Push Schrader off the fence: the trifecta
Update 1:00PM: David at HorsesAss has some interesting commentary on this as well.
Update: 11:15AM: It would appear that even though the main office line isn't being answered, the internal staff lines are. Rep. Schrader's Legislative Director is Chris Huckleberry. His office number is [redacted -editor. Main number is 202-225-5711.]. If nothing else, you should be able to leave a voice mail.
Update: 10:50AM: Well...well..well...here's an interesting turn of events. It seems that all of the Oregon Democratic delegation is answering their DC phones today, except Schrader's office. Wu, Blumenauer and DeFazio's offices all pick up when you call. Interesting constituent services, Congressman Schrader.
Update: 9:30AM: The voicemail at Schrader's DC office is full, and as it's Saturday they're not picking up the phones. You can send him an email here.
As we hit the home stretch on health care reform, the House is scheduled to vote later today on legislation which includes the public option. The vote is expected to be very close, and Oregon Congressman Kurt Schrader has been officially undecided.
This morning, the Oregonian pushed for a "yes" vote, noting that the bill on the table is historic and the kind of legislation that transforms things in a huge way for the better:
As in the 1960s, the momentous change is accompanied today by much wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth. Right up until the final votes on Medicare in 1965, congressional conservatives vigorously opposed it, warning that it would lead to "rationing" of health care and "socialized medicine."It did not, yet the same hoary arguments echo on Capitol Hill today as Republicans battle to block reform and hand President Barack Obama and his Democratic allies a stinging political defeat. Also seeking defeat are thousands of angry "Tea Party" protesters, gathered at the Capitol Mall at the behest of the right-wing talk-show hosts who reign over today's conservative flank.
In any close examination of motive, the noisy demonstrations defy logic and present a bizarre spectacle. Tens of thousands of Americans, outraged that Congress might change the country's completely dysfunctional health care system?
There must be something else going on here, but we'll leave that up to the social scientists and historians. Instead, it's more useful to focus on what's real in the health care debate.
The AARP of Oregon specifically targeted Congressman Schrader this morning in today's Statesman Journal:
Those of us here in Salem and across our state and nation urge Rep. Schrader to seize the moment and move us one step closer to enacting true reform that will at long last bring quality, affordable health care within reach of most Oregonians and Americans. These bills embody the essential elements of reform — affordability, comprehensiveness and choice.They are good for those of us on the sunny side of 50 because they enhance and protect our access to care. As AARP pointed out in its endorsement of the bills this week, they would strengthen and protect Medicare now and into the future, lower prescription costs for seniors stuck in the Part D "doughnut hole," attack systemic waste as well as abuse and fraud, cover preventive services, prevent insurers from discriminating on the basis of age or pre-existing conditions or dropping people after they become sick, and add benefits that will allow more ailing seniors and people with disabilities to remain at home.
But make no mistake, these bills are also good for Oregonians of all ages. Even after the good work in the last state legislative session extended coverage to children, four out of five adults who would otherwise qualify for coverage under the Oregon Health Plan remain uninsured for lack of funding. And a report released last month by Families USA says that among all states Oregon will have the largest percentage point increase in 2009 of working-age adults without health insurance due to rising unemployment.
Alright Oregon, let's raise some hell. Start burning up the phone lines.
Schrader's contact information:
Washington DC Office
1419 Longworth Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-5711
Salem District Office
494 State Street, Suite 210
Salem, OR 97301
Phone: (503) 588-9100
Toll Free: 1-877-301-Kurt (5878)
Oregon City District Office
112 8th Street
Oregon City, OR 97045
Phone: (503) 557-1324
|
November 7, 2009 |
Carla Axtman | Comments (50 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Sponsored Advertising
Comments
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Nov 7, 2009 9:26:52 AM
I have been skeptical of anything decent coming out of Congress regarding health care, but I could be wrong according to Alternet: Why Congress' Health Care Bills Are Better Than You Think. This bill falls considerable short of what people in other developed countries (France, Italy, U.K., Scandinavia, etc.) have, but it looks like it might be a decent start.
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Nov 7, 2009 10:35:00 AM
"This bill falls considerable short of what people in other developed countries (France, Italy, U.K., Scandinavia, etc.) have, but it looks like it might be a decent start."
On the other hand when the House and Senate get to wrangling in the back rooms of Congress with a senate possibly more owned by the insurance corporations that start may be less than decent.
