"The Senate health care bill is not worthy of the historic vote that the House took a month ago,"

"Supporters of the weak Senate bill say "just pass it -- any bill is better than no bill. I strongly disagree," she wrote. "It's time that we draw the line on this weak bill and ask the Senate to go back to the drawing board. The American people deserve at least that." - Representative Louise Slaughter.

Now theres a woman who will not back down in a fight.  

Why is it that its always women who fight hardest for us when it comes to protecting America's families and Health Care reform?

Well, two more House leaders - who just happen to be female  - have stood up to join Congresswoman Slaughter in her fight for a better health care bill and all REAL progressive should stand up for and with them as they battle the vested interests that the White House didnt dare to.

Reps. Lynn Woolsey of the Progressive Caucus and Barbara Lee of the Congressional Black Caucus have announced their support for the House product, demanding a public option in the merged bill.

   On the eve of a historic health care vote in the Senate, liberal Democrats in the House have launched a full-throated defense of the public option -- a sign of battles to come when party leaders try to meld the two bills.

   

"Now that the Senate is poised to pass its version of a health care reform bill, it is time to turn to reconciling it with the House legislation," California Reps. Barbara Lee and Lynn Woolsey said in a joint statement Wednesday. "For Congress to achieve true health care reform we must have a meaningful conference process that integrates both bills into the best possible piece of legislation for the American people."

   But it's clear that they're not going to roll over, as some senators have suggested they should.

"We look forward to working with the House and Senate leadership to ensure that the final legislation provides affordable and comprehensive health care to people who need it."

Woolsey and Lee's top priorities are familiar: the public option ("If the bill requires people to buy health insurance, there must be a public option to bring down costs"), better affordability in the form of more generous subsidies, stronger insurance regulations (including repeal of the industry's anti-trust exemption), the employer mandate ("If individuals are required to buy insurance, employers should be required to provide it."), and financing through wealth taxes and not the excise tax on high-end (often Union negotiated)insurance plans.

And people, where is the outrage over the elimination of the funding mechanism that Obama talked about non stop as the way to pay for this bill?  Remember Obama said he was going to fund HCR subsidies with a special tax on the super rich?  But somehow - instead of that - we're left with a tax on Union negotiated health plans?  SAY WHAT?!  And some of you - so called "progressives" dont think this bill needs any changes?!

Ho Boy!

The sad truth is, this is a wealth care bill -- not a health care bill.

It truly amazes me that there are ANY professed "progressives" at this site who actually think that helping the House progressive caucus get the best bill possible is a bad and or dangerous thing.

These "enablers" of the recent White House sell outs to big Pharm and big Insurance tell real progressives that we must shut up and back this bill, because if we don't - we must have
"no conscience " and be willing to "let hundreds of thousands of Americans die" because we dare to stand up for those brave Members of Congress, who unlike this White House, are willing to stand up and fight the vested interests who want to kill REAL health care reform.

They pretend that if we help Louis Slaughter and other Progressive House Members fight for what is right - we will be doing some great wrong....  wha?

I am very disappointed to see that these people put their ultimate allegiance to supporting the White House over progressive ideals. During Xmas week (conveniently when few Americans were watching) - the White House sold us out on both the senate HC bill and another bill to allow drug imports that would have saved consumers $100 billion bucks. (That progressive dream they gave away in trade for a gift from the Pharm lobby of a $150 million given to fund Obama's media war chest) The paid for cynicism behind these actions is the opposite of the grass roots idealism for health care reform that the left has been fighting for - for decades.  

The pressure in the final round, just like we have seen to date will be on progressives to continue to capitulate.

Remember - to actual progressives, the biggest compromise was to give up our goal of single payer system and for this, we got nothing back for giving up and sacrificing our well loved child to these corporate Molochs.

The hand wringing enablers will do or say anything so this health care fiasco can be promoted as a "victory". They say this sell out of a Bill is a "take it or leave it" situation, an  either/or proposition.  Thats NOT how congressional bill writing works folks!

There are two separate bills heading over to the conference committe - where this fight is just starting. Some on this blog demand that we just shut up and do what the big boys want and be thankful that theyre letting us get anything at all.

Real progressives say HELL NO!

By the way, Progressives should be demanding that the conference be on CSPAN, open to view - just like Obama promised over and over again - how Health care would be negotiated and then never, ever did.

Obama on the campaign trail:

But here's the thing. We're going to do all these negotiations on C-SPAN.

The American people will be able to watch these negotiations so if they start seeing a member of Congress who is carrying the water for the drug companies instead of for their constituents.....

Open this. Transparency. You will hold me accountable, you will hold Congress accountable. That's how we'll get welfare... uh health care reform passed

There's more...

I fully expect that there will be massive changes to the HC bill.  

The unfair to 49 states "Nebraska Compromise" is gonna split this bill wide open in the House. With Stupak and his followers refusing to back down, that alone  will create an opening for many, many others to demand changes also.

This battle is far from over.

