they doing? They're saying to you, we're going to jack up your premiums, we got to increase your deductibles. If you're self-employed, you are completely out of luck. If you've got a preexisting condition, you are completely out of luck. And by the way, those of us who are lucky enough to have health care today, we don't know if we're the ones who are going to lose our job tomorrow, or suddenly it turns out that our child has a preexisting condition. And we'll be stuck in the exact same situation, even if we've got good health insurance.
Now, everything I just said, if you talk to my opponents, they'll agree. They'll say, you're right, the health care system is broken. For too many people it's getting worse. They will acknowledge that the status quo is unsustainable. But you know what they tell me? We had that big health care summit. I know you guys watched all seven hours of it. (Laughter.) Yes, absolutely. It was scintillating. (Laughter.) But you heard what they said. They said, well, we agree with you that the current system is unsustainable, but this is just not the right time to do it. They said, let's start over, that's what they said. We just got to start from scratch.
AUDIENCE: No!
THE PRESIDENT: Well, let me tell you something. The insurance industry is not starting over. They just announced a 39 percent rate increase in California and a rate increase of up to 60 percent right across the border in my home state of Illinois - 60 percent in one year. That's the future. That's the future if we fail to act.
The President's emphasis on Wednesday, however, was less on the dire consequences if we fail to act and more on how savings in government spending can pay for the reform. He warmed up the audience by describing his line by line efforts to cut government spending on all fronts, not just health care.
For example, we decided not to fund an office maintained by the Department of Education - in Paris, France. (Laughter.) Now, I'm sure that was nice work if you could get it. (Laughter.) But I didn't think that was a real good use of our money. We eliminated a decades-old radio navigation system which cost $35 million a year. And some people might say, well, why did you do that? We need that navigation system. Well, the thing is, we got this thing call GPS now, and satellites. (Laughter.) So the whole radio navigation thing wasn't working so well.
With Claire McCaskill sitting behind him, Obama detoured into her ideas for saving government money, pointing out--appropriately, since he was heading for a high dollar fundraiser for her after his speech in St. Charles--that she "just pinches pennies."
Since President Obama was to be in St. Louis today on Wednesday pushing for health care reform, Rep. Todd Akin (R - 2nd) thought he would jump the gun and rally the president's right-wing foes via a video town hall in St. Charles. Attended by about 2,200 people, the event consisted of presentations of the same ol' same ol' talking points by Akin and a handful of other retrograde Missouri politicians, including Lt. Governor Peter Kinder, and, via video, Akin's congressional fellow travelers, John Shimkus, (R-IL) and John Shadegg, (R-AZ).
According to KSDK TV, Akin was in his usual obstructionist form:
I want to say and I want to be completely clear, ... That the bill that we're talking about today is the worst bill that I've seen in all my time in Congress. In fact, it is so bad, it is at least two times worse than the next bad bill, which was the cap and tax bill to supposeably fix global warming.
Not exactly the most profound or relevant analysis - but then this was Todd Akin speaking and we all know that unsubstantiated invective and slogans like "cap and tax bill" seems to work very well with his support base. Other speakers hit the grace notes; State Senator Jane Cunningham, for instance, pushed her tenther legislation "which could potentially stop socialized medicine mandate at the state level." The real knee-slapper, though, came when Akin:
... credited divine intervention with the January election of Scott Brown, R-Mass., which deprived Senate Democrats of the 60-seat majority needed to block filibusters. Akin said he hoped God would intervene again to prevent a health care bill from getting through Congress.
Amazing how small and parochial the God of some of these so-called Christians seems to be.
It is instructive - and sad - to compare this event to the President's appearance, and to think that there are people who are happy to be led down the garden path by fools like Akin and pals. Sadder still to think about what we all stand to lose because we live in a place where this type of idiocy is taken seriously by anyone.
UPDATE: Today (Mar. 12) on the Dianne Rehm show, a caller from St. Charles reported that Akin went even further out onto the thin ice of tasteless absurdity by comparing the passage of health care to that good old Republican fall-back, 9/11. The response, from even the conservative commentator, was to condemn Akin's excess as insane, childish and, at the least, manipulative. Rehm seemed to have trouble believing that there were people present at that rally that cheered Akin - I have trouble believing that there people in my district that voted for him.
