GRITtv for Monday

Will natural gas solve our energy problems? The oil and gas industry has been making their case that natural gas is a clean alternative to fossil fuels, that it will reduce our dependency on foreign oil, and create jobs. What the industry doesn’t mention is the highly controversial practice required to extract the oil known as hydraulic fracturing.

Today, filmmaker Josh Fox, Earth Justice Senior Attorney Deborah Goldberg, Sabrina Artel, Host and Producer of Trailertalk, and Natural Resources Defense Council Attorney Kate Sinding on why hydraulic fracturing poses a real threat to water supplies in the United States and the New York city watershed in particular.

Then, Roberto Lovato, Contributing Associate Editor at New America Media, and Andres Thomas Conteris, the founder of Democracy Now! en Espanol on the political impasse in Honduras and the US role in negotiations to reach a deal between the coup leaders and ousted president Manuel Zelaya. Obama may be paying lip service to the fact that the coup is illegitimate but the actions of the US State Department speak otherwise.

Finally, a boat with medical supplies on its way to Gaza was turned away by Israeli gunships in late June. Ricenpeas.com has footage of the conflict and we’ll be discussing the free Gaza movement right here on Wednesday.

GOP will help Mark Kirk run for Illinois Senate Seat

Chris Cilizza from The Fix at WaPo says:

Kirk To Get His Wish: Seventy-two hours after informing several Republican strategists that he was not running for the Senate in Illinois due to concerns of a primary challenge, Rep. Mark Kirk looks almost certain to get a clear field after all. Illinois Republican Party chairman Andy McKenna is nearly certain to bow out in favor of Kirk today, according to numerous conversations with strategists close to the process. Kirk had made clear that he would not run if McKenna also ran. While national Republicans will now likely get their wish -- as Kirk is clearly their strongest potential general election candidate -- his off-again, on-again decision about the race suggests an ambivalence that should be worrisome to Republican recruiters. A Kirk candidacy would give Republicans a real shot at winning the seat being vacated by appointed Sen. Roland Burris (D). On the Democratic side, state Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias is the only announced candidate. Merchandise Mart CEO Chris Kennedy is reportedly interested but the fact he isn't in the race yet suggests he may not get in.

Remember, and I can't say this too often, Kirk is the one that told the Chinese Gov't not to believe the US Budget. China is holding a lot of our debt. This was almost treasonous for a representative from the US to say. And this is what they want for a U.S. Senator?

Republican's Boo Their Own Congressman

A woman gets up, holding a baggie containing her birth certificate, and unleashes a rambling, minute-long tirade tirade about how the president is a “citizen of Kenya.” The crowd hoots and cheers when she’s done. Castle responds, diplomatically: “Well I don’t know what comment that invites. If you’re referring to the president, then he is a citizen of the United States.” That elicits roars and boos from the crowd, so Castle presses on. “You can boo, but he is a citizen of the United States.”

Link to FDL

GOP trying to sabotage Financial Reform

Well maybe not sabotage it but slow it down. Just as they are trying to slow down health reform.

From Roll Call:

GOP Reps. Ed Royce (Calif.) and Jeb Hensarling (Texas) plan to offer a barrage of amendments and rhetorical broadsides as the Financial Services Committee on Thursday begins marking up a bill to overhaul the rules governing the financial sector and create a powerful new regulator, the Consumer Financial Protection Agency.

They stand little chance of defeating the legislation in committee — Democrats hold a double-digit advantage in seats on the Financial Services panel. But the conservative lawmakers will try to scale back the bill’s reach and use the markup as a forum for making their case for free markets and limited government oversight.

snip

But Hensarling and Royce, who came to Congress a decade apart and represent different regions, share a common philosophy on limiting the role of government that will underlie GOP opposition to the bill.

Hensarling, a protégé of former Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Texas), is among the the most outspoken conservatives in the House.