Someone earlier today wrote a snide anti union slur comment to me and laughed at Labor hero and new AFL-CIO President Trumka and dismissed him as a fat white guy with a mustache. This both shocked and disgusted me.  What kind of "liberal" would say such a thing?

Let me tell you - unions are mad at this bill and they have a right to be,  Just for starts, how can progressives not care that much of the funding for this bill comes from a 40% special tax on good employer provided plans like those provided by organized labor.  (and few others these days) I expect the AFL to fight against this attempt to pay for this bill by hurting working families.(Where did Obamas oft repeated promise to tax the super rich to pay for all this go?) And please be sure,  there will be other changes introduced, so we dont know whats coming.

I mean the chair of the RULES committee, Congresswoman Slaughter, came out against the bill, and if you dont know how our congress works - let me tell you - thats HUGE.  Many house member will demand a public option - understand this battle is not over as yet.  So save your champagne for New Years - toasting the passage of this bill is premature.  its not passed till - its actually passed - and this hasnt happened yet, so put down your glasses...

But lets pretend this bill will become the law..

We'll still be spending twice the average of OECD countries.

Nothing will be controlling co-pays, deductibles, annual and lifetime caps.

More of us will be insured; more of us will be underinsured.

With mandates to policies that have 60% actuarial values, many of us will still be vulnerable to bankruptcies driven by medical expenses.

The biggest cause of excess expense and gaps in coverage is our crazy quilt of government programs and private for-profit insurance.

A public option to our health care system is the way to bring efficiency and rationality to our health care financing.

Instead this reform strengthens the role of for-profit insurance, which will expand their political heft.

At its core, this is not incremental change, but enshrining the basis of the status quo.

States will even be forbidden to pursue waivers to create alternative funding systems, such as single payer, till 2017.

I'd be delighted that 30 million more of our fellow citizens will have some insurance,

but this is not change I can believe in.

There's more...

The most fundamental rule in medicine is, first, do no harm.

Passage of this bill, as its now written, will be a total train wreck for the Democratic Party.

Back in February, 59% of Americans supported single-payer in a CBS/times poll where the public option got 70+% approval. This bill has neither and now the public opposes the plan by a ratio of 47 to 32 percent. And they haven't even been handed the bill for it yet.

And they haven't even had their premiums skyrocket yet.

And they haven't even seen insurance corporation executives buy small countries for use as second homes with the increased compensation they will be floating in.

And they haven't even found out what this does to their Medicare yet.

And they haven't even seen the impact on the national debt yet.

And they haven't even realized that the `good' parts of the bill don't go into effect until FOUR YEARS from now.

You know, elite Republicans may be sociopaths, and they may be lower on the moral totem pole than your basic cannibal, but they're not stupid. I bet they're salivating at the idea that this thing passes.

They must be laughing their asses off at this gift. All they have to do is oppose it right down the line, then say "Told ya so!" at the next election.

But as John Nicols writes in the Nation'.

Want to know what's wrong -- really wrong -- with the health-care "reform" bill being pushed through the Senate by Majority Leader Harry Reid?

Ask a nurse.

Maybe Union nurses can save us from this preventable cancer.

Leaders of three major nurses organizations that have recently come together to form the largest registered nurses union and professional association in U.S. history announced that they will oppose the Senate bill.

http://www.calnurses.org/media-center/in -the-news/2009/december/nation-s-largest -rn-organization-says-healthcare-bill-ce des-too-much-to-insurance-industry.html

Nation's Largest RN Organization Says Healthcare Bill Cedes Too Much to Insurance Industry

By National Nurses United

December 21, 2009

The 150,000 member National Nurses United, the nation's largest union and professional organization of registered nurses in the U.S., today criticized the healthcare bill now advancing in the U.S. Senate saying it is deeply flawed and grants too much power to the giant insurers.

"It is tragic to see the promise from Washington this year for genuine, comprehensive reform ground down to a seriously flawed bill that could actually exacerbate the healthcare crisis and financial insecurity for American families, and that cedes far too much additional power to the tyranny of a callous insurance industry," said NNU co-president Karen Higgins, RN.

NNU Co-president Deborah Burger, RN challenged arguments of legislation proponents that the bill should still be passed because of expanded coverage, new regulations on insurers, and the hope that it will be improved in the House-Senate conference committee or future years.

"Those wishful statements ignore the reality that much of the expanded coverage is based on forced purchase of private insurance without effective controls on industry pricing practices or real competition and gaping loopholes in the insurance reforms," said Burger.

Further, said NNU Co-president Jean Ross, RN, "the bill seems more likely to be eroded, not improved, in future years due to the unchecked influence of the healthcare industry lobbyists and the lessons of this year in which all the compromises have been made to the right."