Earlier I remarked on FiredUp!'s report that Roy Blunt had been selected to be part of the House GOP's "truth squad" monitoring today's health care summit. The Kansas City Star captured what I think must have been a common reaction to this announcement:
So here's a truth about that GOP truth squad: It won't have to look very far to find "mistakes" and "errors" and even "lies" in Obama's measure.
In fact, I would be very disappointed with Boehner and his truth squad if it didn't already have all its "true" facts lined up right now, ready to trot out at a moment's notice on Thursday.
And here's the pudding that provides the proof of that wise prognostication:
Predigested focus group pablum - makes your blood boil doesn't it? I'm getting pretty sick of Blunt et al. claiming to speak for Americans, and, in Blunt's case, Missourians. He certainly doesn't seem to be listening to me or anyone I know - and most of us definitely belong to both categories. But then again, perhaps Blunt is actually speaking for a very particular species of American - rich ones with skin in the insurance game.
If you don't know what I mean, just consider the fact that beginning March 10, insurance lobbyists will be throwing three big fundraising bashes for Mr. Blunt - with suggested donations ranging from $1000 to $5000. Kind of makes learning the truth-squad script worth the effort, doesn't it?
About 50 St. Louisans braved the cold wind blowing in front of Blue Cross/Anthem/Wellpoint (or whatever it's called at the moment) building on Wednesday as part of the final push to get health care reform passed by Congress.
Looking up at the ceiling lights in the hundreds of offices, one couldn't help but get the point. They really don't give a shit about sick people. Row on row of cubicles filled with flunkies who figure out ways to deny paying claims from doctors and hospitals. The sidewalk and steps going down to a small city park in front of the building are covered in cigarette butts. Ironic, huh? I hope those flunkies have good health insurance because they're going to need it when cancer catches up with them. Maybe so many of them smoke because they feel guilty knowing they are part of a huge conspiracy to deceive the American people.
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sibelius called out Blue Cross of California for paying their CEO's obscene salaries and raising premiums by up to 39%. She must have gotten their attention because BC out there in the Golden State (no pun intended) backed off that plan while Sibelius' department takes a peek at their records. Nationally, the Blue Cross/Wellpoint conglomerate made $2.7 billion profit in the last quarter of 2009. And how did they make that money? By letting people die.
Okay, so the Repugs have tons of money to pay people to sit around all day and come up with very clever ways to denigrate Democrats and we don't. Happy Valentine's Day indeed. Everyone who gets that RNC message can have fun choosing a card and sending it to dozens, maybe even hundreds, of other people.
No wonder we're losing the message war. According to a recent Wash Post/ABC poll President Obama's overall job approval rating has gone from 68% in Feb 2009 to 51% now.
Claire McCaskill recently wrote a letter to state legislators who have been carping about the stimulus spending that has sustained our state budget. Taking them at their word, she asked them just what the impact would be if unspent portions of the funds were returned to the government, and whether or not these brave souls wish to forgo further stimulus funds, given their strong convictions.
With much spluttering and bombast, State Rep. Allen Icet (R-Wildwood), Chairman of the House Budget Committee, responded today, managing in the process to avoid answering any of the quite legitimate issues that McCaskill posed. Instead, shaking a metaphorical finger at the errant Democrat, he claimed that he and his fellow anti-stimulus stalwarts could not possibly answer McCaskill's questions until she and her Democratic cohorts in Washington had performed four magical tasks:
(1) balance the federal budget just as we do every single year in Missouri
Bear in mind that this demand comes from a member of the political party that voted against PAYGO in the U.S. Senate. Does Icet really not understand that if the federal budget were to be balanced right away, somebody would have to answer much harder questions than those that McCaskill put to the state's budget vultures? Could it be that his brave demand is nothing more than bluster by which he hopes to divert attention from his inability to answer the hard questions without exposing the intellectual dishonesty at the heart of Republican rhetoric?
Melanie Shouse's traveling billboard is pictured at left.
Cancel that memorial service for Melanie Shouse next Sunday afternoon. She doesn't deserve all the hoopla because, as several right wing bloggers have made clear, all she did was make a really, really stupid mistake in putting off a visit to the doctor when she found a lump on her breast.
Gateway pundit (ht: St. Louis Activist Hub) berates her for not getting one of the free breast exams offered by St. Anthony Hospital.
It's just too bad this woman didn't call St. Anthony's Hospital in St. Louis. They offer free breast exams to women who are in need of assistance. I suppose that's Bush's fault, too.