Posted by: jaybeat | Nov 7, 2009 10:51:02 AM
My email:
Representative Schrader,
As a long time Democrat and strong supporter of your candidacy in our district, I'll keep this short:
Vote YES on the health care reform bill today.
Vote NO on any amendment to restrict reproductive rights, but vote YES on the bill, regardless of whether such an amendment passes.
We NEED health care reform, we NEED this bill. If you're worried about COST, worry about all of the small businesses who increasingly cannot afford coverage for their workers.
If you are worried about ACCESS, worry about people like me: I was most likely FIRED from a job because I utilized the company's healthcare plan, including their prescription drug coverage which reimbursed employees directly out of the company's checking account! A few months later, the company "went out of business" and stopped offering health insurance, including COBRA. Funny enough, though, they remain in business today (same name, same ownership, though I'm sure with a technically different legal business structure), much more profitable because they don't have to carry all their ex-employees and their dependents on their health care plan! After my COBRA, myself and my family were turned down for individual coverage, and coverage under the "high-risk pool" would have cost twice what our COBRA cost, or about the same as my entire unemployment compensation!
We NEED reform for our nation's companies to be competitive against countries where health care is a NON-ISSUE and has NO IMPACT on a business's bottom line.
VOTE YES or you will find Democrats lined up around the block to take you on in next years primary.
VOTE YES so you can instead have Democrats lined up around the block to support you, pointing to this vote as why this supposedly "swing" district needs you in the House.
Vote YES, with the AARP, AMA and countless others.
Vote YES because the CBO says the costs are held in check.
Vote YES now, and improve later by giving the public option the right to pay Medicare + 5% rates.
Vote YES because it is the right thing to do.
Posted by: LT | Nov 7, 2009 11:03:39 AM
Over at Schrader Part 2 there was this comment:
"Posted by: Bill R. | Nov 4, 2009 7:51:14 PM
@ LT
Your and Kari's arguments are irrelevant right now. Because it's fish or cut bait time. The bill is posted, it's going to be voted on at 6 PM EDT on Sat. And it will get an up or down vote.
<<<
The bill may have been "posted" on Nov. 4, but the Congressional Black Caucus had a press conference about it yesterday (Nov. 6) where Cong. Shiela Jackson Lee spoke of being concerned about cost.
The House Rules Comm. (no House bill goes to the floor without a Rule stating conditions of debate--which amendments allowed, time allotted, etc.) met until after 1 AM DC time--I watched the end of it last night on CSPAN. Republicans demanded a voice vote on each thing debated (voice vote taken and then the Republican Ranking member would ask for a roll call vote so the clerk would have to call the roll--and it would always be straight party line).
Regardless of what the above quoted comment says, debate in the House is just about to start--that is what CSPAN said when I turned it on just now. They expect Maj. Leader Steny Hoyer to be the first speaker.
According to what CSPAN put at the bottom of the screen, there will be 4 hours of general debate, 2 amendments, one motion to change the bill.
CSPAN said there would be a Republican substitute, and an amendment to replace the abortion provisions.
Cong. Stupak (D-Mich) and Ellsworth (D-Ind.) have wanted to be absolutely sure that not a dime of government money went to pay for any insurance policy covering abortion, although apparently the Ellsworth language would say it was OK for a woman to spend her own money for that part of the insurance premium if the rest of it was paid for as a subsidy for people who couldn't otherwise afford insurance.
I had called Schrader's office days ago when I first heard about the Stupak proposal and said Kurt had better oppose Stupak or he would have an awful lot of explaining to do to constituents.
It will be interesting to watch the debate and see what members actually say and do.
Posted by: Bob Baldwin | Nov 7, 2009 11:09:27 AM
Just being snarky, but:
Didn't Bradbury used to represent the Canby area as a state senator?
Isn't Canby in Schrader's district?
Maybe Governor isn't the best race for Bill in the '10 primary...
;-)
Posted by: Bill R. | Nov 7, 2009 11:16:37 AM
@ Baldwin
Bill Bradbury comes from Coos Bay
@ LT
The previous post you are referencing about amendments and not allowing them was true at the time. Rep. Stupak forced the leadership to allow an amendment on abortion or face a mass defection. The GOP and the Stupak gang will vote for the amendment, and it will pass. The rest of the Caucus will hold their nose and vote for the entire bill. Could be it will be stripped in Conference, but the Congressional leadership is not going to let the abortion issue kill health care.