"Sadly, we have ended up with legislation that fails to meet the test of true healthcare reform, guaranteeing high quality, cost effective care for all Americans, and instead are further locking into place a system that entrenches the chokehold of the profit-making insurance giants on our health. If this bill passes, the industry will become more powerful and could be beyond the reach of reform for generations," Higgins said. "Sadly," adds Higgins, "we have ended up with legislation that fails to meet the test of true health-care reform, guaranteeing high quality, cost effective care for all Americans, and instead are further locking into place a system that entrenches the choke-hold of the profit-making insurance giants on our health. If this bill passes, the industry will become more powerful and could be beyond the reach of reform for generations."

Further, the nurses list, in detail, the ten fundamental flaws that the Nurses' Union cites in this bill.

   

NNU cited ten significant problems in the legislation, noting many of the same flaws also exist in the House version and are likely to remain in the bill that emerges from the House-Senate reconciliation process:

  1. The individual mandate forcing all those without coverage to buy private insurance, with insufficient cost controls on skyrocketing premiums and other insurance costs.

  2. No challenge to insurance company monopolies, especially in the top 94 metropolitan areas where one or two companies dominate, severely limiting choice and competition.

  3. An affordability mirage. Congressional Budget Office estimates say a family of four with a household income of $54,000 would be expected to pay 17 percent of their income, $9,000, on healthcare exposing too many families to grave financial risk.

  4. The excise tax on comprehensive insurance plans which will encourage employers to reduce benefits, shift more costs to employees, promote proliferation of high-deductible plans, and lead to more self-rationing of care and medical bankruptcies, especially as more plans are subject to the tax every year due to the lack of adequate price controls. A Towers-Perrin survey in September found 30 percent of employers said they would reduce employment if their health costs go up, 86 percent said they'd pass the higher costs to their employees.

  5. Major loopholes in the insurance reforms that promise bans on exclusion for pre-existing conditions, and no cancellations for sickness. The loopholes include:

         * Provisions permitting insurers and companies to more than double charges to employees who fail "wellness" programs because they have diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol readings, or other medical conditions.
          * Insurers are permitted to sell policies "across state lines", exempting patient protections passed in other states. Insurers will thus set up in the least regulated states in a race to the bottom threatening public protections won by consumers in various states.
          * Insurers can charge four times more based on age plus more for certain conditions, and continue to use marketing techniques to cherry-pick healthier, less costly enrollees.
          * Insurers may continue to rescind policies for "fraud or intentional misrepresentation" - the main pretext insurance companies now use to cancel coverage.

  6. Minimal oversight on insurance denials of care; a report by the California Nurses Association/NNOC in September found that six of California's largest insurers have rejected more than one-fifth of all claims since 2002.

  7. Inadequate limits on drug prices, especially after Senate rejection of an amendment, to protect a White House deal with pharmaceutical giants, allowing pharmacies and wholesalers to import lower-cost drugs.

  8. New burdens for our public safety net. With a shortage of primary care physicians and a continuing fiscal crisis at the state and local level, public hospitals and clinics will be a dumping ground for those the private system doesn't want.

  9. Reduced reproductive rights for women.

 10. No single standard of care. Our multi-tiered system remains with access to care still determined by ability to pay. Nothing changes in basic structure of the system; healthcare remains a privilege, not a right.

"Desperation to pass a bill, regardless of its flaws, has made the White House and Congress subject to the worst political extortion and new, crippling concessions every day," Burger said.

"NNU and nurses will continue to work with the thousands of grassroots activists across the nation to campaign for the best reform, which would be to expand Medicare to cover everyone, the same type of system working more effectively in every other industrial country. The day of that reform will come," said Ross. ...

Do even the bullying fanboys dare to insult these good nurses?

Would any of the parties to this disgraceful bill call the members of the National Nurses Unions spiteful names too?

Not likely.

This statement by the nurses should be shared with any of your undecided friends or family members.

There's more...

Congratulations are in order -- to the Republicans.

They got the health care bill they wanted.

Their strategy was ingenious.

They forced the administration to concede and compromise, got much of what they demanded and they still get to complain when it fails. Brilliant.

But wait a minute; Obama and his supporters are celebrating! They say it's a first step. They say these things take time. They're calling it a monumental achievement. That's a stroke of genius on the part of the Democrats. They have the base so conditioned to defeat that any lip service motion will come off as a victory.

In fact, I believe the Dems have a new victory motto. "It's better than nothing."

We've been thrown a bone with no meat, been asked to pay for it, and are expected to say "thank you."

So what do we have in regard to health reform? I'll break it down in 5 simple terms.

#1: The bill is estimated to cost over a trillion dollars. That means higher taxes. Okay, so far so good because taxes for a good cause is money well spent. Right? Well, let's see.

#2: Health cost is yet undetermined but to many people, the estimates are still too much. Of course, the poor will need subsidies. So we're right back to instilling Medicaid in one form or another.

#3: The insurance companies hold the cards and their job is not to provide care; it's to prevent us from cashing in on getting care since it costs them money, and this is a business after all. They will decide what you can get and how much it will cost.

#4: Since payment is not contingent on income it won't matter if you make $150,000 a year or $50,000 a year. The cost will be the same. Again, the lower middle class, (i.e. those who need health care the most) will take the hardest hit.