Yeah, Melanie. Why didn't you do that? Oh wait. She's gone, and we can't ask her. But she'd probably offer some lame excuse like not knowing about that program. You know how those damn libruls are. They never get the right information, and then they try to blame somebody else for their own stupidity.
Another right winger, Flopping Aces, criticizes Melanie for choosing to open a new business rather than pay for her high deductibles.
[I]nstead of going to the doctor she instead dumped 30 grand into a business, one third of that could of [sic] paid the alleged deductible, then who is at fault here?
Not only does he have run on sentences, he has the chronology wrong. She spent thirty thou to open her new business and later, when her credit cards were maxed out, got sick. But let's not nitpick. Surely you can see his point. She gambled with her life by not seeing a doctor. Yes, she would have faced bankruptcy by doing so, but, I mean, better bankrupt than dead, right?
She took a gamble and loss [sic]. It's sad. But to twist and spin this as if Socialism would of [sic] saved this woman's life is absurd.
The wingoverse is out of patience with "Socialists" always whining that citizens of other countries don't face the dire choice that Melanie did. The rightwing attitude is, get over it. She didn't live in France; she lived in the good ole U.S.A. Melanie ought to have just admitted that the whole sad story was her own fault. We live in this great free country which offers excellent health care to ... well, quite a few of us. Just thank the Almighty that we have the privilege of making our own decisions. Too bad she made the wrong one.
End of story. And shut up about health care reform.
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AND Q&A
AT DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE
FUNDRAISING RECEPTION
Capital Hilton
Washington, D.C.
6:15 P.M. EST
THE PRESIDENT: ....And, yes, we are going to keep fighting to fix a health system that too often works better for the insurance industry than it does for the American people. (Applause.) Now, I -- you heard me at the State of the Union -- I didn't take this on because it was good politics. I love how the pundits on these cable shows, they all announce, "Oh, boy, this was really tough politically for the President." Well, I've got my own pollsters, I know -- (laughter) -- I knew this was hard. I knew seven Presidents had failed. I knew seven Congresses hadn't gotten it done. You don't think I got warnings, "Don't try to take this on"? I got those back in December of last year.
So, yes, we knew this was hard. But I took it on because families were at the mercy of skyrocketing premiums, soaring out-of-pocket costs, insurance companies that routinely deny coverage because of preexisting conditions, or see their insurance dropped altogether because they get sick.
We took it on because costs were closing small businesses. They were keeping larger ones from competing on a level playing field. They were eating into workers' take-home pay. They were canceling raises. We took it on because it's the single best way to bring down our deficits. (Applause.) By the way, nobody has disputed that. When I was before the Republican caucus, it was very clear. I said, look, you say you're concerned about deficit reduction? Nobody can dispute the fact that if we don't tackle surging health care costs, that we can't get control of our budget. And by the way, the approach that we put forward would reduce our deficit by as much as a trillion dollars over the next two decades.
We took it on because every single day, 15,000 Americans join the tens of millions who don't have health insurance -- and every single year, 18,000 Americans die because of it.
I got a letter -- I got a note today from one of my staff -- they forwarded it to me -- from a woman in St. Louis who had been part of our campaign, very active, who had passed away from breast cancer. She didn't have insurance. She couldn't afford it, so she had put off having the kind of exams that she needed. And she had fought a tough battle for four years. All through the campaign she was fighting it, but finally she succumbed to it. And she insisted she's going to be buried in an Obama t-shirt. (Laughter.)
But think about this: She was fighting that whole time not just to get me elected, not even to get herself health insurance, but because she understood that there were others coming behind her who were going to find themselves in the same situation and she didn't want somebody else going through that same thing. (Applause.) How can I say to her, "You know what? We're giving up"? How can I say to her family, "This is too hard"? How can Democrats on the Hill say, "This is politically too risky"? How can Republicans on the Hill say, "We're better off just blocking anything from happening"?
That can't be the message that the American people are delivering. Yes, they're nervous, they're anxious, they're in a tough time right now. The thing they want most are jobs. They really don't like the process in Washington, the sausage-making. That part I understand. But I know that they don't -- but I know they don't want to just offer nothing to the millions of people in America who are in the situation that that woman was in. That's what we campaigned on. And we are going to keep on working to get it done -- with Democrats and I hope with Republicans and everybody else in between -- to bring down costs, to end the worst practices of the insurance industry, to finally give every American the chance to choose quality, affordable health care. We are going to keep on working to get it done. (Applause.)
AUDIENCE: Yes we can! Yes we can! Yes we can!
