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

DOWNLOADS: (1091)

PLAYS: (1048)

Morgan Weiland at Media Matters summed up this segment nicely--Memo to the media: This has been a great week for health reform:

Discussing health care reform today on Morning Joe, co-host Joe Scarborough and NBC White House correspondent Chuck Todd agreed that "[t]his week has been a mess for the Democrats." Todd added that "it does seem like they decided to take two steps back after they took one step forward because now they got a trillion dollar bill in the House, which is about $150 billion more than they said, than the President said that he wanted, and now they've got to have this back and forth and figure out how to get six to 10 moderate Democrats and Olympia Snowe on board."

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree that the past week was "a mess for the Democrats." Speaker Pelosi reported out a full House bill, the American Affordable Health Choices Act (H.R. 3962), that achieves a number of key fiscal goals that only this summer many in the media were insisting were out of reach. The Congressional Budget Office found that the bill reduces the deficit by $104 billion over the next decade, and continues to chip away at it in the subsequent decade. Plus it comes in under the magic $900 billion number for the net cost of coverage expansion over 10 years -- a cost that is, in CBO's words, "more than offset." And these achievements are doubly important because they satisfy President Obama's must-have requirement that reform "[w]on't add a dime to the deficit."

If anything, all of this adds up to a big step forward -- arguably a bigger one than has ever taken to achieve comprehensive health care reform in this country.

Not in the Villagers on Morning Joe's world though. In their view it's just terrible that the Democrats are breaking with the White House and their obsession with bipartisanship and catering to Olympia Snowe and her love of the trigger. They're more worried about advancing the meme that the Democrats are in disarray and everything is smelling like roses for the Republicans.

Of course we’re not going to get any sort of substantive debate about what’s actually in these bills and what those changes might mean to the American public. No, we get horse race coverage and meaningless talking points churned out as Chuck Todd whines about being criticized for the way they're covering the issue.

They also never talk about what it would mean if Harry Reid forces an actual filibuster--if he would make any of these Senators who are opposed to the bill have to stand up and debate until they dropped. Later in the segment Sheldon Whitehouse was asked if this could still be dragging along as it got close to the holiday break and would Harry Reid consider keeping all of them there instead of going home. He said this could very well go into the holidays or even the beginning of next year.

I wonder how that would play out? Tell them if they want to filibuster the bill, they're welcome to do it all week Christmas week, and let's carry it into New Years week for good measure. If Reid would grow a spine and actually do that I think I'd consider it a holiday gift, not that it's going to happen. It seems Reid and the media are more than content to pretend that Reid's silent filibuster is the norm. What does anyone think would have happened to the Civil Rights Act of 1957 if we'd had a Harry Reid around back then to deal with the likes of Strom Thurmond?

I'll gladly reserve judgement as I would expect everyone will as well on whether we should be clamoring for that or not after we see what makes it to the floor for a final vote. If they go back to either opt-in or Snowe's trigger I don't see how that's a step towards reforming the current system. The other compromises are bad enough already away from single-payer, which is what we should have.

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

DOWNLOADS: (823)

PLAYS: (2342)

This has to be one of the more infuriating things to come out of one of these Conserva-Dems mouths in a long time. Do you think you could be a little more insulting to the American public Sen. Landrieu? Of course both David Shuster and Tamryn Hall waited until after Landrieu got off the air to question whether what she was saying was complete B.S. or not. That's not included in the above clip but here's my beef with the two of them. While they still had her there, they should have asked her how lining the pockets of insurance industry CEO's and their stock holders is doing anything to help small business or the general public that isn't fortunate enough to have her health care plan paid for by our tax dollars.

And nobody thinks that having a public option is going to be "free". Landrieu apparently pulled that talking point out of the land called her butt, since that's the first time I've heard someone use it. That or some health insurance lobbyist fed it to her and we're going to hear more of the same from Landrieu and the rest of her fellow Corporate-crats as this debate goes on.