#5: More small businesses will not provide health care, mainly since they won't be able to afford it. Besides, they're sure to realize that people will be mandated to get it anyway, so why bother?

How many of our fellow citizens now realize that what we really need is an option of a government run system that would provide for those who can't afford to deal with the insurance companies?

Health care never has been, and never should be a "scored point" for one side or the other. It must be a program that cares for the people.

In a word, what the people got with this Congressional win was a defeat.

And the crowd cheers.

There's more...

Below is a addendum to a diary of mine - health care frauds and fantasies - that I posted yesterday and which was later removed because of a bogus complaint that it was a 'cut and paste ' diary.  This was, in reality, nothing but an attempt to remove any dissenting view that is critical of Obama by one of the self appointed "thought policemen' that roam, patrol and now dominate this site.

I separated it from the other diary - because these are two separate issues.

The other diary - through the statements of leading progressives - points out the reality that it was obama himself who killed the public option.  That too is my opinion and i came here to write a diary about this at myDD.  isnt that what myDD was founded for - a place to share and discuss political opinions amongst other Dems and Progressives? If you go visit that diary - you will see that it is flooded by comments - most of them personal ad hom attacks on me - by people who never even respons to thepeople quoted in the diary itself. These 'cyber thugs" or 'net bullies" come to this site not for discussion - but rather to enforce that their opinion is dominant and that dissenters must be abused, attacked, censored, insulted and driven from the site itself

This post is about the sour affect that self appointed censors, net bullies and childish hooligans have on an open public discourse.

Reposted below is my response to the removal of my diary and to the sad state of affairs when fanboy bullies and thugs are allowed to run free at what once was a open forum for civil debate.

I dont come here to tangle in the comments - I come to post diaries. I come to share my personal opinion - as a Labor Democrat - about the future of our Party and our Nation.  Ive stayed quit for a very long time - but obama's sell out of health care reform to big Pharm and big insurance led me back to my keyboard and made me willing to be a public critic.

But every diary I post gets swamped by the same 4 or 5 cyber bullies - who never respond to anything in the diary itself but come just to attack its author in the most childish, petty ways. Then when i respond in kind - many who dont know the history of these repeated attacks then say I must share in half the blame for what has taken place.

Maybe theres truth to that - but why do i/we have to tolerate such bullying hooligism from the start?  Arent their personal attacks on diary authors a violation of site rules?

To try to stop the endless bickering, Ive asked these name calling thugs to stay away from any and all of my diaries - (and i will GLADLY stay out of theirs)since their interest is in taunting - not responding to any well sourced diary that puts obama in a bad - and true light.

Of course they all refuse because - by net law - all net bullies - must always demand to have THE LAST WORD

Its obviously a unstoppable compulsion.  I had one overly persistent heckler post at one diary - over 50 times - just berating and insulting me - calling my words and my own personal bio - a lie  It got so obsessive that i thank the Gods that these sites permit anonymous posting because that kind of out of control taunting - is a sliver away from actual harassment and cyber stalking.

(Note: I find it amazing that thes hooligans are willing to use a word and make a charge like that - TO LIE, LIAR, This is an accusation that is almost unheard of and almost never used in normal ADULT society, but it is used by these thugs constantly, over and over and over again. Its shocking and at the same time quite revealing.  Of course, these online thugs would never speak such a way in person.

As in real life, bullies - net and the kind from childhood - are always at heart, true cowards, and theyd never risk the punch to the jaw that would normally follow from making such an insulting accusation in real life.

What do we do about this?  What can we do about this?
Will the front pagers who run this site stop this bullying?  Dont they understand that these attempts to intimidate others from speaking freely keeps others away from this site and so damages its value in all ways?

Its quite ironic that nowadays dissent against Obama is not only allowed at the DailyKos and Huffpost, it seems to be rising wave.  But at the site where many fled to during the Hillary 'killing time' because it allowed all opinions - is now dominated by a very vocal and small minority (less then 10) who decide - on their own - what is allowed to be discussed here and work to insult, hide, remove or just plain intimidate any post or poster who dares to disagree with their personal opinion..

Its that simple and its scary.  
Self appointed net censors.  
Who'd of thought it would ever come to this?

-------

Below is my original response to yesterdays backhanded censorship.  Some of it can be read as being taunting to my attackers - but hey - I have been attacked by these wee thugs in every diary since i got here, had just had my diary removed unfairly and I was answering in kind.

------

One of the most spiteful, mean spirited and insulting fanboys here - a person who doesnt have the patience or the ability to write well enough to defend obama's disgraceful health care sell out to big pharm and big insurance -  instead comes to my diaries to taunt and to toss personal insults, not to dialogue or explain.

 He then whines in pain and complains how unfair it is - when I respond in kind.

Today, instead of simply infesting my diary with his attacks (like all the fanboy ankle biters - he never has responded to the experts and congressmen I quote in my diaries) he went to "teacher" and whined about how this diary was a "cut and paste" piece and got it removed.