THE PRESIDENT: I am not going to walk away from these fights. And I know you won't -- because you didn't before. You didn't when folks were slamming doors in your faces -- "Barama who?" (Laughter.) You didn't quit when you heard voices saying we should scale back and throttle down and accept less. You remember that. When folks were saying our sights were set too high; that our faith in this country was misplaced; that our hope was naïve; that you couldn't change Washington; that you had to accommodate yourself to the political realities. You've all heard that. You didn't listen to those voices then -- your voice proved them wrong. You proved that nothing can withstand the power of millions of voices that are calling for change....
Update: The memorial service for Melanie has been changed from Saturday to Sunday. It is next Sunday, Feb. 13, 2:30, at Central Reform Congregation, 5020 Waterman.
Would it be too much to say that our broken health care system killed Melanie Shouse? No one could prove it in a court of law. But the system certainly drove her to put off seeing a doctor when she first discovered a lump on her breast, and the system too often put its profits ahead of treating her cancer. Last week, after being in treatment for four years, she died.
When she first noticed the tumor, she and Steve Hart, her business partner of eighteen years, owned Sweet Meat Stix. It was a small business that left them with few pennies to spare, so Melanie only carried catastrophic health insurance, which had a $5,000 deductible--what she called "'hit by a bus kind of insurance'". That constituted a huge sum for a struggling entrepreneur, so she put off seeing a doctor. Meanwhile the breast cancer grew. And metastasized. By the time she saw a doctor, she said, "'I could have been diagnosed from across the street. It wasn't a surprise.'"
Because she was diagnosed with terminal cancer, she was eligible to be on Medicare. But that took two years to kick in. Meantime, she became too weak to work and had to go on Medicaid. The Suburban Journal wrote an article about her last September, which included this information:
Shouse is now on her third round of chemotherapy to fight off the bone cancer and liver tumors. That treatment did not keep her from becoming bedridden for a month this spring. She was then given Avastin, a biologic therapy that costs $6,500 for a two-week supply. Since then she has been able to keep food down and "get off the couch." Her insurance provider has since sent her a letter saying it won't pay for Avastin.
"The insurance bureaucracy shouldn't stand between me and my doctor and treatment," Shouse said. "Like they know more than a world-renowned oncologist."
The last time I saw her was at a rally outside Lacy Clay's office in mid-November. She was wearing an eye patch because of the cancer. She joked that it made her look like a pirate, and she liked that because she preferred looking dangerous to the opposition. Here's the video I posted of her inveighing against the obstacles to reform--in the persons of Congressional Republicans:
"These prehistoric creatures are known for acting only on short-sighted, self interested greed in the service of powerful interests which refuse to relinquish the impunity they have enjoyed over the last six decades."
She spoke from firsthand knowledge about how deadly that impunity is.
President Obama participated in a lengthy give and take with House republicans at their obstructionism planning session "issues conference" in Baltimore, Maryland today. The republicans made the mistake of agreeing to broadcast the event. Absolutely brilliant miscalculation on their part.
It's nice to actually have a President who can think. Then again, the environmental contrast was stark.
"...But if you were to listen to the debate and, frankly, how some of you went after this bill, you'd think that this thing was some Bolshevik plot. No, I mean, that's how you guys -- (applause) -- that's how you guys presented it...."
For a second there I forgot Marsha Blackburn was an idiot, then she wouldn't stop editorializing. :( #cspanObama/GOP q & a about 1 hour ago from UberTwitter
The Johnson County, Missouri Democratic Club meets monthly on Thursday evenings in downtown Warrensburg. The membership of the club includes Democratic Party activists and a significant number of the members of the Johnson County Democratic Central Committee. A motion addressing health care reform, and specifically, Senator Claire McCaskill's (D) recent statement, in the aftermath of the Massachusetts special senate election was offered under new business by a member of the club and central committee.
The monthly meeting of the Johnson County Democratic Club in Warrensburg, Missouri.
The motion:
January 21, 2010
We, the members of the Johnson County Democratic Club, are disappointed by the recent statement Senator Claire McCaskill made after the special senate election in Massachusetts. We are especially disappointed in the following:
As I said to somebody last night:, everybody needs to get the Washington wax out of their ears and listen and pay attention that people out there believe that we are going too far, too fast. (January 20, 2010)
Actually, the results Massachusetts indicate that by not passing health care reform and proposing a watered-down version the Democratic-controlled Congress has not gone far enough and has gotten there much too slowly.
