I fail to see, Kari, how a delay is going to promote the agenda you are suggesting here. A delay simply gives more time for Ron's Pharma and Corporate insurance friends to obstruct a real health care bill. I also fail to see the great benefit of bypassing the budget reconciliation route, while capitulating to the likes of Snowe and Collins on the public option route, since they are on record as opposing any real public option. Yeah, I know, you have business dealings with Wyden, but that doesn't mean you have to be a shill for him. I would like to see evidence that Wyden is not just selling us, and the American people out, like he did on the Medicare drug plan.

Thanks, Kari. I have long thought there was more to this story than meets the eye.

One of the ideas being bounced around is having a commission (rather than Congress) set Medicare rates. Apparently there is currently some Medicare Payment Allocation Comm. (maybe I got the name wrong) and the proposal which Obama appears to support would either strengthen that board or create a new one.

However, both Sen. Snowe and Speaker Pelosi have questions about that idea. How far do you suppose an idea would go with that kind of opposition?

On the radio I heard a Democrat in Congress(forget who) saying "we spend enough on health care--the question is how to allocate the money now spent". Gee! That's what I heard Ron say at a town hall meeting.

On CSPAN I saw health care hearings in the House about (among other things) efforts to keep Trauma Centers open and well funded and Cong. McDermott (D-WA ) and Sanchez (D-CA) were arguing with a Republican over liability caps and how that would impact the cost of health care.

There were debates along the lines of "well, that was tried in Texas and it didn't work" and someone else saying "Ohio is getting hammered when it comes to Medicaid!".

And of course there is the subject of how to pay for subsidies so that the unemployed, part time workers, and full time min. wage workers don't have to choose between basics like food and rent or paying for health insurance.

These are all complex topics.

But all of that would magically go away if only Wyden would stop being an impediment to health care and everyone should call his office and tell him to get with the program?

To my way of thinking, such excessive certitude is the downfall of many political movements. That's what bothered me about Bowman's post. There is very often more to a complex story like this than meets the eye. Thanks, Kari, for "the rest of the story".

Kari, here's the president's message today on Healthcare. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83FvLjsUOJg

It's pretty clear and well stated. Some are suggesting that he is touting the Wyden plan here on the "one-stop shop" and free choice idea. You are also suggesting that somehow Wyden is a trojan horse in this latest maneuver who is "tasked" by the administration to peel off a few Rs. What's your take?

Even if you think what Kari says is true ( I m not saying I do or don't)you should still contact Wyden's office and let him know what you would like to see health care reform look like. He needs to know we are watching.

Washington Post, on Republican plans to slow down health care bill:

"Their main goal is to slow down the pace of the legislation in Congress in the hope of fomenting wider opposition. 'If we're able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo," Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) said yesterday during a conference call with conservative activists. "It will break him."

I changed my mind. I think Kari is mistaken.

He may be doing a great job with the best of intentions by signing this letter but strategically, it is playing into DeMint's hands. Changes to a good bill can be made later (even in this congressional session), if the framework dies now, it is dead for a couple generations.

I normally disagree with Kari on many, if not most subjects. For me, he often puts his prejudices in front of his facts - his emotions ahead of his reason. In this case, however, I think he has it exactly right. I think Wyden is working on his "long-stated principles: Health reform that's universal, comprehensive, high-quality, affordable, portable, non-discriminatory, prevention-focused, and that brings down costs for families and public budgets." I don't agree with much of what he is doing, but, for a politician, he is reamaining very true to his beliefs and I respect that. I think Congress needs to get this one right, and, following the rush-it-through-at-all-costs plan will doom us to a poorly conceived plan.
Thanks, Kari, for bringing some sanity to the thread that JoAnn started so poorly.

Remember that Senator Wyden has been working on health care repair for many years, and not just in the sense that he cosponsored legislation. Instead he has been working on extremely detailed and workable legislation that would truly expand access to health care and contain costs.

It is tempting to look at Senator Wyden's very recent actions and believe that he is now part of the centrist locus of power in the Senate that is hesitant about meaningful health care reform, but if you consider his very long and very credible history as an expert in the solutions to our health care crisis the notion is absurd.

I asked this of Jo Ann Bowman and she refuses to answer the question, so I will ask it of Bill R. Please cite a sentence in the Wyden letter that you disagree with and explain why.

s might want to read Wyden's statement that Kari posted. It appears Wyden is on to DeMint's bullshit.