Hall: I want to talk about the public option. You just heard Gov. Dean and he said “What’s the point in having a sixty vote majority in the Senate if you can’t get the public option passed?” “That is health care reform, not insurance reform and that is what the American people want.” Where do you stand? I know that you’ve been under a lot of pressure about your opinions on public option, but where do you stand now after we saw new numbers come out and it passed in the Senate Finance Committee yesterday, without the public option in that committee?

Landrieu: Well first of all Gov. Dean has been a wonderful leader and he is a great guy and a wonderful American, seriously. I just don’t agree with him on his statement that unless you have a public option you can’t have real reform. And I don’t agree that if you’re not for a public option you’re for insurance companies, you know, scamming tax payers…um…or consumers. I’m not for either. I wish it was as simple, but it’s not.

The bottom line is we want choice and competition and a reformed market place. I don’t believe as a Democrat and I’m proud to say this as a Democrat, I believe in the private sector. I don’t believe in the government running every program and for everybody. I believe in public/private partnerships.

Hall: Do you believe in the polling that says that the American people want a public option? Do you believe in that desire from the folks that you and all of the others represent that say that they want a public option to happen to help offset these costs?

Landrieu: I think when people hear public option they hear free health care. Everybody wants free health care. Everybody wants health care they don’t have to pay for. The problem is that we as governments and business have to pick up the tab and as individuals. So I’m not at all surprised that the public option has been sold as free health care, but there is no free lunch and it’s costing us 16% of the gross national product and it’s driving businesses out of business.

So I wish it was as simple as saying you can have a public option and everything’s going to be great or not. The fact it’s more complicated than that and it’s been a very I think unfortunate debate between public option and not public. We should be thinking about public/private partnerships and cost containment.

Sen. Landrieu, cost containment would mean putting a stop to your campaign donors taking 30% for moving our money around and making the bankers happy while they deny their customers the coverage they thought they paid for.

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

DOWNLOADS: (51)

PLAYS: (166)

Olympia Snowe claims that the trigger option which was included in Medicare Part D was never needed because there was so much competition. Little surprise since it worked out so wonderfully for big Pharma.

Rahm Talks of Triggers in Healthcare Reform, But Doesn't Anyone Remember Medicare Part D?:

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by Meg White

In examining and crafting policy, it is helpful to look at the recent past. The favorite comparison for our current efforts to reform healthcare is known as Hillarycare, the failed attempt at universal healthcare during the Clinton Administration.

But there may be a much more timely (and ominous) yardstick to hold up to this current legislative process: President Bush's Medicare Part D prescription drug program for seniors.

I know 2003 was forever ago, but does anyone remember how we ended up with Medicare Part D?

It was promised as a mechanism to bring down prescription costs for seniors. The problem is, the legislation itself was basically written by Big Pharma. The drug companies ingeniously decided they wouldn't have to negotiate with the federal government on Medicare prescription drug prices, as they must do with other programs such as the Veterans Health Administration, so they could charge taxpayers whatever they wanted.

And that they did.

After all that, the program still didn't help a large minority of the senior population deal with drug costs because of the massive "doughnut hole" problem. There are millions of seniors caught in the so-called doughnut hole, where thousands of dollars in annual prescription drug costs must come directly from their individual pocketbooks, or they will go without the often life-saving medications.

The legislation had a "trigger" built in to supposedly protect consumers and taxpayers against huge cost increases in the program. If the bills became too large, a "public option" would kick in and tell Big Pharma what's what. Unsurprisingly, that threshold has not yet been reached.

As a result, Big Pharma got a big windfall (a whopping $3.7 billion in the first two years alone) from Medicare Part D. But hey, that's what happens when you let lobbyists for the industry you're trying to reform write the legislation that does the reforming.

[...]

But the peep from Emanuel was telling. He says a "public plan" is only necessary if hospital bills balloon too large. That will set off a "trigger mechanism" like we were told would be available for the Medicare prescription drug program. You remember, that one which we haven't yet seen?