He frequently offers amendments on the House floor to cut federal spending and scale back federal programs. As a former leader of the Republican Study Committee, Hensarling, whose districts includes parts of Dallas and its suburbs, managed the failed bid of Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) to oust Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) in 2007.

snip

Hensarling said: “The left seems to believe that if only we will empower some sort of ruling, enlightened elite, that only then can consumers hope for fairness and justice. We believe that the best form of consumer protection comes from competitive markets — competitive markets that are vigorously policed for abuse and fraud.”

Hensarling’s views often provoke eye rolls from Democrats. But his relentless ideology has earned him the top Republican spot on the Financial Service Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit. He’s also popular with the wealthy financial services industry, which could be a key source of campaign funds if he ever opts to run for the Senate, as some expect.

The big give away is that Hensarling is a protege of Phil Gramm. The person we have to thank for no oversight in the Financials and the collapse of our economy. And competition did so well with Consumer Protection, didn't it!

Wake up people!

Obama: healthcare reform "urgent" and "indisputable,"

Obama spoke about healthcare reform again today.



From the LA Times:

Reporting from Washington -- President Obama, calling the need for healthcare reform "urgent" and "indisputable," said today that it is not his own political fortune that is at stake, but rather the health of the nation's economy.

"The need for reform is urgent, and it is indisputable," the president said, in an appearance at the Children's National Medical Center.

"Now, there are some in this town that are content to perpetuate the status quo," said Obama, demanding that Congress act this summer. "There are others who recognize the problem but believe, or perhaps hope, that we can put off the hard work of healthcare reform for another day, another year, another decade."

snip

Shaking his head ruefully, Obama called the Waterloo metaphor into question.

"Think about that," Obama said. "This isn't about me. This isn't about politics. This is about a healthcare system that is breaking America's families," its businesses and its economy.

snip

Obama, who last week started ratcheting up his call for Congress to act on healthcare reform this summer, met with healthcare providers at the Children's National Medical Center before making his public remarks.

"We always knew that passing healthcare reform wouldn't be easy," he said today. "There is a tendency toward inertia in this town. . . . But we are a country that chooses the harder right over the easy wrong."

Are we a "country that chooses the harder right over the easy wrong." I hope so!
Are people going to support this with Obama or will they vote against their own best interest again?

How are the Banks using TARP Money?

That is the question, isn't it? From what I can see there is not very much lending going on so what are the banks doing with the money?

From the Washington Post:

Many of the banks that got federal aid to support increased lending have instead used some of the money to make investments, repay debts or buy other banks, according to a new report from the special inspector general overseeing the government's financial rescue program.

The report, which will be published Monday, surveyed 360 banks that got money through the end of January and found that 110 had invested at least some of it, that 52 had repaid debts and that 15 had used funds to buy other banks.

Roughly 80 percent of respondents, or 300 banks, also said at least some of the money had supported new lending.

The report by special inspector general Neil Barofsky calls on the Treasury Department to require regular, more detailed information from banks about their use of federal aid provided under the Troubled Asset Relief Program. The Treasury has refused to collect such information.

Doing so is "essential to meet Treasury's stated goal of bringing transparency to the TARP program and informing the American people and their representatives in Congress about what is being done with their money," the report said.

Some lending? How much is "some lending"?

In a written response, the Treasury again rejected that call. Officials have taken the view that the exact use of the federal aid cannot be tracked because money given to a bank is like water poured into an ocean.

"Although it might be tempting to do so, it is not possible to say that investment of TARP dollars resulted in particular loans, investments or other activities by the recipient," Herbert M. Allison Jr., the assistant Treasury secretary who administers the rescue program, wrote in a letter to Barofsky.

The Treasury has required 21 of the nation's largest banks to file public reports each month showing the dollar volume of their new lending.

The government so far has invested more than $200 billion in more than 600 banks under a program that began in October with investments in nine of the largest banks. Some banks have started to repay the aid even as others continue to apply for it.

Sorry Treasury! This isn't transparent enough yet. And why are they using TARP money to buy up other Banks? So we can create some more Too Big To Fail banks?