Pure harassment. As if he/these fanboys  (there seems to be about five members of the Obama "thought police" who are here seemingly 24/7 - they all write and act in exactly the same childish ways) ever actually care about "fair use" when they pull this pathetic trick to silence dissenters.

 Not one has ever come to one of my diaries to argue with one of my sources or to simply present an alternative POV.

No, they come just to insult, harass, attack and intimidate.

 Whats happened to this site? Its like an upside down universe - where dissent is now encouraged on Kos and Huff Post - but Stalinistic rules are upheld by a roving bad of net bullies and hooligans here.

 The big question is what do they think they are achieving?

 One of Obamas big problems with the recent electorate - is the insulting perception of arrogance and bullying by his supporters. (teabagers? everytime I hear that phrase i know its losing us votes.  So stupid!)

 So what do the fanboys think is the best way to help their hero - as they linger around here ALL the time? (Don't these boys have jobs?)

By insulting and bullying others and by being arrogant about not allowing differing POV to be allowed???

.  
Thats brilliant boys...sheer brilliance!

Why they havent invited the lot of you down to DC to help with Obama's message - Ill just never understand!

Fanboy mottos:

If you cant argue with the truth - have the truth removed!

Dissent will not be Allowed.  Dissent will not be tolerated.

Do or say ANYTHING in order to win an "argument".

What is it with these people?  Its as if they believe that if dissent can be removed from this site, that somehow this will protect Obama from the rising anger that many millions of Democrats, Progressives and Independents feel about what he has done (and hasnt done) as President?

 

Do they really live and believe in such a fantasy-land?  Are they really that delusional?

Personally, my simple guess is - Yes.  They are.

Oh well, must suck to be them.

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

How many people on the left who have railed about corporatism and fought for 'working families" have been banished from this and other sites by so-called enlightened "progressives" who actually believed that Obama and the Democratic party would save everybody from that hell? (and if you don't like it - tough!)

We were "racists", "haters", PUMAs, "Hillary shills" because we didn't let all of the hope and change glitter blind us.

And there are still die hard Obama supporters here who claim - Just wait!- he doesn't have any power!, hes only been there for 11 months, they'll tell you while trying to convince you that if you just shut up and hang in long enough he will fix everything. And dont you dare to criticize him because then you'll be hurting the Democrats!, they'll insist, as if the Democrats aren't the ones hurting themselves. Then theyll huff and puff and demand fealty, sceaming "he's our president!", they'll shout, as if loyalty to the office trumps everything. (knowing they didnt say or believe that when Bush was in office) But he's not Bush!, they scream, as if the highest bar they can set for the performance of this president is to say that he's better than a war criminal. It's a farce. All of it. Then why are you here?, they wail, not understanding that if you actually do want better Democrats or a better government that you don't just lie down with the various-dogs you already have.

If you obsequiously bow down to the new Prince and back him even as he sells our the very same ideals he sold himself to you to begin with - you are far from the solution, youre actually at the core of our problem.

Progressives and true Democrats must face reality and stick to our principles and demand that either the system or the players change.

And that doesn't mean being a handy wallet to the powers that be who shill for your cash so they can grab a cushy DC power job and stab you in the back once they get there while you foolishly believe that the $10 or $100 you sent in on the internet is some match to the billions spent by corporate lobbyists and wall street bankers and national financiers who really run America and supported Obama from the get-go.

People, It's long past time to wake up.

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

At Least 278 Former Congressional Aides Lobbied On Health Care...

Over $600 Million Spent...    

Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.). "No public option, no extending Medicare to 55, no nothing, an excise tax, God!" he exclaimed about the Senate health care bill to Roll Call. "The insurance lobby is taking over.

Rep. Dave Obey (D-Wis.), told Politico of Senate delays, "It's ridiculous, and the Obama administration is sitting on the sidelines. That's nonsense."

Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) argued that it was really Obama who intentionally let centrists take control. "Snowe? Stupak? Lieberman? Who left these people in charge?""It's time for the president to get his hands dirty. Some of us have compromised our compromised compromise. We need the president to stand up for the values our party shares.

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) "This bill appears to be legislation that the president wanted in the first place, so I don't think focusing it on Lieberman really hits the truth," said Feingold. "I think they could have been higher. I certainly think a stronger bill would have been better in every respect."

Democratic Transportation Committee Chairman James Oberstar -"The White House has been useless."

Health Industry Stocks Hit 52-YEAR High On Friday.

According to Dylan Rattigan, health insurance company stock prices rose an average of $10 pershare. Yet President Obama and his people expect us to believe this bill is for the benefit of the American people.

David Axelrod keeps saying 'we took on the insurance companies, this is real reform, they're against it.'

Right...but we'd expect you to say that wouldn't we?

