President Barack Obama reaches to shake hands with people in the crowd following his remarks at the DeSoto Next Generation Solar Energy Center in Arcadia, Fla. Photo by Pete Souza.
But last Sunday, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell has said the whole process is just going too fast. He showed what's long been obvious: His strategy is to bury reform under endless delays and distortions.
McConnell seems willing to use every trick in the book to delay a fair debate on reform. Each day reform is postponed is another day for him to attack it with another distortion. It's a desperate gambit to confuse the American people, derail the effort in Congress, and block reform.
Mitch McConnell: We're calling you out.
McConnell claimed that health reform would cut Medicare. AARP says it isn't true -- and endorsed the bill in the House.
He trotted out the old "reform will drive insurers out of business" line. But the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office concluded that most people would still be covered by private health insurance.
And the one about reform forcing bureaucrats between doctors and patients? His predecessor as the Senate Republican leader, Bill Frist, recently said, "that's not what's in these bills."
We put together a video debunking all of McConnell's distortions -- watch and share it today. Then call McConnell's office and make sure he knows Americans won't sit idly by while he delays desperately needed reform.
]]>The bill achieves President Obama’s three principles of reform: more security and stability for people who have insurance; more quality, affordable options to those who don’t; and bringing down the high costs of care for American families, businesses and our government itself.
The bill would extend coverage to 31 million Americans and reduce the deficit by $127 billion in the first ten years, and by $650 billion in the second decade. Here’s an excerpt from President Obama’s statement:
“…From day one, our goal has been to enact legislation that offers stability and security to those who have insurance and affordable coverage to those who don’t, and that lowers costs for families, businesses and governments across the country. Majority Leader Reid, Chairmen Baucus and Dodd, and countless Senators have worked tirelessly to craft legislation that meets those principles.
"Just yesterday, a bipartisan group of more than 20 leading health economists released a letter urging passage of meaningful reform and praising four key provisions that are in the Senate legislation: a fee on insurance companies offering high-premium plans, the establishment of an independent Medicare commission, reforms to the health care delivery system, and overall deficit neutrality. The economists said that these provisions ‘will reduce long-term deficits, improve the quality of care, and put the nation on a firm fiscal footing.’ Those are precisely the goals we should be seeking to attain.
"The challenges facing our health care system aren’t new – but if we fail to act they’ll surely get even worse, meaning higher premiums, skyrocketing costs, and deeper instability for those with coverage. Today, thanks to the Senate’s hard work, we’re closer than ever to enacting solutions to these problems. I look forward to working with the Senate and House to get a finished bill to my desk as soon as possible.”
The Senate is expected to vote on a "motion to proceed" - a procedural vote necessary in order for full debate to begin - sometime this weekend.
]]>
"[I]n New Jersey..., voters were asked if they approved of the job Obama is doing and 57% said they did—even as 49% voted to boot Democrat Jon Corzine out of the governor’s office.
"In Virginia, Obama even posted a 48% approval rate among the right-leaning electorate that turned out yesterday — hardly a sign of broad-based voter anger against Obama."
While Mr. Isenstadt tries to make the case that elections decided on local issues portend a national trend, the only recent election decided on national issues was the special election in NY-23, where - despite a distinct voter registration advantage for Republicans - a Democratic candidate won with the help of Independent voters. In fact, Democrats have won all five special Congressional elections since this Congress was sworn in.
Indeed, the Democratic brand and President Obama's numbers remain strong - especially in comparison to the Republican brand. There are a number of recent polls that support the contention that the President maintains support across the ideological spectrum, including with Independent voters. For example, according to the latest ABC/Washington Post poll, President Obama's job approval among Independent voters is 55% positive. [ABC/Washington Post poll, 10/19/09] Even a recent Fox News poll has the President with a +15 point spread with Independents and with his numbers trending upwards. [Fox News poll, 10/29/09]
The President retains high approval ratings across the board including with Independents - comparable to those he had on Election Day. But the most telling trend for 2010 and beyond is the purge of moderates from the Republican Party by right-wing ideological extremists. As we saw in the NY-23 election, by driving out moderates, the Republican Party is turning off Independents, even in areas where they should have a demographic advantage.
While Mr. Isenstadt chose not to include any of this data which would undermine the premise of the story he chose to write - and which was provided to him once it was learned he was writing it - it does tell a much more accurate story of not only the feelings of the Democratic Party, but also of the state of play of Independent voters.
Boston Globe: “For Palin, Reality Goes Rogue”
Alone among what people learned about Palin - her cringe-inducing interviews, her lack of foreign-policy knowledge, her sometimes mean campaign style - the news about her clothing purchases undercut her authenticity. The fact is, Palin’s populist conservative supporters don’t care whether she’s been to Asia. But they need to know that she is who she says she is: an average woman from Wasilla who speaks for the middle class against moneyed and educated elites. If Palin were in politics for herself - for the Neiman Marcus handbags and Saks Fifth Avenue suits - her credibility would crumble…
New York Times: “Palin Onstage, Still Moving Off Message”
There were no questions about the Bush doctrine, but Sarah Palin’s appearance Monday on “The Oprah Winfrey Show” to promote her memoir looked less like a celebratory comeback than a redo of the presidential campaign. For all her aplomb and telegenic charm, Ms. Palin still had the hunted look and defensive crouch she wore in television interviews with Katie Couric and Charles Gibson last year…It was a surprisingly unsmooth performance for a politician-celebrity who insists that the McCain campaign stifled her spirit and smothered her natural talent for communication.