Cheney still may be Investigated

Illinois Democrat Jan Schakowski's, Chairman of the House Intelligence Subcommittee is quoted by Politico:

“The House Intelligence Committee will move forward with a full investigation that will explore certain CIA programs and the core issue of how the committee is kept informed,” Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), the committee’s chairwoman, announced in a statement issued Friday evening.

“My subcommittee will take the lead on significant portions of the investigation; we will explore instances where the Congress was not informed in a timely way and situations in which laws may have been broken.”

And from Raw Story:

Cheney tried to keep program secret

US former vice president Dick Cheney ordered the CIA to withhold information about a secret counterterrorism program from Congress for eight years, The New York Times reported on its website Saturday.

Central Intelligence Agency chief Leon Panetta, who ended the program when he first learned of its existence on June 23, revealed Cheney’s role in a closed briefing a day later to the Senate and House intelligence committees, the Times said, citing two people with direct knowledge of the matter.

“Because this program never went fully operational and hadn’t been briefed as Panetta thought it should have been, his decision to kill it was neither difficult nor controversial,” an intelligence official told the newspaper, speaking on condition of anonymity.

There's a BIG Update to this CIA story:

From the AP:

Judge rules CIA committed fraud in court

By NEDRA PICKLER (AP) – 45 minutes ago

WASHINGTON — A federal judge has ruled that CIA officials committed fraud to protect a former covert agent against a lawsuit.

According to court documents unsealed Monday, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth referred one CIA attorney for disciplinary action. The judge also is considering sanctions against five other current and former CIA employees, including former CIA Director George Tenet.

Today is the 40th Anniversary of the MOON WALK

Apollo 11, July 20th 1969
Armstrong, Collins, Aldrin


"that one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind" Neil A. Armstrong

The Case For a Surtax

As part of its health care legislation, the House Ways and Means Committee has proposed implementing a tax surcharge on the richest one percent of Americans, with the revenue going toward financing a portion of the estimated $1 trillion cost for health care reform. Under the House proposal, the surtax would begin in 2011 and constitute a one percent marginal rate for households making between $350,000 and $500,000, 1.5 percent for households making $500,000 to $1 million, and 5.4 percent for those making more than $1 million. As House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) put it, "Let's leapfrog over the middle class to the wealthiest people in our country. They've had it pretty good the last eight years in terms of tax policy under President Bush. And we think that's a place you can go." Yesterday, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius called the tax "a legitimate way to go forward." And as Families USA executive director Ron Pollack said, "Since this group enjoyed a significant tax reduction windfall during the last decade -- and since this windfall played a big role in burgeoning federal deficits -- it makes sense that this group bears some burden as part of the effort to secure America's long-term economic future through health-care reform."

...Full Story at Think Progress

Obama's Odds

E.J. Dionne Jr has a great article in the Washington post today called Why Obama Likes His Odds.

It was not the soaring rhetoric that is Barack Obama's signature, but he recently offered the sound bite that may define his presidency: "Don't bet against us."

He explains that Obama wasn't around when the Democrats were beaten down during the Clinton years:

But Obama doesn't quite see things the way his more nervous Democratic allies do because he missed the years in Washington during which his party was beaten down. Many Democrats had their perceptions of political reality shaped by the failure of Bill Clinton's health proposal, the 1994 Republican revolution and the GOP's triumphalism during President Bush's first term.

And this has been a problem. The Democrats were beaten down so badly during those years they seem to have lost their spine. And as Dionne says "no one ever thought passing a health-care bill would be easy, and the effort hit some bumps last week over costs and how to cover them."

Since then the Budget Office has reworked the numbers and found that the Public Option will work within the parameters Obama wants, Pay Go, and will actually save money.

Dionne goes on to say:

The paradox is that Obama's limited experience under Republican sway makes him more comfortable than many of his allies are with wielding the power that comes from large Democratic majorities.

And it's real power. Nothing made that clearer than the trajectory of Judge Sonia Sotomayor's Supreme Court nomination battle -- or non-battle.