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to the point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That in its essence is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group." -- FDR

----

------

Arianna: Lobbyists Should Be Time's Persons Of The Year

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-hu ffington/sunday-roundup_b_398108.html

Time should, without a doubt, have picked Washington lobbyists -- because no person or group was more influential in 2009. After an inspiring presidential campaign that promised to take on the special interests, the lobbyists flexed their muscles (and their wallets) and showed who really runs the show in DC. Lobbyists carried the day on health insurance reform, banking reform, financial reform, drug pricing, cramdown legislation, and credit card interest rates, to name just a few. And every time they won, the American people lost. It's Time for a reshoot. The Lobbyists: The Real Persons of the Year.

--------

You wanna blame Leiberman.

You wanna blame Nelson.

But this foul deal was always Obamas ideal.

Ben Smith's column in Politico on December 07, 2009.  A second day that should live in infamy...

Insurance industry insider: 'We win'

With the Senate shifting sharply away from a "pure public option," an insurance industry insider who has been deeply involved in the health care fight emails to declare victory.

"We WIN," the insider writes. "Administered by private insurance companies. No government funding.

Glen Greenwald has shown you that it was Obama who maneuvered to get rid of the PO.

Senator Feingold even said this publicly.

http://www.salon.com/news/healthcare_ref orm/index.html

From Salon: contrary to Obama's occasional public statements in support of a public option, the White House clearly intended from the start that the final health care reform bill would contain no such provision and was actively and privately participating in efforts to shape a final bill without it.  From the start, assuaging the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries was a central preoccupation of the White House -- hence the deal negotiated in strict secrecy with Pharma to ban bulk price negotiations and drug reimportation, a blatant violation of both Obama's campaign positions on those issues and his promise to conduct all negotiations out in the open (on C-SPAN).  Indeed, Democrats led the way yesterday in killing drug re-importation, which they endlessly claimed to support back when they couldn't pass it.

Obama lobbied hard to kill Senator Dorgans bill - something that would have saved consumers an estimated $100,000,000,000 - as a payback to big pharm he muscled Senators to vote no.

Lets not forget Obama's give away to Big Pharm is part of a secret trade off with the Drug lobby for them to spend $150 million  on pro Obama advertising.

By killing Sen. Dorgan's bill - the White House started to work and earn those big bucks.

The White House deal with PhRMA for their backing of the overall plan, and defeating the amendments was something Obama was far more strenuously behind than, say, the Medicare buy-in or the public option, which he was nonchalant about tossing overboard.

This was a major aspect of reform and could have provided real competition and potentially saved struggling Americans many billions. Its absolutely inexplicable why any honest politician could conceivably vote against this.

Wonder how and why this additional sell out of the American consumer took place?

---

 

Pharmaceuticals: Top Recipients  
    From Opensecrets.org

   Top 3 Presidential Candidates
    Rank Candidate Amount
    1 Obama, Barack (D) $2,135,376
    2 Clinton, Hillary (D) $689,099
    3 McCain, John (R) $671,722

More from Greenwald:

As was painfully predictable all along, the final bill will not have any form of public option, nor will it include the wildly popular expansion of Medicare coverage.  Obama supporters are eager to depict the White House as nothing more than a helpless victim in all of this -- the President so deeply wanted a more progressive bill but was sadly thwarted in his noble efforts by those inhumane, corrupt Congressional "centrists." Right.  The evidence was overwhelming from the start that the White House was not only indifferent, but opposed, to the provisions most important to progressives.  The administration is getting the bill which they, more or less, wanted from the start -- the one that is a huge boon to the health insurance and pharmaceutical industry.   And kudos to Russ Feingold for saying so:

------

In a payback to big Pharm, this week Obama worked to kill Senator Dorgans bill to import lower cost drugs into the US - something that would have saved consumers an estimated $100,000,000,000 - but he muscled Senators to vote no - and this was barely mentioned on the blogs or in the MSM.    

Please recall that Obamag got $2,5 million for his campaign just from Big Pharm.  That was more than 6 times as much as they gave to McCain or Hillary.

There's more...

A lot of people seem to think that the many progressives and liberals, who feel largely betrayed and outright hostile to the Obama administration at this point, really ought to just quietly grumble, fume, and stay quiet in the corner, give their unconditional support to Obama while said administration goes across the line and repeatedly gives their corporate friends and K street supporters whatever they pander for in order to accomplish things.

And here at myDD it seems that any time anyone dare to writes a post that complains about this and is negative towards the job that Obama has done as President - the fan boys immediately jump into the comments and start throwing personal insults and attacks at the author.  If one dares to write a diary complimenting Hillary Clinton while critiquing Obama - the anger of the fanboys is then surrounded and supported by the oh so solemn hand wringing of those that say that to bring up this comparison is just too 'damaging" to be allowed to be discussed. The "Oh, we must not crowd." Both are sorry attempts to silence dissent and to censor anyone who dares to say the obvious about this situation, which is that Democrats are heading to certain disaster in 2010 and if we dont want lose to Sarah Palin or whoever - we better prepare ourselves to consider serious primary challenges to Barrack Obama for 2012.

