DOWNLOADS: (526)

PLAYS: (2907)

Embed

I hope Anthony Weiner is right here and that if our overly partisan Supreme Court does strike down the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act that it does lead to the return of the public option. Here's more from TPM where Weiner expressed some similar sentiments to the ones made here with MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell.

Weiner Says SCOTUS Will Rule Against Health Care Law, Paving Way For Public Option:

This is more in the spirit of partypooping than of celebration. But on the first anniversary of the Affordable Care Act, one of the law's most dogged defenders, Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY), admitted he thinks the Supreme Court will strike down the individual mandate. It's not that he thinks the mandate is unconstitutional, but that the court has become so partisan, that its conservative justices will rule against President Obama in a 5-4 decision. He wasn't glum about it, though -- if the mandate goes he said it will pave the way for Congress to pass the public option.

"If lightning strikes, and it turns out that as many of us believe, the Supreme Court turns out to be a third political branch of government and they strike down the mandate -- big deal," Weiner said, expressing a 'so what?!' sentiment. "Big deal!" Read on...

I think potentially a bigger story our media and our politicians are ignoring is what's happening in Vermont, where they're poised to pass a single-payer health care plan for their state. If they can make this work there, you could see it spread to other states and eventually, hopefully, the rest of the country. If memory serves, this is the same type of scenario that brought Canada their health care program. It started in one province and eventually spread to the rest of the country. It's a huge uphill battle with lots of special interests poised to fight against it, but who knows. Maybe we win one there and move towards not allowing the insurance companies continuing to rob us blind so they can take care of their stock holders and their CEO's instead of the people they're supposed to be bringing a service to.

Vermont’s Single-Payer Salvation:

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (363)

PLAYS: (1677)

Embed

Thank you Sen. Sanders. While discussing the ruling by Florida tea party Judge Roger Vinson to invalidate the Affordable Care Act, Bernie had this to day about what we need to do to fix out broken health care system.

SANDERS: At the end of the day, let's be clear, the United States is the only nation in the industrialized world that does not provide health care for all of our people and yet we end up spending almost twice as much as any other country. Is this health care reform bill the bill I would have written? No, it is not.

And one of the changes that I want to see is not to repeal the whole bill, but to give states the flexibility to go forward in more effective ways. In my state I would like to see; and I think we've got a shot at passing a Medicare for all, single payer bill, which in a cost effective way could provide health care to all of our people.

Those are the changes we need. Not the wholesale repeal of this legislation.

His state of Vermont is going to be under attack for trying to do this by the special interests that don't want to see it work. Let's hope they prove them wrong and get the system enacted and maybe it will spread to other states.

DOWNLOADS: (1543)

PLAYS: (22211)

Embed

In the wake of Keith Olbermann's departure from MSNBC, I at least was able to take a little solace watching the Wall Street Journal's Stephen Moore getting his ass handed to him on Real Time over the health-care law and insurance company mandates by MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, former Reagan adviser David Stockman and Bill Maher. Moore, of course, defended the hypocritical Republicans who thought a mandate was a great idea until a Democrat proposed it and gave us more of the "government takeover of health care" lie, which Rachel, thankfully, shot down.

I really don't know why Bill Maher thinks having Moore on as a guest contributes much to his show because the man strikes me as being as dumb as a box of rocks -- but who knows, maybe he's some genius and I'm just not seeing it. Whether he's just not that smart or crazy like a fox with his lies, what he does is lie. I don't understand how that adds to any kind of dialogue that moves our country to a place where we're solving our problems for the working class, whether some might consider it entertaining or not. Stephen Moore had nothing to add to this discussion other than hyperbole and lying GOP/Rupert Murdoch talking points.

The insurance mandates he's claiming are unconstitutional are something Republicans loved before a Democrat proposed them. And those high deductible plans he's touting just mean a lot of people don't get treatment when they're sick because they can't afford it. As Rachel recommended, we need to actually have a "government takeover" of our health insurance programs and Medicare for all and we'd be a lot better off. Moore would prefer to keep lining the insurance companies' pockets instead.

DOWNLOADS: (1685)

PLAYS: (460)

Embed

Looks like Dennis is everywhere the last couple of days. He visited the set of Real Time to discuss his reasons for deciding to vote for the health care bill.

DOWNLOADS: (1935)

PLAYS: (1195)

Embed

Oops. Republican John Shadegg appeared on MSNBC just after Dennis Kucinich made his statement saying that he was going to vote for the health care bill. While arguing against the mandate to buy insurance Shadegg let's one slip and basically made the argument for having single payer health insurance. As The Hill noted, he quickly switched gears. Shadegg (R): 'I would support single payer' over individual mandate:

Shadegg blasted the for-profit health insurance industry during an appearance on MSNBC today, finally declaring, "I would support single payer."