Obama is doing a balancing act right now and the Democrats old way of thinking along with the constant beat down by the Republicans and the health insurers Obama has to fight all the way.

Dionne goes on to say:

But Obama must simultaneously convince Democrats that they are not living in the Republican congressional eras of 1995 or 2003 -- that if it's necessary, they have the strength on their own to win. This was the implicit message Obama conveyed to Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) to push him to conclude his frustratingly protracted health-care negotiations with Republicans in the Senate Finance Committee.

Getting Baucus to move this week is essential to maintaining momentum. If Obama seems likely to win, interest groups will be more forthcoming, his own party will be more likely to hold together and more Republicans will be inclined to cut a deal.

And that, finally, is why Obama wants to make sure his party bets with him, not against him. His core message to fellow Democrats is that the only things they have to fear are the fears and insecurities bred into them when they were a battered minority. Obama is free of those doubts because he never knew them.

So the fight is increasing and we have to stand behind Obama and keep sending those faxes, emails, phone calls and letters. This time we have to pass Health Care Reform or it may take another 100 years.

News from Pelosi on the Health Care bill

h/t to Maggiesboy

From Pelosi's blog at the Gavel:

CBO Scores Confirm Deficit Neutrality of Health Insurance Reform Bill
July 18th, 2009 by Karina

News from the Energy & Commerce, Ways & Means, and Education & Labor Committees on the CBO estimates released last night on America’s Affordable Health Choices Act:

July 17, 2009

Washington, D.C. — The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released estimates this evening confirming for the first time that H.R. 3200, America’s Affordable Health Choices Act, is deficit neutral over the 10-year budget window - and even produces a $6 billion surplus. CBO estimated more than $550 billion in gross Medicare and Medicaid savings. More importantly, the bill includes a comprehensive array of delivery reforms to set the stage for lowering the future growth in health care costs.

Net Medicare and Medicaid savings of $465 billion, coupled with the $583 billion revenue package reported today by the House Committee on Ways and Means, fully finance the previously estimated $1.042 trillion cost of reform, which will provide affordable health care coverage for 97% of Americans.

“This fulfills the strong commitment of the President and House leadership to enact health reform on a deficit-neutral basis,” said Chairmen Henry A. Waxman, Chairman Charles B. Rangel, and Chairman George Miller. “The reforms included in this legislation will help control health care costs and expand access to quality, affordable coverage to all Americans in fiscally-responsible manner.”

The estimates also cover important reinvestments in Medicare and Medicaid, including phasing in the closing of the “donut” hole in the Medicare drug benefit. The bill’s long-term reform of Medicare’s physician fee schedule to eliminate the potential 21 percent cut in fees, and put payments on a sustainable basis for the future, will cost about $245 billion. Those costs, however, are not included in the net calculations above, as they will be absorbed under the upcoming statutory “pay go” legislation that is pending in the House.

Blogger Puts Blue Dog Mike Ross in the Dog House

Gonzo jounralism? I think not, I call it 4th Estate vs CNN's 5th Column

CBO Scores Confirms Deficit Neutrality of Health Reform Bill

Published on Jul 18, 2009 - 7:29:28 AM

By: House Committee on Energy and Commerce

Washington, D.C. July 17, 2009 - The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released estimates this evening confirming for the first time that H.R. 3200, America's Affordable Health Choices Act, is deficit neutral over the 10-year budget window - and even produces a $6 billion surplus. CBO estimated more than $550 billion in gross Medicare and Medicaid savings. More importantly, the bill includes a comprehensive array of delivery reforms to set the stage for lowering the future growth in health care costs.

Net Medicare and Medicaid savings of $465 billion, coupled with the $583 billion revenue package reported today by the House Committee on Ways and Means, fully finance the previously estimated $1.042 trillion cost of reform, which will provide affordable health care coverage for 97% of Americans.