Think Progress: “Sarah Palin Lies to Oprah”
On the afternoon of Oct. 2, 2008 — the day of the vice presidential debate last year — Politico’s Jonathan Martin broke the news that Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) presidential campaign was “pulling out of Michigan.” The next day, vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin told Fox News’ Carl Cameron that she disagreed with the decision. “I fired a quick e-mail and said, oh, come on. Do we have to call it there?” said Palin. “I want to get back to Michigan and I want to try.”
But in her interview with Oprah Winfrey, which aired yesterday, Palin claimed that she only “went rogue” on the Michigan message because she “didn’t know we pulled out of Michigan…”
Politico: “Going Rogue: A Guide to Who Gets Whacked”
Sarah Palin may claim to scorn elites, but her new book will ring familiar to its Beltway readers. Getting even with those who crossed her, praising her allies and generally putting a self-serving sheen on last year’s presidential campaign, “Going Rogue” is typical of the political memoir genre of recent vintage. It’s the sort of book that will send the political class scurrying to bookstores, eager to see how they fared in what’s known as “the Washington read...”
New York Daily News: “Sarah Palin is Complainer in Chief in New Book”
The "You betcha" lady is no more. In her $1.25 million memoir "Going Rogue" (Harper, $28.99), Sarah Palin introduces a new voice, and it’s that of a chronic complainer. So much so you want to shout at the pages, "Man up, woman!" The news from the book has already spilled, and it is essentially this: John McCain’s senior aides were mean to her. Katie Couric was mean to her. Her critics, who are by definition supposed to be mean, were mean to her. But rather than come back swinging, she comes back whining.
MSNBC did a rundown of the rapidly expanding list of factual inaccuracies in Palin’s new book -- is "Going Rogue" fact or fiction?
The Huffington Post did its own rundown of the 18 biggest falsehoods in the book, and Politifact has already fact-checked Palin for claiming that weatherization funds provided through the Recovery Act (which she opposed) required states to adopt universal building codes. That claim, by the way, was FALSE.
]]>
The ads call out their Representatives for siding with the status quo, and urge listeners to call their Member to ask him or her to “stand up for reform, not the insurance companies.”
“Not only did these districts vote for President Obama in 2008, they are also in dire need of comprehensive health reform,” said DNC Communications Director Brad Woodhouse. “These Members, and Republican leaders, have read this issue wrong politically - they think the political peril is in voting for reform. We're putting these folks on notice: the political peril is in siding with big insurance companies and voting against reform."
Members targeted: Reps. Mary Bono Mack (CA-45), Dan Lungren (CA-3), Elton Gallegly (CA-24), “Buck” McKeon (CA-25), David Dreier (CA-26), Ken Calvert (CA-44), John Campbell (CA-48), Brian Bilbray (CA-50), Mike Castle (DE-AL), Bill Young (FL-10), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL-18), Peter Roskam (IL-6), Mark Kirk (IL-10), Judy Biggert (IL-13), Don Manzullo (IL-16), Tom Latham (IA-4), Dave Camp (MI-4), Fred Upton (MI-6), Mike Rogers (MI-8), Thaddeus McCotter (MI-11), Erik Paulsen (MN-3), Lee Terry (NE-2), Frank LoBiondo (NJ-2), Leonard Lance (NJ-7), Pat Tiberi (OH-12), Jim Gerlach (PA-6), Charlie Dent (PA-15), Randy Forbes (VA-4), Frank Wolf (VA-10), Dave Reichert (WA-8), Paul Ryan (WI-1), Tom Petri (WI-6).
]]>According to the Washington Post:
Step two, according to the e-mail, appears to assume the outcome of the economic review: "The economist will then circulate a sign-on letter to hundreds of other economists saying that the bill will kill jobs and hurt the economy. We will then be able to use this open letter to produce advertisements, and as a powerful lobbying and grass-roots document."
If this storyline sounds eerily familiar, that’s because it is. We’ve seen these so-called “economic studies” - with predetermined outcomes - appear at critical times in the health reform debate before.
On the eve of vote on reform legislation in the Senate Finance Committee in mid-October, Blue Cross Blue Shield and America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) released similarly bogus and self-serving reports in a last-ditch attempt to kill reform before it passed out of committee. PricewaterhouseCoopers, the firm retained by AHIP to write the report, erased any grain of AHIP’s credibility when it issued a public statement admitting that they produced a skewed analysis of only part of the bill because that is what the insurance industry paid them to do.
According to the Post, this latest cattle call for a “respected economist” is part of a “behind-the-scenes effort by the business groups to influence the legislative debate is part of an intensifying series of attacks by the opponents of Democratic health-care plans.” To us, it’s just more phony-baloney.
As the Senate prepares to take up its final health reform legislation this week, it’s also proof that the insurance lobby and their friends won’t let a little thing like “facts” get in the way of their campaign to maintain the status quo.
Last week, the Business Roundtable – which represents the chief executives of major U.S. companies – released a report showing that by 2019, large employers will spend $28,530 on health care costs per employee, 166 percent more than they do today. With the cost containment measures included in health reform legislation, the BRT found that those same large employers stand to save $3,000 per employee.
]]>