Now the House is using healthcare reform as an impetus to argue over ways to fix the doughnut hole problem, but they don't see the trigger pointed right in their faces.

Instead, Blue Dog Democrats are saying they want to work with industry to institute reforms. The insist that the American Hospital Association is ready to help cut costs. Right. Just like Big Pharma promised to do for seniors with the failed prescription drug program we're trying to clean up now, just three years after it went into effect.

Lawmakers need only look back a few years in the past to see that trusting industry to institute a fair trigger guarantees yet another program blowing up in our faces.

From CNN's American Morning. Good grief. She's on Hardball repeating the same nonsense right now. Transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (992)

PLAYS: (786)

From Meet the Press, when asked about whether President Obama is going to be able to get health care reform passed or not and about the "vast right wing conspiracy" Clinton faced and whether President Obama is facing similar opposition, former President Clinton decides to sing the praises of Olympia Snowe's horrid trigger option.

CLINTON: Oh, you bet. Sure it is. It's not as strong as it was, because America's changed demographically, but it's as virulent as it was. I mean, they're saying things about him--you know, it's like when they accused me of murder and all that stuff they did. He--but it's not really good for the Republicans and the country, what's going on now. I mean, they may be hurting President Obama. They can take his numbers down, they can run his opposition up. But fundamentally, he and his team have a positive agenda for America. Their agenda seems to be wanting him to fail, and that's not a prescription for a good America. We actually need a credible debate about what's the right balance between continuing to expand the economy through stimulus and beginning to move back to fiscal balance. We need a credible debate about what's the best way to get to universal coverage.

Now, the one Republican who's come up with a good idea is Senator Snowe. She deserves a lot of credit for saying when we did this Medicare prescription drug bill, instead of giving the government the power to negotiate for lower prices we gave the drug companies a chance to offer them, but we held the power in reserve. And if there was any state in America where there was no competition, you could do it. So let's do that for health care. That's a good idea. That's, that's the kind of debate the country needs, and I hope that the Republicans will come forward with it. These...

How many ways can I find to say... "Hell no!"? This is not a good idea and the trigger is meant to be something that is never pulled and instead kill any real reform of the insurance industry, just as it has never been pulled with the overpriced Medicare Part D drug plan that was nothing but a giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry, as slinkerwink over at FDL points out here- Why The “Trigger” Is A Con Job Pulled On Us By Lobbyists.

Mike Lux writes a very disturbing piece about something that he warned us about back in June. It's called a Trigger.

The moment I am talking about is the debate of the so-called trigger mechanism for having a public option in health care insurance.

The insurance lobby has had multiple tactics for stopping the public option idea, which they despise because they know if regular folks have choice to go to a public option, insurance companies won't have the same ability to treat their customers like garbage when they get sick. The first tactic was just to try to kill the public option outright, and the good news is that they appear to have failed at that. This so-called trigger proposal is the second tactic: the idea is to write a "trigger" that will allow for a public option only under certain conditions, but write the legislation so that those conditions would never get met in the real world. It's a classic DC tactic, right up there with calling for a commission to study something. Olympia Snowe is carrying the insurance industry water on their trigger proposal, proposing triggers that would only get tripped in some fairyland none of us have ever visited.

Rahm bragged about it in July, but then was forced to backpedal on it when we all came out and raised bloody hell.

Rahm Reassures Angry House Members that Obama Backs Public Plan, No Trigger

As Lux describes it now, the White House is obsessed with Olympia Snowe and they are willing to allow her to write the language in the bill that adds the trigger to the public option. but she will basically eliminate any chance a trigger will actually get triggered.

Are you confused?