Posted by: Bill R. | Nov 7, 2009 11:20:36 AM
Schrader voted "Yes" on the Rules resolution. It could portend a "Yes" vote on the bill,maybe.
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Nov 7, 2009 11:22:33 AM
"... Cong. Shiela Jackson Lee spoke of being concerned about cost. "
If she, Schrader, or anyone else is worried about funding health care there is a simple solution if we oppose the military-industrial-security complex. Bring the troops home from Afghanistan, Iraq and other places in the sprawling American empire. There will be more than enough money available to make an American health care system the best in the world instead of its current status at the bottom of the table among developed nations.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Nov 7, 2009 12:08:49 PM
Editor's note: I've pulled the internal staff number from Carla's 11:15 update. We're not going to post internal staff phone numbers - folks need to get their jobs done.
I've also confirmed with Schrader's office that the main lines are OPEN. They're being deluged with calls - every time a phone is hung up, it rings again. The calls are from all over the nation, and on both sides of the issue. When folks call and don't get through, they're going to voicemail. The voicemail is filling up fast, too. They've got folks processing voicemails as fast they can.
An alternate contact method is email. You can send Congressman Schrader an email here.
Posted by: FrankC | Nov 7, 2009 12:21:10 PM
Don't understand why Schrader is the only Oregon office not taking calls. The voice mail is full! Great job listening to your constituents.
Why did the other number get taken down?
Posted by: Carla Axtman | Nov 7, 2009 12:24:51 PM
For the record: This post was edited without my permission and I strongly disagree with Kari on this. But I have been told in no uncertain terms that he is the publisher and I'm to do what I'm told.
The internal # was pulled by Kari, not me.
Posted by: Also in Primate News | Nov 7, 2009 12:25:05 PM
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Nov 7, 2009 12:08:49 PM
Editor's note: I've pulled the internal staff number from Carla's 11:15 update. We're not going to post internal staff phone numbers - folks need to get their jobs done.
There you go. What goes on behind closed doors is real work and face time with constituents is a nice to have. Yeah, not MUCH of a hack. That's identical logic used by banks and CC companies that have pulled fax numbers, etc., shoehorning everyone into a little manageable channel. It's called limiting access. If the Rep pulls a bonehead stunt, it damned well should impact business as usual.
Have to agree with the Bills (and probably the absent Oregon Bill).
Posted by: Peri Brown | Nov 7, 2009 12:27:58 PM
Brave heart, Carla. Thanks for speaking up. The position is easier to swallow when the dissent is visible!
Posted by: FrankC | Nov 7, 2009 12:42:59 PM
I've worked for a Member of Congress before and for a freshman member, constituent service is key. When your Senior Members all have their phone lines open, it seem stupid not to do the same.
And with all due respect to Mr. Schrader, he is a Freshman, it's not like he is in the middle of the action working on the bill. And besides it will be his staff and interns answering the phones. It's a small gesture but an important one.
This whole "people across the country are calling"...well so are your constituents! And by not being fully accessible you're not doing the best job you can.
Maybe it's a rookie mistake, but it's a bad one.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Nov 7, 2009 12:54:19 PM
I'm going to repeat what I said above: I've also confirmed with Schrader's office that the main lines are OPEN.
It's kind of like a radio contest - there's just too many calls coming in. I've been the poor intern on a day like this, it's no fun - but there's nothing to be done about it. Keep logging and clearing the voicemails and work the phones as fast as you can.
I'm told that for Schrader, the vast majority of the calls are coming from outside of Oregon. That's too bad.
As for whether we're going to post internal staff numbers here at BlueOregon, we're not. It's my view that that's akin to posting a home phone number or a personal email address.
The office has a main number for a reason - because they've got their systems set up to triage calls that way; and because people need their own phones to get their work done.
We never posted internal staff numbers for Gordon Smith or Greg Walden - as much as joy as I would have taken in making their lives hell - and we're not going to start now.
Posted by: Carla Axtman | Nov 7, 2009 12:55:25 PM
Over at HorsesAss blog, David has a good post on this.
Posted by: Sharon | Nov 7, 2009 1:14:57 PM
I got through on the main line at Rep. Schrader's DC office to tell him I support the bill. The phones are definitely being answered, so keep trying!