He quickly clarified his comment, saying he would simply like to see health insurance companies have more competition.

"I would support forcing American healthcare companies to compete right," he said "Now they have a monopoly."

That's similar to the argument Democrats have made for the public option, and in a statement to The Hill, Shadegg's office said a public option would be better than requiring individuals to buy insurance from the for-profit sector.

Read on...

David Shuster did a pretty good job here. It is humorous to watch these Republicans spinning so badly in an attempt to attack the Democrats that they're going from repeating Dennis Kucinich's point about why we should have single payer in one breath and then talking about high risk pools in the next. I don't recall any support for single payer coming from Shadegg on the House floor over the last year. Instead he was busy using a baby as a prop while he talked about the "dangers" of government run health care. These Republicans never seem to run out of goal posts to move.

I know a lot of people are mad at Kucinich for changing his vote. I'm not happy with this whole deal but I say cut him some slack. He didn't have any good options to deal with and not passing this bill is political suicide for the Democrats right now and he knows it. There's no reason we can't keep pushing these guys for a Medicare buy in as Grayson is proposing and for single payer after this passes. This fight isn't over if the bill does pass and I know Dennis will be one of the ones continuing to push the party to do the right thing. I'm not ready to throw him or Bernie Sanders or any of the other progressive Democrats who vote for this bill under the bus. They're not what's wrong with our Congress. The problem is there aren't enough of them.

We can keep pushing the Democrats to do the right thing and supporting primary challengers against the ones who won't or we can throw our hands up and let the party that has "moved into a mental hospital" back in power. We're stuck with a two party system right now so I'll take the former. I shudder at the thought of a President Romney or Palin, a Leader McConnell, a Speaker Boehner and a Michele Bachmann chairing some committee in the House. I had enough of the wingnuts running the show under Bush to last me for the rest of my life and that was before they started ratcheting up the crazy the way they are now.

DOWNLOADS: (915)

PLAYS: (3484)

Embed

Bill Maher feels the same way I do about how the Democrats negotiated on the health care bill. Even if it was not what they ever thought they were going to get in the end, they should have started with single payer and negotiated down from there.

Transcript via MSNBC from the March 10th edition of Countdown.

O‘DONNELL: We‘re back with Bill Maher here on COUNTDOWN. Bill, after my tickle fight last Friday night, as I always do, I watched your show, and new rules, you turned into a prude, suddenly. You want the president to quit smoking. You became Mayor Bloomberg on Obama. What‘s the quit smoking bit with Obama?

MAHER: Well, it was tongue in cheek, Lawrence, as you know. Come on, do I have to tickle you to get you to laugh at this one? No, what I was— you know, the point of the rule was that when people quit smoking, they get angry.

And I like my president angry, because, you know, considering how much in this country people are poisoned, ripped off and lied to, we all should be angry, but especially that guy, who has to deal with Congress every day, and trying to get this health care bill through and all that. And you know, I like him when he‘s out on the stump in sort of a partisan mode.

I think his biggest mistake that he has made in his first year was to put bipartisanship ahead of fixing the country. He spent all his political capital on getting three damned votes for that stimulus bill, instead of coming in with all the energy from the election and saying, you know what, we‘re in a crisis mode; I won this election by a sizable mandate; here‘s what we‘re going to do; if you don‘t like it, Republicans, you can suck on it.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (588)

PLAYS: (807)

Embed

Don't we wish Orrin. Orrin Hatch pretends that the Republicans weren't involved in the process of putting together the health care bill. Sorry Senator but the ones who were completely shut out of the process were single-payer advocates. They weren't even allowed a seat at the table when Max Baucus was having his hearings. You and your party on the other hand were given ample opportunity to muck up the bill you refused to vote for later. I also can't believe he had the nerve to say the Senate passed the Health Committee bill when that's a blatant lie as well. The end result of that Senate bill was not what came out of the Health Committee and he knows it.

From Slate--This Is What "Bipartisanship" Looks Like:

What do the GOP amendments to this Senate health care bill actually say?

When the Senate health, education, labor, and pensions committee passed its health care bill Wednesday, the Obama administration hailed it as a "bipartisan" effort. No matter that it passed the panel on a strictly party-line vote, with all 13 Democrats voting for and all 10 Republicans voting against. It was bipartisan, administration officials explained, because it contained 160 Republican amendments. Republican senators said that characterization was absurd. After all, they said, most of the 160 amendments were technical, rather than substantive, changes. Lisa Murkowsi of Alaska told the New York Times that, while it was "pretty impressive" that 20 of her amendments were accepted, "they were all technical."