First, polls show that a majority of voters for the winning Republican candidate support a single payer option.
More importantly, voting patterns reveal that the strongest areas of support for President Obama in Massachusetts had a turnout lower than the statewide average. In other words, the results in Massachusetts suggest that Democrats did not vote in necessary numbers because the democratic-controlled Congress has not gone fast enough and far enough in enacting the agenda we elected them to pass.
We, the members of the Democratic Club of Johnson County, worked last year for health care reform and regulation of our financial institutions and government support for working people.
If our elected officials do not feel that the Democratic agenda is worth fighting for after the loss in one special election, we will surely lose in November.
We, the members of the Johnson County Democratic Club, call on our elected officials in Washington, Senator McCaskill and Representative Skelton to remember that they are Democrats first and enact the agenda we all fought for in 2008.
If they fight for us in Washington now, we promise we will fight for them in Johnson County in 2010 and 2012.
There were approximately forty individuals in attendance. These are the local people who go door to door, make the phone calls, make the literature drops, register new Democratic Party voters (in large numbers), and write the campaign contribution checks. These are also some of the people who know people without insurance or have family members without access to affordable health care or who are without access to affordable health care themselves. And they didn't just work their tails off in 2008. These are the people who are and were the lead volunteers who do and did the heavy lifting in 2004 and 2006, too.
After extensive discussion the motion passed overwhelmingly by a voice vote. There was some dissent.
The club will forward the motion to Senator Claire McCaskill, Congressman Ike Skelton (D), and Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan (D).
Via TPM, we learn that Roy Blunt has gotten a little post-Scott Brown bump: he now polls 49% to Carnahan's 43%. Will Carnahan's damage control take her down the McCaskill path, or will she stand up and fight for the Democratic base?
I share the opinion of the Erstwhile Conservative that Ed Rendell puts the case for doing the latter as well as anyone I have heard over the last two days:
It's too late for McCaskill; we can only hope Carnahan listens to the stand-up branch of the party.
Non-binding health care resolution that urges MO's congressional delegation to vote NO on HCR passes 111-46. #UTD 15 minutes ago from web
Ah, a profile in non-binding courage. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't there more than 46 Democrats in the Missouri House of Representatives?
This may explain why Massachusetts voters don't appear to be too concerned about 41 votes in the U.S. Senate (Well, yes, there is Joe Lieberman, too.).
HCR 18 Urges the Missouri Congressional delegation to vote against H.R. 3200, the federal health care reform legislation
Sponsor: Diehl, John (87) Proposed Effective Date: 00/00/0000
CoSponsor: LR Number: 4336L.05C
Last Action: 01/19/2010 - HCS Adopted (H)
WITH HA 1 TO HA 1, HA 2 TO HA 1 AND HA 1 AS
AMENDED ADOPTED
HCS HCR 18
Best line of the health care debate so far. Rep Beth Low upon being recognized by Speaker after standing at microphone about two hours waiting. "Thank you Mr. Speaker for helping me break in my new shoes."
Roy Blunt has not agreed, not so far anyway, to sign the Club for Growth Pledge to work for repeal of the health care reform bill, should it pass. He would work to do that, of course. I mean, what? He's a Republican.
But there's little love lost between him and the Club for Growth. He resents their slash and burn tactics in support of their small government, cut taxes agenda. They resent him for all the pork he's voted for. In fact, they rate representatives on a RePORK card. He got only 48 percent on his 2009 RePORK card and a pitiful 22 percent rating in 2007.
But what difference does it make whether he signs some silly pledge or not as long as he intends to do what the wingnuts want and oppose health care reform? Not much, maybe. Except that his primary opponent Chuck Purgason did sign it and will continue to paint Blunt as a corrupt D.C. insider. It's so nice when the other side does your work for you. Consider the help their state party gave us simply by picking Blunt. As Democratic Rep. Jake Zimmerman pointed out:
[Republicans] found a guy who's been in Washington for decades! They found a guy who left his wife to marry a lobbyist! They found a guy whose last name is Blunt, the least. popular. political name in Missouri right now! They are doing everything humanly possible to give this election to Robin Carnahan! That's pretty good in an election year like this.