Posted by: JJ | Nov 7, 2009 1:19:43 PM
If Schrader votes yes...he is toast in 2010, and I'm sure he's well aware of it. This bill is without question, one of the most indefensible and deplorable pieces of legislation in modern history...but my own views (and the view of most Americans) aside, as a life long political junkie, I'll be fascinated to see how this shakes out. Are enough "conservative" Democrats willing to commit political suicide by voting for a bill that ultimately has no chance of becoming law, simply because Barack asks them to? We shall see...very interesting stuff to watch...
Posted by: Bill R. | Nov 7, 2009 1:49:53 PM
@ JJ
Schrader is definitely toast if he votes to kill health care. In Virginia polling shows Deeds lost a lot of Dem votes because he didn't support the president on health care. In that event I'm one of those who would try to replace Schrader in the primary and not check his name on the ballot if he's on it.
http://rootswire.org/content/dropoff-obama-voters-easily-explains-deeds-loss
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Nov 7, 2009 2:12:03 PM
"I'm going to repeat what I said above: I've also confirmed with Schrader's office that the main lines are OPEN."
If Schrader and his office haven't absorbed the message by now additional calls most likely won't make any difference.
Not to change the subject, but Schrader is on my list (probably irrevocably) for voting "Yes" on that execrable bill to bury the Goldstone report.
Kari: With your development of Schrader's, Wyden's and other pols web sites, can you set up a page on each to keep us up to date on their campaign donations? If they don't have anything to hide or be ashamed of they shouldn't object.
Posted by: OR-5 Constitutent | Nov 7, 2009 2:17:16 PM
I was able to speak with someone in Schrader's Washington office a few minutes ago, as well. The office is definitely open today.
Posted by: Calling in opposition | Nov 7, 2009 2:42:11 PM
Stipulated: Shrader is not serving his constituents in a host of ways and that Republicans are scumballs that don't want reform.
With that out of the way, as several intelligent leaders on the health care reform issue including several Congresspeople have publicly noted, is a big step backward. In this case, though, he's right to oppose THIS bill, if for the wrong reasons.
There is no mincing words: This bill, by imposing a mandate to buy insurance from the corrupt private insurance industry from day 1 without offering a universally available national publicly owned option anyone can buy into from day 1, is a pure bailout for the industry. By another definition: FACISM.
Unfortunately, as we see from Kari and Carla, this has become solely a matter of winning one for the broken down, incompetent, truly corrupt wing of our Party in all branches of our government. The proof is that it has absolutely nothing to do with actually fixing our broken system to pay for health care and yet they sit there and shamelessly lie to our face as the evidence rolls daily confirming this.
This is an embarrassment to real Democrats everywhere. If it passes, because of the mandate --- with civil and criminal penalties in an environment of continued stagnant economy and high unemployment --- and no principled alternative that anyone can avail themselves of, that will in fact result in electoral failure for our Party in 2010 and 2012. The result is going to be regressive and repressive populist backlash which will be a disaster.
Posted by: Rev. Chuck Currie | Nov 7, 2009 3:02:25 PM
I faxed the congressman a letter and spoke directly with Chris Huckleberry. Kari, I disagree with you removing his number from this post. His job is to answer the people his office represents.
My message to Chris: The leadership of the United Church of Christ supports this legislation and we have a number of churches in his district. I look forward to sharing his vote with those churches.
Posted by: Calling in opposition | Nov 7, 2009 3:07:02 PM
And by the way, I can appreciate there is a dispute between Carla (who I side with in this dispute) and Kari:
For the record: This post was edited without my permission and I strongly disagree with Kari on this. But I have been told in no uncertain terms that he is the publisher and I'm to do what I'm told.The internal # was pulled by Kari, not me.
But they still are both wrong on this issue because to them it still just about winning, not doing the right thing here.
All we see in the internal dispute is what we know about Kari: He's sold out long ago because he's making a business running websites for the incompents who have risen to the top of our party in Oregon. As we saw in the grade school cat fight debate between two others on this blog about the egotistical has-beens that are the story in the Governor's race right now, Blue Oregon really has become a pretty smelly political cesspool.
Carla, I'm not impressed with your skills, yet, but it is experiences such as you've had from which people grow. Think hard about the real meaning of this legislation and why it may be time to think about the need for the re-alignment of power and authority in the Democratic Party, and who you'd like to actually be associated with in that. Some of us recognize there are few in the Democratic leadership in the state or nationally who deserve support for THEIR agenda, but that's quite distinct from whether our party can be reformed behind an agenda that benefits those of us who don't hold the power in our country.