Sorry folks I know you are very desperate to - but you can't put the cork back in this bottle and you can't stop the many voices who are saying this by screaming loudly and insulting the speakers.  

I too decided to be quiet no more when I read this in Ben Smith's column in Politico on December 07, 2009.  A second day that should live in infamy...

Insurance industry insider: 'We win'

With the Senate shifting sharply away from a "pure public option," an insurance industry insider who has been deeply involved in the health care fight emails to declare victory.

"We WIN," the insider writes. "Administered by private insurance companies. No government funding. No government insurance competitor."

In the two weeks since its got much worse than that.  The fanboys both in and out of the media have spent the last week pretending that we lost the public option because of Lieberman - even though writers like Glen Greenwald have shown you that it was Obama who maneuvered to get rid of it and Senator Feingold even said this publicly.  But the Obama myth is stromg.  This week he also worked to kill Senator Dorgans bill to import lower cost drugs into the US - something that would have saved consumers an estimated $100,000,000,000 - but as a payback to big pharm he muscled Senators to vote no - and this was barely mentioned on the blogs or in the MSM.  

Watching Obama sell out us to big pharm and sell out the public option to big insurance millions of Americans are coming to the conclusion that it was a big mistake to allow the big media and the Chicago crowd to bully us and the system in 2008 and many are starting to say this publicly.

Whine and cry and post as many diaries about how awful this is that you wish - get used to it - over half the country now knows what would have been best.

I may be saying this early and you may be able to silence my small voice at this little blog, but be sure -

"Apres moi le Deluge...!"

------

The regrets over what could have been are clearly shown by the polling.  Hillary Clintons approval rating has soared to 75% while Obama, who has the singular honor of having dropped further quicker than any other president in polling history now has more people opposed to him then are for him.

This is not a new phenomena.  Rasmusen polling had Obama dropping below 50% approval rating in July.  In early November, they did a poll that said that 76% of voters believed that Hillary would be doing as good a job or better than Obama.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c

ontent/politics/general_politics/novembe

r_2009/27_say_hillary_would_be_better_pr

esident_than_obama

27% said she'd be saying better and only 14 % saying shed be doing worse.  Thats a 5 to 1 positive to negative gap. Those were impressive numbers - but recent polling for her is even better.

This week From Politico Aemon Javers reports:

http://dyn.politico.com/members/forums/t

hread.cfm?catid=1&subcatid=2&thr

eadid=3437369

A new poll of avid news watchers shows that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has a much higher approval rating than the man she once campaigned against and now works for, President Barack Obama.

In the poll of 800 registered voters who are self-identified "news watchers," Clinton had a 75 percent approval rating and a 21 percent disapproval rating overall. Obama, in contrast, had a 51 percent approval and a 45 percent disapproval rating.

Lets begin with the most important progressive voice writing today, Paul Krugman.  In his latest "Conscience of a Liberal" column in the NY Times Krugman reminds us that he warned us about all this years ago and he uses those 3 little words that are driving some so crazy....told you so...

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12

16/illusions-and-bitterness

But what's happening, I think, goes beyond health care; what we're seeing is disillusionment with Obama among some of the people who were his most enthusiastic supporters. A lot of people seem shocked to find that he's not the transformative figure of their imaginations.

Can I say I told you so?

 If you paid attention to what he said, not how he said it, it was obvious from the beginning -- and I'm talking about 2007 -- that he was going to be much less aggressive about change than one could have hoped.

And this has done a lot of damage: I believe he could have taken a tougher line on economic policy and the banks, and was tearing my hair out over his caution early this year. I also believe that if he had been tougher on those issues, he'd be better able to weather disappointment over his health care compromises.

Then there was Matt Taibbi's new piece in Rolling Stone titled "Obama's Big sellout" with this memorable opening:

Barack Obama ran for president as a man of the people, standing up to Wall Street as the global economy melted down in that fateful fall of 2008. He pushed a tax plan to soak the rich, ripped NAFTA for hurting the middle class and tore into John McCain for supporting a bankruptcy bill that sided with wealthy bankers "at the expense of hardworking Americans." Obama may not have run to the left of Samuel Gompers or Cesar Chavez, but it's not like you saw him on the campaign trail flanked by bankers from Citigroup and Goldman Sachs. What inspired supporters who pushed him to his historic win was the sense that a genuine outsider was finally breaking into an exclusive club, that walls were being torn down, that things were, for lack of a better or more specific term, changing.

Then he got elected.

What's taken place in the year since Obama won the presidency has turned out to be one of the most dramatic political about-faces in our history. Elected in the midst of a crushing economic crisis brought on by a decade of orgiastic deregulation and unchecked greed, Obama had a clear mandate to rein in Wall Street and remake the entire structure of the American economy. What he did instead was ship even his most marginally progressive campaign advisers off to various bureaucratic Siberias, while packing the key economic positions in his White House with the very people who caused the crisis in the first place. This new team of bubble-fattened ex-bankers and laissez-faire intellectuals then proceeded to sell us all out, instituting a massive, trickle-up bailout and systematically gutting regulatory reform from the inside.