And naturally, Blunt, whether he signs the pledge or not, is doing what Democrats hope Republican candidates all over the country will do: fall into the repeal trap:
Remember, while several provisions of the health care reform initiative wouldn't kick in until 2014, some really popular measures would kick in almost immediately. Consumers would have all kinds of new protections, including a ban on discrimination based on pre-existing conditions, the elimination of rescissions, and a ban on annual or lifetime caps.
And that's exactly why the aggressive repeal push from Republican activists and the Tea Party crowd offers Dems an important opportunity. Democratic leaders would love nothing more than to be able to tell voters next year, "A vote for a Republican is a vote to let insurance companies screw over American families. Know those new protections that just became law? Republicans will take them away unless you vote Democratic."
Some GOP candidates are willing to back a partial repeal, in part because they know parts of the package are popular, and in part because they realize that total repeal is practically impossible. But for the right-wing base, partial isn't good enough. As Josh Marshall noted recently, "After all, if it's really the end of the universe, America and Apple Pie, as Republicans have been suggesting, it's hard to say you just want to tinker at the margins."
It puts Republican candidates in a box. Democrats are going to ask, "Are you really going to fight to repeal protections for Americans with pre-existing conditions?" If Republicans say "no," they alienate the GOP activists who will settle for nothing but a full repeal. If Republicans say "yes," they alienate the mainstream electorate.
Despite finding himself in a situation where he's being shat on from both directions, Roy Blunt could still pull this election off. Wouldn't that be disgusting? We gotta help Robin beat him.
On January 12th Mike Stark from firedoglake caught up with Representative Emanuel Cleaver (D) in Washington for a short interview on the prospects for the Health Care Reform bill:
Representative Emanuel Cleaver (D): ....Two components of, of the bill that I do have appreciation for that I would other, otherwise find complete disdain in, uh, embracing. One, is that we have, uh, a, uh, a stop or a halt to the, uh, pre-existing conditions at, you know, we get rid of that. And the secondly, we get thirty million more Americans able to, uh, secure health care.
Mike Stark: Something.
Representative Cleaver: Yes, something, something better than they, than they had previously.
Mike Stark: I don't want people to get the wrong idea, so before you go, right now the bill's a non starter with you?
Representative Cleaver: I don't think that, I don't think this bill is gonna go anywhere and, uh [crosstalk]...
Mike Stark: What has to be corrected in the senate bill in order to get the progressives on board over there?
Representative Cleaver: Yes. I don't think there's any question. And, uh...
Mike Stark: Specifically, what has to change [crosstalk] in that bill?
Representative Cleaver: Well, we, uh, uh, the Congressional Black Caucus, of which I'm a member, Vice President, just sent a letter to the President, uh, restating our commitment to the, to the public option. I'm actually a, um, recovering, although I'm, my, recovery is not, is not complete, uh, single payer, uh, member. So, uh, I've already compromised, uh, by moving to the public option. So, uh, I think, uh, in spite of the fact that the news media is proclaiming this bill, uh, approved I, I, I'm not in a, uh, position, based on everybody I've spoken with, to, uh, agree with them.
Mike Stark: You think it's in trouble right now?
Representative Cleaver: I, I do think it's in trouble.
Mike Stark: Uh, before I let you go...
Representative Cleaver: But I think ultimately we, we, we're gonna get something. I think what's, what, what comes out may, may be disapproved and then in thirty days we may bring something else, uh, forth because we've never been this close before. Uh, but it may take a no vote, um, in order to get people back on board.
Mike Stark: Before I let you go, uh, usually politicians get nothing but, you know, vituperative bile and you're always screamed at and all the rest. A lot of my readers and a lot of our, the people that follow what we're doing, uh, wanted me to expressly thank you folks for standing up and doing the right thing in fighting for decent health care. So, to all the people on the progressive side that are concerned about keeping the Democratic majority and getting good health care bill passed, well, thanks.
Representative Cleaver: Well, that's reason to, uh, think that we can enter, uh, two thousand ten optimistically. Thanks.
Earlier, I 
I don't know why the President let the Republicans get eight months ahead of him in selling health care reform to the public. Now that he's started, though, he's saying all the right things. He needs to convince people that if we don't make these changes, even middle class people who currently have health insurance are going to be priced out of the market. And he needs to allay their fears that, in these recessionary times, we can pay for the plan without raising the deficit.
Since President Obama was to be in St. Louis 
Claire McCaskill recently 
With much spluttering and bombast, State Rep. Allen Icet (R-Wildwood), Chairman of the House Budget Committee, 
Melanie Shouse's traveling billboard is pictured at left.
But there's 