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Nov 7, 2009 3:20:42 PM
Who said anything on this thread about Republicans being scumbags?
Over at Alternet Joshua Holland has an article worth considering: 10 of the Nuttiest Statements Elected Officials Have Made in the Health Care Battle
Item 6. Health Care Reform Is Just Like Terrorism, but Far Worse! Just as wrong as referring to this HOUSE health bill as fascism. There is a case for considering senate versions as proto-fascism, but that is a different story.
Posted by: Emmit Goldman | Nov 7, 2009 3:35:23 PM
Calling in opposition: I agree with much that you say, but you also seem to be getting punked by the DP once again, since you apparently prefer to attempt to "reform" the DP (which is like "reforming" the insurance and pharmaceutical industries).
It's time for progressives to leave the DP behind and join with those who want to fight for progressive causes. The tea-partiers, as crazy as they often are, at least have the guts to fight for what they want.
Posted by: Calling in opposition | Nov 7, 2009 4:11:15 PM
Bill Bodden - one of the attributes of fascism is an alliance between the government and industrial/corporate interests against the liberty and benefit of working people. The state puts it's power behind enforcing the interests of private industry to the mutual economic benefit of the powerful and the detriment of all of the rest of us.
Oh, and by the way, that generally is with the support of dominant institutionalized religionists who work real hard to twist out a theory for the moral rightness of such a course that for which they then become lead propagandist in exchange for holding onto a powerful and privileged position in society. I won't bother to recite the historical and present day examples since I really don't care to waste my time educating anyone who at this point is too stupid to know them. (You'll have to decide if the shoe fits in your case --- but your snarky comment could be read as a strong hint).
That is exactly what has come to happen with the House bill in the form it has been introduced.
Don't be so very stupid as to try to establish a moral equivalence between the wingnuts on the right who mindlessly mouth superficial, falsely seeming parallels of this argument as tools of the status quo, from those who understand exactly how this bill has become a bailout of the health insurance industry and for the benefit the real power behind the status quo in very direct and sophisticated way.
This is not reform, this is anti-reform for the most cynical of political purposes in which those playing the game look down on all of us as objects to be used for their benefit.
And I really don't take find the "intellects" over at AlterNet, or the HuffPo, or on most of the boring blogosphere to be exceptional or that informative as sources for critical analysis of much. For the most part they are exceptionally pedantic thinkers who have a much above average desire to draw attention to themselves. They preen to have a place on stage as part of the spectacle of political debate in this country. As in this case, the quality of the commentary is of secondary concern to them compared to their instrumental goal of reinforcing the self-assurance amongst those of whom they want to have social status.
If you actually read the rest of Item 6, you'll find no serious discussion at all of the specific issue of the mandate that I have addressed.
What you find instead in that item is standard, mindless, play-to-the-friendly peanut gallery snarking against exactly the kind of right wing-nuttery I just discussed above. The difference in the arguments is between criticizing how this bill does not genuinely deliver the kind of health care reform people need in deference to benefitting corrupt private interests that in the end too many of our leaders cannot stand up against, and idiotic hyperventilating claims about the government takeover of health care by people who in actuality work in favor of those corrupt private interests.
So if the shoe is starting to look like a little too comfortable for you, you might want to clarify. Although snarking is a favored discussion tactic of the community that tends to be defined around the left end of the blogosphere, it is not a particularly attractive or successful debating tactic.
Posted by: Carla Axtman | Nov 7, 2009 4:13:27 PM
As for whether we're going to post internal staff numbers here at BlueOregon, we're not. It's my view that that's akin to posting a home phone number or a personal email address
WADR, it's absolutely not like that whatsoever, Kari.
I posted a phone number paid for by tax dollars for an office paid for by tax dollars to an employee whose salary is paid for by tax dollars. This was not someone's personal phone # or personal home address that they pay for themselves.
I understand that you're the publisher and the final decision is yours. But with this one, you are absolutely wrong.
Posted by: Calling in opposition | Nov 7, 2009 4:25:51 PM
Emmit, overall I agree with you. It isn't so much as getting punked as for the moment placing a value on loyalty --- in this case to the values for which the Democratic Party used to stand. Loyalty is something that is one of the key ingredients to exercising power effectively. It's up to those who are being loyal to exercise judgement they are being loyal to the right things.