Who's right? There's no real way to resolve this debate without examining the content of these amendments, and the committee has yet to officially release them. But a Senate Republican source sent Slate a summary of many of the amendments, with a short description of each. (Download the Excel file here.) Disclaimer: This is an incomplete list. Of the 788 amendments filed, only 437 appear here. And of the 161 GOP amendments passed or accepted, we have confirmed only 80 as such. We hope to update the document as more information becomes available. Read on...

Transcript via CNN below the fold.

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (834)

PLAYS: (2027)

Embed

Conservative columnist David Brooks expressed support for a system of health care that is most often demonized by the right wing. "I wouldn't mind a single-payer. I prefer it to what we have now," Brooks told ABC's Jake Tapper Sunday.

Brooks support for single-payer comes late in the health care reform debate. Both houses of Congress have passed reform bills which Brooks says he can't support. "I oppose it. It's a close call for me," said Brooks. "My preferred option is to give consumers choice."

In July, Brooks deflected a question about implementing a single-payer system. "There is no way something that big and complex and dynamic can be run out of Washington," he said.

DOWNLOADS: (831)

PLAYS: (1482)

Embed

Dr. Nancy Snyderman talked to Sen. Judd Gregg about his stalling tactics in the Senate to hold up the debate on the health care bill, and after a great deal of filibustering and feigned indignation from Gregg Snyderman followed up by asking Gregg this:

Snyderman: But Senator let me just ask you a question. We just listened to the President talk about jobs. We know people continue to lose their jobs, which means they’re losing their health care. So what do you say to the average American who’s played by all the rules who can’t have the same health care that you have and you’re one of our elected officials?

Gregg: Well, you know if he works for the government he’ll get the same I have. I mean I have the same health care as a person who works for The Secret Service, works for the FBI or works down at the local Federal Building. I mean I don’t have anything different than what an average federal employee has.

I actually proposed a bill which I wish had been incorporated into this which said that people would be able to have the option of the FEHB program which is the Federal Health and Benefit Program and I’m cosponsor of a bill which does the same thing. That’s not really the issue here. The issue here is how you do it affordably. How do you do a health reform process which is step-by-step takes on issues that can improve health care, expand its coverage rather than proposing this massive bill which as I said grows the government in the largest way we’ve ever grown. It’s $2.5 trillion and at the same time in my opinion will put the government basically in charge of health care because that’s the ultimate goal here—move the government into health care, give us a single payer system.

Think Progress posted the first part of Gregg's reply here--Gregg’s Health Care Solution: ‘If You Work For The Government, You’ll Have The Same Health Care I Have’ and had this response to the interview:

It’s puzzling that Gregg — who regularly slams “spending beyond our means for big government programs” — would say that anyone who wants health care coverage like his should simply work for the federal government. Certainly, Gregg wouldn’t advocate that we grow the size of government by employing the tens of millions of Americans who are uninsured in order to provide them health care. Or would he?

They did not include the latter part of Gregg's response where he touts a bill he co-sponsored as a means for everyone to receive the same health care benefits as federal employees. There's just one problem with that. From Ezra Klein:

The plan has a lot more fake support than it has real support. If every Republicans who has co-sponsored W-B would commit to voting for it, the plan might pass. But they haven't.

So Gregg cites a bill he co-sponsored but never committed to voting for instead of admitting what the Republican Party’s actual solution is for health care reform—do nothing and sabotage anything the Democrats try to do for political gain. It sure can't be because the Democrats haven't shown the insurance industry enough love in the bill they're trying to get through the Senate.

DOWNLOADS: (155)

PLAYS: (366)

Embed

October 28, 2009 MSNBC The ED Show

From Kucinich's office today: State Single Payer Cannot Be Ignored

Washington, Oct 29 -Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today made the following statement after House Leadership announced the latest version of health care reform:

“Today, advocates of true health care reform were disappointed to learn that the Kucinich amendment was removed from the latest version of the health care reform bill. At the end of the day, states may be given the option to opt out, but won’t be allowed to opt into a proven system that provides all of a state’s residents with better health care.

“Many states are demanding single payer. Not only does it help people stay out of poverty and provide health care for all, but it would provide major relief for states facing budget difficulties. The Lewin Group’s financial analysis of the California single payer bill that passed the legislature twice found that “the net cost of the program to state and local governments is a savings of about $900 million” in 2006 alone. There are also strong single payer movements in Pennsylvania, New York, Illinois, Colorado, and New Mexico.

“If a state wants better health care than can be provided by the federal government in the health care bill we are seeing today, the federal government should not stand in their way. The removal of the Kucinich amendment constitutes yet another capitulation to the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries who are already reaping billions of dollars from the bill.

The Kucinich amendment had been added to HR 3200 in a 27-19 bipartisan vote in the Education and Labor Committee.

Transcript from MSNBC below the fold.

Continue reading »