Media reports and insider buzz make it increasingly clear that key people at the White House have become obsessed with Olympia Snowe on health care, and are willing to do pretty much whatever she demands in order to get her on board. The price is looking more and more like this incredibly bad trigger proposal she has been pushing, a trigger that quite literally is written to automatically never trigger a public option. You see, Senator Snowe is writing language into an amendment that is literally a Catch-22. The legislative language says that a public option will be set up in a state in which health care is not affordable to 95% of the state's residents, but it defines affordability as after the new tax credits that are written into the bill to make health care affordable. Not only would this be an incredibly weak public option (doing it in one state will mean it can't get the market power to compete with the big insurers), but it would be a public option that is written by its definition to never be triggered. This is a trigger specifically, intentionally designed to kill the public option...read on

Please keep up the pressure and don't allow Rahm or the White House negotiate the public option away with bullshit triggers put there by Olympia Snowe.

HCAN writes: The Snowe Trigger - A catch-22 to kill the public health insurance option

Olympia Snowe's trigger is a plan to kill the public health insurance option. Not kill it as in make it weaker, but kill it as in make absolutely sure it will never, ever come into existence.

Senator Snowe's trigger is literally a catch-22, defined by Wikipedia as "a set of rules, regulations, procedures, or situations which present the illusion of choice while preventing any real choice."

Since the media gasbags for the most part have all proclaimed the public option DOA, the trigger will be a point they will hammer progressives that go on TV about. It's the Bipartisan Creep for Broderites. I hope any members of the CPC are well informed before they decide to do the Hardball's, CNN or cough, cough....FOX News. The Villagers think they speak for America when they discuss health care reform, but they do not. Americans overwhelmingly support a public option and one that isn't rigged to a phony trigger. Lux warns that this will cause a civil war in the Democratic Party.

The AFL-CIO, Howard Dean and Democracy for America, bloggers, MoveOn.org, progressive media figures, and the tens of thousands of people coming to Obama rallies and cheering wildly for a public option will figure out quickly that this trigger proposal is a farce specifically written to kill any chance of a public option. The Congressional Progressive Caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus already are angry at having legal immigrants thrown under the bus by Baucus, all will explode.

Ya think?

This trigger will never trigger a public option, but I can tell you what it will trigger: a civil war inside the Democratic Party just when you most need unity to pass health care reform. I am convinced that there are deals that can be struck that will bring progressive and moderate Democrats, House and Senate Democrats together on a good strong health care bill that will pass. But a trigger designed to never trigger isn't even close to being one of them.

Rahm seems to be using the trigger to get his backroom deals done with Big Insurance, and he's playing with fire.

No Triggers. Do you hear that, Rahm?

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

DOWNLOADS: (112)

PLAYS: (232)

Rachel Maddow talks to David Sirota about why including a "trigger" in the health care bill is a poison pill that assures we won't have any real reform. David reiterates what he wrote in his op-ed The Trigger Mechanism:

Recall that over the last decade, a maverick group of progressive and conservative lawmakers pushed bills to let Americans purchase cheaper, FDA-approved prescription drugs from other industrialized nations. It was (and is) a commonsense idea - other countries allow importation, and the practice helps lower health costs by permitting consumers to buy medicines at the lowest world market price, not just at an artificially inflated domestic premium.

As with today's public option surveys, polls on importation showed strong national support for the concept. So rather than murder the drug legislation outright, congressional leaders joined the Clinton and Bush administrations in backing a "compromise": Importation bills were passed, but only those that gave the secretary of Health and Human Services the power to trigger - or not trigger - final implementation.

Specifically, the secretary would have to first certify that imported medicines were "safe" (drug companies promote the lie that Canadian medicine is mortally dangerous - prompting Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty, an importation proponent, to ask, "Where are the dead Canadians"?).

This trigger provision, of course, was lobbyists' poison pill - and it worked as they planned. Importation has never been implemented, as no HHS secretary has pulled the trigger. Hence, Americans are still barred from wholesale importation of lower-priced medicine - and pharmaceutical industry profiteering continues.

The moral of the story is that triggers are just another version of the old Blue Ribbon Commission trick. They are designed not as good public policy, but as devious political tactics to help dishonest lawmakers look like they support popular measures - all while guaranteeing those measures never become reality.