All in all, intellectually I know the evidence is very strong the DP's time in our country's history has come and gone. To adapt a literary metaphor, we are just watching the ghost of a political party hanging around that hasn't realized it's dead and it's time has come to depart this plane. This health care issue--- if the Senate and House pass something that incorporates the essentials of the House and Senate bill as they now stand and specifically the mandate --- very well could be the political event that finally makes all of this clear to any honest person.
To be clear my heart really does want to see a genuine progressive political party arise out of these times, much as the modern Republican Party actually started as a small group of people in Wisconsin standing up in the midst of the moral conflict and social turmoil in the time of slavery. Let's hope that turns out to be the case if this health care debate turns out to be the debacle my DP is working overtime to make it.
Posted by: Carla Axtman | Nov 7, 2009 4:29:05 PM
Carla, I'm not impressed with your skills, yet, but it is experiences such as you've had from which people grow. Think hard about the real meaning of this legislation and why it may be time to think about the need for the re-alignment of power and authority in the Democratic Party, and who you'd like to actually be associated with in that. Some of us recognize there are few in the Democratic leadership in the state or nationally who deserve support for THEIR agenda, but that's quite distinct from whether our party can be reformed behind an agenda that benefits those of us who don't hold the power in our country.
I put zero stock in anonymous commenters who talk down to me and essentially tell me I'm stupid. If you were hoping to win me over, this absolutely not the way to go about it.
Posted by: Kurt Chapman | Nov 7, 2009 4:47:32 PM
here are a few reasons 3962 is a BAD Bill.
* Employers must either provide an approved basic minimum plan (no definition of approved) or pay an 8% payroll tax.
* Employers offering a Medical plan may charge no more than 28% for employes apting for employee only coverage and may not charge employees more than 35% for family coverage. If they do, then see the 8% payroll tax above.
* Employers can provide a good plan AND be within the limits set above, however if the amount charged employees is over 12% of take home pay, the employees may opt out and the employer is still on the hook for the 8% payroll tax.
* There are no credits or provisions to encourage Wellness Plans.
* Assuming the mandatory purchase is constutional under the Commerce Clause, there are no teeth in the mandatory requirements. The "penalties are no encouragement to sign up.
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Nov 7, 2009 5:35:42 PM
"- one of the attributes of fascism is an alliance between the government and industrial/corporate interests against the liberty and benefit of working people."
Agreed, but that applies more to the senate and the Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats who are fighting the house bill. The few Democrats in the house who can be considered progressive support this bill even though it falls short of what they would prefer - such as single-payer.
However, concern for what's in this bill should be limited because what will come out of any house/senate negotiations will be entirely different. The virtue of this house bill is that it promotes a short step in the right direction that leads to a long march.
Posted by: Insider | Nov 7, 2009 6:13:19 PM
Schrader just voted FOR the bill.
Not sure why all this space was wasted with a false alarm.
Posted by: Calling in opposition | Nov 7, 2009 6:54:32 PM
I put zero stock in anonymous commenters who talk down to me and essentially tell me I'm stupid. If you were hoping to win me over, this absolutely not the way to go about it.
Frankly Carla, the reason that I have little respect for you is because your ego far exceeds any demonstrated ability on your part. You might want to be aware that being so presumptive and ingracious to try to hide that, a rather pronounced character flaw amongst the Seattle-Portland young and snarky "creative class", is pretty much why no one takes your crowd seriously.
Posted by: Calling in opposition | Nov 7, 2009 7:09:29 PM
Schrader just voted FOR the bill.
Not sure why all this space was wasted with a false alarm.
At this hour they have not yet voted for the bill. They are still voting on amendments, not the bill. Right now they are voting on the Stupak amendment. If that were to pass, then passing the bill would mean making the Hyde amendment permanent, which means most private plans would not cover abortion. Go read AlterNet:
House Will Take Up-or-Down Vote on Stupak Amendment, Threatening Women's Rights
Posted by: Calling in opposition | Nov 7, 2009 7:21:53 PM
If the mandate wasn't enough for your pinheads who have no clue what this is all about to oppose this bill, has passage of the Stupak amendment has passed that will severely limit the ability of working people to even find insurance that covers abortion, a legal medical procedure gotten through to you why there are bad politics around this bill?
Pelosi allowed Stupak to offer his amendment, which everybody knew would pass, because she guessed that if she could get the arrogant but stupid wing like we see at Blue Oregon to ignore the mandate and to do the work pushing their representatives like Shrader to support it, they'll be too stupid and egotistical to reverse themselves once the Stupak amendment passed.