"This fulfills the strong commitment of the President and House leadership to enact health reform on a deficit-neutral basis," said Chairman Henry A. Waxman, Chairman Charles B. Rangel, and Chairman George Miller. "The reforms included in this legislation will help control health care costs and expand access to quality, affordable coverage to all Americans in a fiscally-responsible manner."

The estimates also cover important reinvestments in Medicare and Medicaid, including phasing in the closing of the "donut" hole in the Medicare drug benefit. The bill's long-term reform of Medicare's physician fee schedule to eliminate the potential 21 percent cut in fees, and put payments on a sustainable basis for the future, will cost about $245 billion. Those costs, however, are not included in the net calculations above, as they will be absorbed under the upcoming statutory "pay go" legislation that is pending in the House.

Obama's Weekly Address - Is He Starting to Manage?

Right now in Washington, our Senate and House of Representatives are both debating proposals for health insurance reform. Today, I want to speak with you about the stakes of this debate, for our people and for the future of our nation.

This is an issue that affects the health and financial well-being of every single American and the stability of our entire economy.

It’s about every family unable to keep up with soaring out of pocket costs and premiums rising three times faster than wages. Every worker afraid of losing health insurance if they lose their job, or change jobs. Everyone who’s worried that they may not be able to get insurance or change insurance if someone in their family has a pre-existing condition.

..more

A Canadian Comments on Experiences with Single Payer System in Canada

While this story is a few months old, it speaks to a lot of the misdirection the right is using to keep single payer off the table, out the door and buried in a deep hole.

Found at PNHP

Posted By Chris Dinn
March 5, 2009

http://prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezraklein_archive?month=03&year=2009&base_name=let_single_payer_free

As a Canadian who watched and helped his sister go through 5 years of elite treatment medical treatment for a rare brain tumor, I consider myself experienced with the single-payer approach and I have generally great things to say about it.

First things first, and this is a hugely important factor, Canada’s health care system is PROVINCIALLY RUN. That is to say, constitutionally, it’s not the purview of the federal government, it’s the explicit responsibility of the provinces. Over the years, various federal governments have issued transfers to the provinces explicitly for health care, but the responsibility for delivery remains with the provinces.

Additionally, as Ezra noted once upon a time in a review of international health care systems, the providers in a single payer system are private. This is an important distinction. Doctors in Canada are small business-people competing for customers. Canadians choose which doctor to visit and the doctor with the most visits gets better reimbursement from the province.

Get that? That’s provinces competing to do the best job on health care management (keeping costs down) with doctors and hospitals competing to get the most visitors, to keep business booming and government reimbursements coming.

The upside of this is that it promotes competition for efficiency of delivery. In fact, Canada’s entire system evolved that way, beginning as a Saskatewan program pioneered by Tommy Douglas.

Now, before you write off the single payer system (I’m looking at you wisewon), keep in mind that not only did Canadians recently vote Tommy Douglas the greatest Canadian in a recent CBC reality show (http://www.cbc.ca/greatest/), but he’s also Keifer Sutherland’s grandfather (no lie).

We should be honest about the downsides of a single-payer system. Despite the sundry downsides you may here from US commentators, criticisms in Canada come from mainly two areas.

First is equal access. In Canada it doesn’t really matter how rich you are or how much money you have to throw at your medical problems, you get treated in the same line as the poor farmer, the homeless guy and the suburban middle-class family who need the same treatment. To you, maybe, this is a bug. To me, it’s a feature. The idea that in Canada we treat our poor in the same order we treat the rich seems an impressive display of equality when it matters the most.

The second is for wait times. This is not a material concern to this discussion. If you want to know why read http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_health_of_nations.

While there are some exceptions to these rules, such as Canada’s rare and controversial private clinics, the system generally works as advertised.

As an example, in 1996, when she was 10 years old my sister was diagnosed (in Newfoundland) with a rare brain tumor. She was treated in Newfoundland, but when a better treatment became available in Toronto the provincial government sent her to Toronto for the care and covered its cost. Had a better program existed in an American children’s hospital, she could’ve been treated there.

