You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (651)

PLAYS: (2679)

Sherrod Brown explains to David Shuster why he signed decided to co-sponsor Tom Coburn and David Vitter's amendment which would require members of Congress to enroll in whatever version of the public option ends up being passed in the health care bill.

Brown: Yeah, you often find out about amendments going on on the Senate floor and if my staff and I like one of the amendments we'll call an office and say, Republican or Democrat, I'd like to co-sponsor. We do that as a matter of course it happens across party lines all the time, hundreds of times a day. We did that with Sen. Coburn, nine times we said we wanted to co-sponsor--usually it takes once and they say yes--I've always accepted that. So has everybody I know in the Senate. Nine times we asked to co-sponsor and their office either just said we'll get back to you or ignored our calls and our emails because it was all a sham.

They don't, they clearly don't like the public option. They were making fun of it. Their whole game is to delay and deceive and to play political games. And when they offer an amendment saying sign up for the public option to force--tell members of Congress they have to join the public option--I think I should. I think we all should but they don't evenn like it themselves. And so it's just a little partisan game they're playing, and this is too serious for them to play those kind of games.

From Salon's War Room--Coburn, Vitter plan to ridicule public option backfires:

Now, as the Senate's debate over its version of reform legislation kicks into gear, two Republicans -- Sens. Tom Coburn and David Vitter -- have picked up that theme and are running with it. The two authored an amendment they want attached to the bill; it would require members of Congress to enroll in whatever version of the public option the final legislation creates, if it includes one.

Both Coburn and Vitter are vehement opponents of the public option, and they're hoping to prove themselves right by showing that no senator who's in his or her right mind would want their healthcare covered by it. They've gotten a surprise, though: Genuine support for their amendment from someone on the other side of the aisle -- and a proponent of the public option, at that -- Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio.

Continue reading...

Senators Franken, Dodd, and Mikulski also joined Sen. Brown in co-sponsoring the amendment. Here's Sen. Franken weighing in on the Senate floor.

So Harry Reid's holding firm - for now. And you just can't argue with Sherrod Brown: What concessions have the ConservaDems made?

The Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, met on Monday night with a group of liberal Senate Democrats who urged Mr. Reid not to back down from his decision to put a government-run insurance plan, or public option, in the major health care legislation that he is working to finalize.

[...] “I don’t think in the end, anybody here in our caucus wants to be on the wrong side of history, wants to kill on a procedural motion, something as important as this,” Mr. Brown said. “It’s the most important thing they ever will have voted on except perhaps the Iraq war.”

Mr. Brown, who is a member of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, which included a public plan in its version of the health care legislation, said that liberals had already given a lot of ground, starting with their willingness to give up a fully government-run single-payer system, which many favor.

“A large number of people in this country including many, many doctors wanted Medicare for all,” he said. “That didn’t happen. Then we wanted a strong public option tied to Medicare rates. Then we wanted a public option building the Medicare network. That didn’t happen. Now we are saying public option coming out of the HELP Committee. And now we’re saying public option with the state opt-out. Where was the compromise coming from their side?”

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (52)

PLAYS: (249)

In between Ben Nelson's hackery which John is going to tackle here, Sherrod Brown on State of the Union did a nice job of calling out Orrin Hatch for the Republicans hatred of Medicare and explaining why it is important, at minimum, to have a public option included in the health care bill.

KING: Senator Brown, let me come to you. A big state, health care's a huge issue. I'm wondering if you share the frustration that many progressives on the House side share when they're told, well, the White House is pushing this idea of a trigger, maybe, because they want to keep Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine, the one Republican who has backed it in the Senate so far. There are many who have said, this is the United States of America, not the United States of Maine. Does the White House have the calculation wrong here?

BROWN: Well, I'll answer the question about the trigger first. The trigger says, let's give the insurance companies two more years after they've had five decades since World War II to do things right. They continue their practices of pre-existing condition. You know, reports recently that a woman that has a C-section, by some insurance companies, will be denied care because that's considered a pre- existing condition. A woman that's been a victim of domestic violence, that's considered a pre-existing condition because her husband or boyfriend or whomever is more likely to hit her again.

I mean, the insurance companies have had their chance to do this right. We need the public option now. We need it in large part because it will inject competition into places where they don't have it. In southwest Ohio in my state, two insurance companies have 85 percent of the market. They need more competition to discipline those companies, to make them more honest, to bring prices down.

Continue reading »

You barely see or read anything in the media about health care town halls that are constructive and where people actually ask pertinent questions. The media have also forgotten that the leader of the House Republicans isn't having a town hall either. What's up with that?
Why isn't John Boehner having a town hall?

I’ll take right here in southern Ohio. My own representative, and the House Minority Leader, John Boehner is not holding any townhalls. Add to that the district directly south of me, OH-02, which is represented by Jean Schmidt (R), and our Republican Senator George Voinovich.