So know what are you going to do Carla and Kari?
Posted by: Calling in opposition | Nov 7, 2009 7:59:02 PM
Just to try to educate some of you, Carla obviously being a typical PDX loser who obviously doesn't care as she played cheerleader for a bill that those of us following it knew last night would be amended this way, the reason that the Stupak amendment will all but eliminate the availability of insurance coverage for a legal medical procedure is this:
Under the bill federal subsidies will be available to buy any plan in the exchange. In addition these are the only plans for which a subsidy will be available (that includes state insurance programs that have federal subsidies.) And remember the exchange is where all this magic competition is supposed to work.
However, because of the Stupak amendment, no plan in the exchange will cover this legal medical procedure because no one has figured out how it would be practical to reconcile the subsidy requirement with the Stupak prohibition.
So this bill if passed tonigh, is nothing but robbing working people who will be forced to overpay for private insurance and deny women their constitutional right to have full control over their own bodies.
This is a serious omen of the political collapse of the Democratic Party and it is important to note just how much NW Democratic Seattle-Olympia-Portland-Salem crowd and their pathetic hand puppets just desperate to be somebody like Carla, Kari, Nick, and the rest actually embody the lack of genuine intelligence, selfish political opportunism, and petty juvenile cynicism that are the cause.
Posted by: Rev. Chuck Currie | Nov 7, 2009 8:03:16 PM
Carla, I think your leadership on this issue today helped bring the Congressman over to the good side of the force.
Posted by: Carla Axtman | Nov 7, 2009 8:56:50 PM
Frankly Carla, the reason that I have little respect for you is because your ego far exceeds any demonstrated ability on your part.
For somebody who has so little respect for me and my ginormous ego and itty bitty abilities, you sure are spending a shit ton of time reading and responding to my post. :)
Posted by: Carla Axtman | Nov 7, 2009 9:03:34 PM
Thanks, Chuck. I don't know that it really had that much to do with me--but it definitely had to do with all those Oregonians calling and emailing and writing to demand a "yes" on this.
I do hope the abortion provisions are eliminated or softened in the Senate version. Certainly that will have to be (at least in part) a big component of advocacy for the Senate side.
Posted by: Peri Brown | Nov 8, 2009 10:13:38 PM
Agreed on the kudos.
"Calling", this is called lobbying. Understandable it looks messy and strange to those that are used to buying the votes of their rep! And THAT, btw, is facism.
Posted by: LT | Nov 9, 2009 10:03:58 AM
Regarding your "update", Carla,
Update 1:00PM: David at HorsesAss has some interesting commentary on this as well.
"For example, Rep. Kurt Shrader, from Oregon’s 5th Congressional District has recently made it known that he would oppose the House bill, despite consistent polls showing that his constituents support it. Sure, you could just call the Congressional switchboard at 1-866-220-0044, and ask to be connected to Shrader’s office, but that would be easier to dismiss as just run of the mill public pressure. Wouldn’t it make more of an impact to disrupt the day to day workings of his office by calling a more direct line?"
Making oneself obnoxious is the way to win friends and influence people? Or maybe that blog is accurately named. Rudeness is a virtue because everyone will forgive bullying on behalf of the greater good? Not with everyone.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Nov 7, 2009 12:54:19 PM was right.
"I'm told that for Schrader, the vast majority of the calls are coming from outside of Oregon. That's too bad."
Calling a Congressman's office from out of district and claiming "do the right thing or I won't vote for you" is OK as long as it is "in support of a good cause"?
Years ago there was a woman I met on a Democratic campaign who said "Manners cost nothing, but they can reap amazing rewards". Apparently Carla et al don't believe that.
Posted by: Carla Axtman | Nov 9, 2009 10:19:31 AM
Making oneself obnoxious is the way to win friends and influence people? Or maybe that blog is accurately named. Rudeness is a virtue because everyone will forgive bullying on behalf of the greater good? Not with everyone.
When Schrader's office made the decision to not answer the phones on Saturday morning--I made the decision to push back at them.
Perhaps you're fine with an Oregon Democratic Congressman not answering the phone and having a full voice mail on the day of one of the biggest votes of the session. I am not. Especially when everybody else in the delegation manages to have their phones answered.
Perhaps that word "obnoxious" doesn't mean what you think it means. Or perhaps its more appropriately placed at the feet of those who think its acceptable to shirk their constituents.