My family was middle class for our rural community, but would hardly qualify as rich. My parents had a combined income of under $100,000 yearly, but my sister received three rounds of neurosurgery, three rounds of chemotherapy and a three-weeks-in-isolation bone marrow transplant. All without my parents paying out of pocket for anything.

In the US people go bankrupt in situations like this. In Canada, they live through it. My parents are now happily in retirement and relatively well financed.

Meanwhile an exgirlfriend of mine from Wisconsin needed her wisdom teeth out. Her plan was to go get the treatment and stiff the hospital on the bill. She said future creditors would understand, since medical bills are often skipped out on.

I’m not an American, and I don’t know how typical or a-typical that is, but it definitely happened.

Are you still telling me the Canadian approach is completely the wrong solution? I’m sorry, but I just can’t take Americans with a straight face on that point.

Volunteers Needed

Daily Kos and Fire Dog Lake are teaming up to go to Washington to attend the Markup of the House Health Care bill. They need volunteers to go to Washington and they need donations to help us get the Health Care bill we want. A good Public option.

Here's some info from myceve at Daily Kos:

UPDATE:

It's official, we're off to the races. Just received word from Speaker Pelosi's office as follows. This means we need all hands moving toward Washington for the markups.

Please check back for additional details and read the comments of Jane Hamsher.

Pelosi, House Leaders, Committee Chairs to Hold Press Conference on Introduction of Health Care Legislation

Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House Democratic Leaders, and Committee Chairs will hold a press conference in the Rayburn Room of the Capitol today, July 14, at 2:45 p.m. to discuss legislation introduced today by the Tri-Committees on health care reform.

Okay, so now we have certainty on the legislation. Now, we must remove the vice-like grip of the lobbyists. The way we do this is by having the American people sit in the mark up room and fight for a good bill as hard as the lobbyists will try to destroy it.

But before I go any further, a little bit of housekeeping. A lot of you asked how you could help, especially if you can't get to Washington. We're starting to run up some big expenses, so Jane Hamsher has put up a FIGHT THE LOBBYISTS DONATIONS PAGE:

https://secure.firedoglake.com/page/contribute/PublicPlan

The lobbyists have countless millions. If you can throw in a few dollars to help with the mounting costs of this undertaking that would be a great help and we thank you for your generosity.

IF YOU HAVE ANY DOUBT WHAT WE'RE FIGHTING, PLEASE LOOK AT THIS. LOBBYISTS BUY ALL THE SEATS AT THE TABLE.

Nataline Sarkisyan's parents coming to Washington to sit front and center in markup room.

One of our expenses among many, is getting Nataline Sarkisyan's parents to Washington and putting them up in a hotel for four nights.

It's huge that Nataline's parents have agreed to come from Los Angeles to sit in the front row during the markup. They are the living embodient of this national catastrophe, and Hilda Sarkisyan will tell the Congresspeople that no other American family should ever lose a child to a murderous for profit insurance company.

URGENT CALL FOR VOLUNTEERS.

PLEASE SIGN UP HERE. CAN YOU COME TO WASHINGTON? THERE ARE OTHER THINGS YOU CAN DO, PLEASE GO TO THE SIGN UP SHEET AND LET US KNOW HOW YOU CAN HELP. AND THANK YOU! ALL THESE RESPONSES ARE GOING DIRECTLY TO JANE HAMSHER.

IF YOU CANNOT COME TO WASHINGTON THEN COULD YOU DONATE A FEW DOLLARS TO FIGHT THE LOBBYISTS MILLIONS?
YOU CAN DONATE HERE:

https://secure.firedoglake.com/page/contribute/PublicPlan

The lobbiests are ready and already on their way to DC. Help if you can any way that you can.

Myth Busters

Found at The Seminal

As the health reform fight moves forward, the issues people are talking about change. While it once seemed like our biggest battle was over whether we are going to get a strong public health insurance option as part of reform, that question has now joined a host of others in the debate.

Predictably, these new arguments come with their fair share of myths that need to be pushed back on. So here we go...