The closest townhall the people of southwest Ohio have had is one held in Columbus last week by Senator Sherrod Brown, however Steve Driehaus (D-OH-01) is also planning an event.

I can fully get behind what the right is doing, but I can’t tolerate partisanship in such an endeavor. To me its amazing, yet not shocking that John Boehner isn’t holding one. Boehner is a pro at ignoring his constituency. A few years back during the Medicare debacle his office flat out refused to talk to seniors, even when there was a large gathering only a couple of miles from Boehner’s house.

Maybe they'll make him cry like he did at the Reagan Statue:

So last week the Thune Amendment was thankfully defeated. A group I work with, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, took on the task of defeating this insane legislation, which only had a chance of passing due to the extremism of the NRA/Birther crowd and the ever-present cowardice of the usual Blue Dog Democrats.

I guess they weren't busy enough trying to destroy health care reform or climate-change legislation, so overriding state laws trying to prevent criminals from enjoying the right to concealed carry seemed like a good idea.

Thankfully, the NRA lost a gun battle for the first time in five years, but no thanks to squeamish Blue-Dog Democrats. Take Colorado Democratic Senators Udall and Bennet, for example. They waited to the end to vote, as if calculating which way to go right up until the last possible moment, and then voted with the gun nuts. Interestingly, two Republicans from generally pro-gun states, Senators George Voinovich of Ohio and Dick Lugar of Indiana, didn't feel a need to cave to the Bonkers Wing of the GOP. Nor did some other Democrats from pro-gun states, like Senators Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Bill Nelson of Florida and Sherrod Brown of Ohio.

In response, a Columbine dad, who suffered what is the nightmare scenario for all of us with children in school, decided to remind these two men about what is and is not leadership in today's Denver Post. It says everything that needs to be said on this issue, as well as a host of others the Blue Dogs continue to practice duck & cover.

Sadly, the biggest threat to rational legislating right now is not from Republicans, who are and should be irrelevant, but from Blue Dogs. These people need to be taught not to fear their big contributors, but We The People.

(**As I stated in the piece, I am working with Mayors Against Illegal Guns.)

This is certainly great news. With Ted Kennedy finally behind the public plan option, he'll be able to bring a lot of people to our side of the table - and of course, he considers this his legacy:

Liberals pushing for the creation of a federally run health insurance plan won a major victory Thursday when Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) strongly indicated his commitment to the policy, one of the most controversial elements of healthcare reform.

Kennedy has co-sponsored a resolution introduced by Sen. Sherrod Brown (Ohio) and 26 other Democratic senators that declares the healthcare reform legislation the Senate will consider this summer must include a public plan option people can choose instead of private insurance. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) also co-sponsored the resolution.

Though purely symbolic, this show of strength by 28 Democratic senators sends a clear signal to liberals that a public plan, one of the left’s top priorities and a component of President Obama’s healthcare platform, will be part of reform.

Kennedy’s unequivocal support for the public plan marks a return of sorts to the front lines of the battle for healthcare reform.

The Cincinnati Enquirer is preparing to rank President Obama’s first hundred days. In doing so they listed how local lawmakers have voted with the President.

• Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio: 100 percent
• Rep. Steve Driehaus, D-Ohio: 86 percent
• Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio: 71 percent
• Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio: 43 percent
• Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.: 41 percent
• Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky.: 24 percent
• Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio: 0 percent
• Rep. Geoff Davis, R-Ky.: 0 percent
• Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Ohio: 0 percent

I think the most telling number there is that of the House minority leader, John Boehner. He is setting the lead for his caucus and they are following in lockstep with him. Even the Senate’s Minority Leader has been able to support the President 41% of the time.

DOWNLOAD (43)

PLAY (98)

Rachel Maddow talked to Sherrod Brown about the financial crisis and outrage over the AIG bonuses. Brown stated how important it is that people have some confidence in government, in Wall Street and the banking system. Although Brown didn't think that the outrage over the bonuses was unwarranted he noted that there are bigger issues that need to be addressed.

One being looking into why AIG passed billions of taxpayer funds onto financial institutions such as Société Générale, Deutsche Bank and Goldman Sachs and made them whole when that was not necessary to stabilize the financial industry.

He stressed what Congress needs to do next.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOAD (10)

PLAY (74)

Rachel reports on the GOP playing political games where they're obstructing for the sake of obstructing and holding up appointments of nominees who they will eventually vote for and not against despite all of the pomp and political games being played in the mean time. Rachel talks to Sherrod Brown about just how much the GOP will continue to play the role of obstructionists and whether it will help or hurt them politically to continue to do so.

Rachel Maddow asks whether it is the automotive companies at fault, or if the crisis where buyers can't get credit are at fault for the current crisis the Big-3 is facing. Rachel discusses whether we need a bottom-up rather than top-down solution to the problem with Sen. Sherrod Brown since the banks still are just not lending money even after the huge infusion of cash the taxpayers gave them.