On importation, triggers gave corporatist politicians a way to seem like they were remaining true to their pro-consumer platitudes and "free trade" dogma at the same time they were strengthening an extreme form of anti-consumer protectionism for pharmaceutical companies.

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

DOWNLOADS: (110)

PLAYS: (152)

Eric Cantor clutches his pearls and repeats the Republican's latest talking point du jour; the President's speech was too partisan. That's rich coming from Mr. Party of "No" Eric Cantor. These statements didn't sound too partisan to me.

OBAMA: Well the time for bickering is over. The time for games has passed. Now is the season for action. Now is when we must bring the best ideas of both parties together, and show the American people that we can still do what we were sent here to do. Now is the time to deliver on health care.

[.....]

OBAMA: Finally, many in this chamber – particularly on the Republican side of the aisle – have long insisted that reforming our medical malpractice laws can help bring down the cost of health care. I don't believe malpractice reform is a silver bullet, but I have talked to enough doctors to know that defensive medicine may be contributing to unnecessary costs. So I am proposing that we move forward on a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first and let doctors focus on practicing medicine. I know that the Bush Administration considered authorizing demonstration projects in individual states to test these issues. It’s a good idea, and I am directing my Secretary of Health and Human Services to move forward on this initiative today.

[.....]

OBAMA: But those of us who knew Teddy and worked with him here – people of both parties – know that what drove him was something more. His friend, Orrin Hatch, knows that. They worked together to provide children with health insurance. His friend John McCain knows that. They worked together on a Patient’s Bill of Rights. His friend Chuck Grassley knows that. They worked together to provide health care to children with disabilities.

Newshounds has more on the segment- Hannity And Cantor Complain About Partisanship In Obama’s Health Care Speech, Ignore GOP Heckling And Disrespect:

Sean Hannity and Republican Congressman Eric Cantor last night (9/9/09) blithely accused President Obama of being too partisan in his health care speech to the Joint Session of Congress while they just as blithely ignored the heckling and disrespect from Republicans that included booing, holding up antagonistic signs, using Blackberries during the speech and, in one case, shouting out that the president is a liar. With video.

Hannity opened his post-speech show last night with a commentary that accused Obama of delivering “an attack speech that could have been written by James Carville.” He forgot to mention that the Republicans’ reaction would have been scripted by middle schoolers.

Hannity went on to complain about Obama’s “cynicism and intimidation… Everyone disagrees with him is either a liar or a thug.”

Yet Hannity made no mention of Republican Congressman Joe Wilson yelling, “You lie!” during the speech.

Continue reading...

Transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »

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

DOWNLOADS: (75)

PLAYS: (97)

Senator Joe Lieberman (Status Quo-CT) sat down last week with the Connecticut Post for a long interview and online question session. Among the first questions was about his supposed change in support for a public option from 2004 when he ran an ill-fated campaign for President. Lieberman explained that his proposal then was nothing like what is being proposed by others now.

Lieberman was also chided for his support of the Iraq invasion and subsequent occupation which will end up costing taxpayers north of a trillion dollars (more in real dollars than the Vietnam war, inflation adjusted) yet won't support meaningful health care reform. You can watch the full length video at the CT Post site. Apparently that was Donald Rumsfeld's fault...

STAMFORD -- U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman made it clear Wednesday that he would not vote for a health care bill that included a government-run option, but said that without it, he and most of Congress would support comprehensive health care reform.

Discussion on health care dominated an informal question-and-answer session with the fourth-term Connecticut senator, who spoke to the editors of The Advocate and Connecticut Post and answered e-mailed questions from readers.

If the public option "is off the table, we have the opportunity to achieve significant reform with bipartisan support," Lieberman said during the nearly two-hour meeting Wednesday afternoon.

And as always, Joe is all too trigger happy:

The Democratic-turned-independent senator said he knows his opposition to the government-run option will probably foil the Democrats' efforts to pass the bill.

"There will be no shot at 60 votes, because I'm not the only one," he said.

But he added: "If we start this out and three years from now a case can be made that the private market is not working effectively, I would support the public option."