Myth: Health reform will be paid for by "cutting" Medicare and Medicaid

This is the latest line trotted out by conservatives and picked up by the media, that we're going to cut Medicare and Medicaid to pay for health reform. We're not cutting Medicare or Medicaid, if by cut you mean doing anything that will lower people's benefits. We're finding savings in the program. And that's not just spin.

Here's an example: Right now, Medicaid pays hospitals a sum of money (which varies geographically) to help make up the losses they incur for treating patients that show up in the emergency room without insurance (who hospitals are legally required to treat). After health reform is passed, the number of uninsured in this country will diminish. These payments will therefore become redundant and can be phased out, yielding savings without cutting anyone's benefits.


Myth: We're just waiting for reconciliation on health care so we only need Democratic votes to pass it

This one isn't true...yet.

Right now, the Senate is still operating under regular order, which means we will need 60 votes to end a filibuster and cut off debate over a health care reform bill. (Aside: Which Senators are going to be the ones to filibuster health care? People should start asking them that.) There is, however, an October 15th deadline. If the Senate is unable to move a health reform bill under regular order, they must move one under reconciliation by October 15th. So, right now, Harry Reid and other Senate leadership are giving Republicans every opportunity to come on board and vote for real health reform. If they don't come on board, that's what reconciliation is for.

Myth: Health reform will cost too much and put a burden on families

This is the most insidious of the right-wing lies. In reality, the cost of doing nothing on health reform will bankrupt families, and reforming health care will save the average American family thousands per year.

If we don't reform our health care system and bring down skyrocketing costs, the average family will be paying almost $10,000 more per year for health care by 2016 than they do now. Our government will be bankrupt. And we'll spend one in every five dollars in our entire economy on health care, up from the already astronomical one in seven that we spend now. The cost of doing nothing is simply unacceptable, and those against reform are willing to bankrupt families, government and our entire country to serve their obstructionism.

Not to mention that reforming health care will reduce costs for families. According to the Commonwealth Fund [pdf], health care reform that puts everyone in, gives people affordable options, and includes a strong public health insurance option (like that proposed by the House of Representatives) would save the average family $2,228 per year.

Plus, health reform will be fully financed. In the House, it will be paid for by a combination of Medicare and Medicaid savings, a public health insurance option that saves money, and a 1% tax on those that make over a quarter of a million dollars per year.

-------------------------------

Even though these myths are fairly prevalent in the debate right now, there's a silver lining here. The Frank Luntz messaging that was supposed to be the GOP's silver bullet - the health care reform is a Washington takeover leading to rationed care - is largely failing to take hold. And so, we're forced to combat that latest set of conservative talking points. We'll just have to do to these points what we did to Luntz - discredit and bring the truth.

No Laughing Matter

Found at TPM

Al Franken probably has the "big fat idiot" overdosing on anxiety prescriptions after giving an excellent opening statement in the Sotomayor hearing. Just goes to show any comedian can be a radio or TV talk show host but only a select few can be a functioning senator.

My favorite part of his statement came towards the end:

Second, I am concerned that Americans are facing new barriers to defending their individual rights. The Supreme Court is the last court in the land where an individual is promised a level playing field and can seek to right a wrong:

• It is the last place an employee can go if he or she is discriminated against because of age, gender, or color.
• It is the last place a small business owner can go to ensure free and fair competition in the market.
• It is the last place an investor can go to try to recover losses from securities fraud.
• It is the last place a person can go to protect the free flow of information on the internet.
• It is the last place a citizen can go to protect his or her vote.
• It is the last place where a woman can go to protect her reproductive health and rights.

Yet from what I see, on each of those fronts, for each of those rights, the past decade has made it a little bit harder for American citizens to defend themselves.

Illinois Political News

Mark Kirk Denies Report He's Out Of Senate Race, Deciding Over Weekend

U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk is denying a report that he has decided not to run for the Senate in part to avoid a primary with the Illinois Republican Party Chairman.