But also in the blogs, what was until recently never discussed, is being spoken about publicly.  At Talk Left - Obama supporter 'Big Tent Democrat' writes that he was "Wrong About Obama"

I thought, despite my disagreements with his political style, that the historic opportunity he was presented coupled with his immense political talent would lead him to become our FDR (who did not change politics, he changed how we think about government, much more important.) I wrote that a lot here, especially after the financial meltdown in September 2008.

It seems pretty clear that I was wrong.

One commenter there sums it all up:

I voted for Obama and didn't expect much, but then, I didn't expect this.

Big Tent also wrote this very short blog:

The Primary Wars

I'll reignite them right now:

It remains the most prescient statement of the primaries.

At Huffington Post there have been a series of blog posts along these themes, but let me quote from just one, Lee Stranahan writes"

To use a trendy Tiger Woods analogy, this is the 101th mistress -- the time to stop defending and start packing.

Whatever happens with this bill, one thing is now crystal clear - the White House is calling the shots and they want a bill that's a giveaway to the insurance industry with no real protections, public option, or Medicare rollback. There is NO standard here except passing a bill.

Oh. And the White House is willing to lie about it, too.

Enough. It is now time for anyone who supported Barack Obama in 2008 to let the President know loud and clear that this is not what we voted for it. This isn't a question of liberals whining. This isn't about piling on the President.

We didn't elect Barack Obama to pass a health reform bill that Joe Lieberman and his insurance cronies approve of.

It's time for Obama voters to be outraged. Many of us voted for Obama because we felt he was different -- after all, he told us he was different. He said he wasn't about politics as usual. Okay, now we know that's not true. Let's be adults and act like it.

Barack Obama is just another politician; willing to lie on the campaign trail to get elected. Then treat him like any other politician. He understands votes so let him know he won't be getting yours, especially in the primary. That's the language that people like Rahm Emanuel understand.

And don't let anyone scare you with Sarah Palin or a GOP White House in 2012. Dropping support for a series of horrible decisions from Larry Summers to Afghanistan to this health reform bailout means you want a better Democratic candidate to emerge. The White House wants you scared; cowed into thinking that not going along with their bad decisions means eight years of some Republican you hate.

It's a scare tactic. Don't fall for it.

Instead, if you voted for Barack Obama realize that you voted for an idea, not just a man. Just because this man hasn't delivered on those ideas doesn't mean it's time to give up on principles like changing Washington to get rid of the power of the lobbyists who run things. Or real health care reform for that matter.

It's time to do what Barack Obama asked us to do - hold him accountable. This is totally unacceptable, Mr. President. Start acting like the man we elected or you have three years left in the job.

There's more...

Nation's Largest Union: Change Health Care Bill Or Else

Richard Trumka, president of the 11-million member AFL-CIO, has said the public option is a non-negotiable element of health reform.

From Raw Story:

The head of the massive AFL-CIO union took one step farther in labor's disenchantment with President Obama's and the Senate Democrats' healthcare bill -- and he promised the bill would die in the House of Representatives if it isn't changed.

Trumka told reporter Sam Stein in little-highlighted comments Thursday that he's "extremely disappointed" with the current state of the Senate healthcare bill, which at this point has lost both a public healthcare option and the option for those over 55 to buy into Medicare.

"If the Senate bill in its current form went to the House it would go down," Trumka told Stein. "I can tell you this. The plan as it currently is would not get much support from the American worker unless it is improved."

President Richard Trumka says the current bill is "inadequate," is funded "the wrong way," and stops short of outright opposing the whole package for now.

In a statement released by the Afo-Cio he added:

 

 "Because it bends toward the insurance industry, the Senate bill will not check costs in the short term, and its financing asks working people and the country to pay the price, even as benefits are cut.

      That's why we are championing a public health insurance option: It is the way to break the stranglehold of the insurance industry over consumers that has led to double digit premium increases virtually every year.

The labor movement has been fighting for health care for nearly 100 years and we are not about to stop fighting now, when it really matters. But for this health care bill to be worthy of the support of working men and women, substantial changes must be made. The AFL-CIO intends to fight on behalf of all working families to make those changes and win health care reform that is deserving of the name.

There's more...

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

If you really want to understand why Howard Dean now feels forced to oppose the White House's health care strategy - I suggest you watch this short concise statement from yesterdays Morning Joe and another short vid at the end of this diary taped back during the summer where he explains that health care reform without a strong public option - is no kind of reform at all.

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

There's more...

After a week where we watched Obama give away the public option (as Senator Feingold said he'd always intended),

pushing back health care reform for years,

a week where he also gave away billions and billions more of our tax dollars to the bailed out banks,

a week where he raised the debt ceiling to new obscene numbers (give aways to bankers and fake stimulus bills that benefit insiders are expensive!)

aint it good to know that so many Americams feel the same way that I do about a woman, who if she were our President, would have done NONE of those things...

-----

There's more...