If forcing a Congressman to open the phone lines for his constituents is "bullying", then I'm pleased to do it seven days a week and twice on Sunday.
Posted by: Pat Ryan | Nov 9, 2009 11:07:35 AM
Jesus Carla.
There have been a lot of posts over the weekend that seem to demonstrate that nothing of the sort happened.
Kari and many others assert that the lines were "open" and "clogged" by the number of calls, while you're still touting your own heroic exploits.
Prove your assertions. Retaract your assertions. Or continue to lose what credibility you have left.
Posted by: Carla Axtman | Nov 9, 2009 11:24:11 AM
Pat:
Schrader's office was NOT answering the phones on Saturday morning. I have it directly from a source from the Hill that this is the case. They didn't start answering the phones until well after 10AM our time. Perhaps after 11AM. I don't know exactly what time it was when they started--but it was absolutely after my 10:50AM update.
The lines were "open and clogged" after they finally decided to start answering them--and they were clogged because Schrader's people hadn't cleared out the voice mail (due to not having people dealing with it that morning).
I didn't just get that internal office # out of my ass, Pat.
Posted by: Pat Ryan | Nov 9, 2009 2:02:40 PM
They didn't start answering the phones until well after 10AM our time. Perhaps after 11AM. I don't know exactly what time it was when they started--but it was absolutely after my 10:50AM update.
OK Carla. That must be the sourcing that I asked for. Issue resolved (I guess).............
I didn't just get that internal office # out of my ass, Pat.
Storage location aside, I don't know what your "internal number" has to do with my comment. I too, have phone #s for many peoples although I choose to keep them on my computer and cell phone.....
The fact seems to remain that other commenters were able to communicate with Schrader's office. According to them, the lines were clogged due to volume, and they seem to not have your expertise or sources available to them.
Maybe you could provide assistance.
Posted by: Carla Axtman | Nov 9, 2009 2:16:55 PM
Storage location aside, I don't know what your "internal number" has to do with my comment. I too, have phone #s for many peoples although I choose to keep them on my computer and cell phone.....
You asked me to provide proof of my contentions that the phones weren't being answered on Sat AM in Schrader's office. I have sources that work on the Hill. I was demonstrating that these are in fact reasonable sources by talking about the fact that this phone # didn't just come out of thin air (or my ass--as it were). That's context. I'm not in the business of just making stuff up.
I figured you knew that about me already. But apparently not.
The fact seems to remain that other commenters were able to communicate with Schrader's office. According to them, the lines were clogged due to volume, and they seem to not have your expertise or sources available to them.
Maybe you could provide assistance.
Note the time stamps on the comments. There is a commenter at the top of the thread who notes that they can't get through--thinking it's because it's a Saturday. I make note of that in my post in the first update.
Then after speaking with sources, I find out that there's staff in Schrader's office, and they're just not answering the phone (and apparently not cleaning out the voicemail box). That's update #2.
After that, you'll start seeing commenters talk about how they're able to get through--the first of which is Kari at 12:54PM, two hours after my second update.
(And about 90 minutes after the third update, which contained the internal staff phone # for a short time).
Posted by: saç ekimi | Nov 13, 2009 1:09:34 AM
I'm really very useful to follow a long-time see this as a blog here Thank you for your valuable information
I'd love to take one of those for a spin. We need a lambo rental service in Pittsburgh. Any takers.
Thnx for the interesting post.I found it very useful for myself.Keep writing.
saç ekimi
laptop
Posted by: life coaching | Nov 19, 2009 3:19:24 PM
For those of you thinking that if they implement this it will eliminate some of the waiting and lines… I agree in
principal with your ideas at the same time I do believe if someone invents something before others they should have
some rights to make money from it.
acı cehre
koçluk
vajinismus
Note: The presence of any individual above does not imply an endorsement by BlueOregon. The selection of faces shown is done by Facebook. Visit BlueOregon on Facebook.
Post a comment
Posted by: Bill R. | Nov 7, 2009 9:22:35 AM
It is too late to call Schrader's offices locally or in D.C. as they are closed today and the vote is slated for this evening. He has turned out to be one of the bluest of blue dog turncoats. As of yesterday he was threatening to vote to kill health care by voting with the GOP. I won't be surprised if he does precisely that this evening when they vote. Those who might be watching the debate on c-span notice the juvenile disruption and shouting by the GOP side. Schrader is probably holding hands with his pal, Greg Walden, cheering them on. I will be happy to be proven wrong.