The Washington Post's Chris Cilliza reported Friday afternoon that Kirk would not make a Senate bid, despite signaling to party leaders just days ago that he was planning to run.

The North Shore Republican appeared set to enter the race after Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan announced she would not run. A potential sticking point for Kirk, Cilliza reported, is his vote for the administration's climate change bill and a potential primary with state GOP chairman Andy McKenna:

[Kirk's decision] followed a meeting of the Illinois Republican congressional delegation on Thursday in which his colleagues refused to back Kirk in a primary against Illinois Republican Party Chairman Andy McKenna due, in large part, to his vote in favor of President Barack Obama's climate change bill.

This is the idiot guy that told the Chinese not to believe the US Budget



---

Quinn Shelving Tax Increase Push Until Fall

Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn is putting aside his call for an income tax increase until November.

In an interview Friday with The Associated Press, Quinn said he now wants to pass a state budget with significant spending cuts. Then in November, he would ask lawmakers to choose between balancing the budget by cutting even further or by raising taxes.

Quinn said delaying the decision for five months would provide time to study Medicaid spending, pension reforms and other cost-cutting measures.

Then officials would be in a better position to decide the best way to finish erasing a roughly $11.6 billion budget deficit.

The Democratic governor says he'll ask lawmakers to consider the idea when they return to Springfield next week.

---

Giannoulias takes lead in fund-raising for a Senate bid

Illinois Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias has raised $1.8 million for his Senate bid, while his likely Democratic rivals have zero dollars in their war chests.

Giannoulias has been fund-raising since March. Federal fund-raising reports, public next week, will show that Giannoulias raised about $670,000 in the second quarter of 2009.

Giannoulias is also in a position to pour some of his own money into his campaign; his federal financial disclosure statement will show that he is worth between $13 million and $62 million, I'm told.

Lisa Madigan is running again as State's Attorney but will Have Joe Birkett, from DuPage County as her opponent again. My opinion...Birkett doesn't have a chance!

Medical Liability - The Debate

Medical Liability is constantly pushed by the GOP as a reason medical costs have skyrocketed. The cost of liability insurance is very expensive for Doctors and Hospitals. But if you are permanently disfigured or die because of a mistake a doctor or hospital made, what other alternative does the patient have or the patient's family?

I have long thought that doctors don't police themselves enough and hospitals, like the Catholic Church covered for their wayward priests, cover for their doctors.

The New York Times has an OP-ED today written by Tom Baker that delves into medical liability:

Liability = Responsibility

OUR medical liability system needs reform. But anyone who thinks that limiting liability would reduce health care costs is fooling himself. Preventable medical injuries, not patient compensation, are what ring up extra costs for additional treatment. This means taxpayers, employers and everyone else who buys health insurance — all of us — have a big stake in patient safety.

Eighty percent of malpractice claims involve significant disability or death, a 2006 analysis of medical malpractice claims conducted by the Harvard School of Public Health shows, and the amount of compensation patients receive strongly depends on the merits of their claims. Most people injured by medical malpractice do not bring legal claims, earlier studies by the same researchers have found.

On the other hand, medical liability has improved patient safety — by leading hospitals to hire risk managers, for example, and spurring anesthesiologists to improve their safety standards and practices. Even medical societies’ efforts to attack the liability system have helped, by inspiring the research that has documented the surprising extent of preventable injuries in hospitals. That research helped start the patient safety movement.

When it comes to rising medical costs, liability is a symptom, not the disease. Getting rid of liability might save money for hospitals and some high-risk specialists, but it would cost society more by taking away one of the few hard-wired patient safety incentives.

Besides, there’s a better answer for doctors worried about high malpractice insurance premiums.

He goes on to say:

The research shows, overwhelmingly, that the real problem is too much malpractice, not too many malpractice lawsuits.

And:

Evidence-based liability reform would give these institutions the incentive they need to cut back on the most wasteful aspect of American health care: preventable medical injuries.

This medical liability issue is a straw man issue by the GOP. Any excuse to avoid giving the American people good, afordable health care.