"Ron specifically rejected any suggestion in the letter that the committee and the senate should wait until after the August recess. Ron trusts Chairman Baucus and Majority Leader Reid to be able to tell the difference between good faith progress with Republicans like Sen. Snowe and Sen. Collins, and DeMint-like obstruction."

The $300,000+ Wyden gets from Blue Cross/BS tells me something about his long-unstated principles: keep the profits rolling for the health insurance companies while screwing over people. Fits perfectly with his support for NAFTA type agreements.

@ Peter Ray

What I object to is a delay..... period. What politicians say they are doing covers a host of sins. Actions speak louder than words. And finding common cause with those who are consciously seeking to defeat a progressive health bill (Nelson, Lieberman, Snow, Collins), in order to block the president's well founded request for an expeditious passage of health care is an act, on its face, worthy of condemnation. This issue has been studied for decades. It's crunch time, decision time, it's now or never.

I remember well the so-called "centrist" obstruction of the Clinton effort, and this is just part of the same playbook. Any tinkering or adjustment can easily happen down the road. And the president is right. This is going to happen this fall or not at all. And if the Dems fail, they will become again a minority party as they did in 1994 following the Clinton failure. And they will deserve it. If they can't do it now, with 60 senators, a strong majority in the House, and a president, they have no excuse and no justification to govern. They will lose support on the left and in the center, and you will see a splintering of the Dem. coalition. The Dem. party will be an utter failure.

I would like to believe that Kari is right, and that Wyden is maneuvering to get growing traction on his free choice plan which would have some strong across-the-board selling points, especially if there is a public option. I hope that Kari is right, and I fear he is not. If he is working in tandem with the president, and with the president's plan to reign in Medicare/Costs, and to promote a middle class approach to health care, then this has possibilities. What makes me suspicious is Wyden's connections to the corporate health lobby. Some of these senators and congressmen who claim to be Democrats are careerists who are first and foremost for themselves and not for the party or the country. We will find out soon who Wyden is for, and who he stands with, and what kind of person he is.

@ Peter Ray

Actually you are conflating what Ron Wyden said and what a staffer characterized he intended in the letter he signed on to. Big difference.....

I think I'm with Peter B. It looks like Wyden distinguishes between finding gettable votes for health reform and DeMint conservatives. And the letter rules out delay if you read it carefully. Like it or not, and I don't like it, Pelosi and Reid have to get the Liebermans and Blue Dogs on-board, or health reform will fail.

But I'm also with Bill R's last comment - we will find out who Wyden is soon enough. For now, I'm not going to freak out about Wyden.

"Ron trusts Chairman Baucus..."

That's another negative to tag onto Wyden. Baucus is one of the more blatant shills for the insurance corporations. He wouldn't consider a public option in his committee hearings. Perhaps he has come around to pay lip service to it, but that is the best we can hope from him.

I read Wyden's "Free Choice Proposal" earlier today. It is entirely insurance-corporation oriented and directed at people with jobs or are self-employed. Nothing about people who are unemployed. More on this on Jo Ann's post.

As someone commented earlier, Wyden has been working on this health plan for a long time. The trouble is it looks like he has been working more for the insurance corporations than the people.

Bill Moyers Journal on PBS is an excellent source of information related to the health care debate.

What's striking is how good Republicans are at making Democrats take hard votes and how much Democrats do nothing to make Republicans do so. With control of all three branches, the Republicans got Democrats to vote for insane Bush proposals and to back an invasion of Iraq. Now, with Democrats controlling all three branches, Republicans are still in charge of writing the bills and making great progress watering down any progressive content.

The sad thing is that, with Obama and Wyden, we're getting the worst parts of LBJ's presidency (AfghaniNam) but none of the best (Medicare etc.)

Re: "Senator Wyden's presence in this group of centrist Senators is fairly surprising."

Wyden is centrist, all right. If you consider the center to be the middle between the right and the far right. And if you have contempt for demcracy.

I can't help but mention again a great book by Senator Hollings, "Making Government Work."

As a long time senator, Hollings offered the observation in his book that Democratic members of the Senate Finance Committee and House Ways and Means Committee, however liberal they might have seemed, invariably end of being centrists, at least on economic issues. He focused on trade as his main example, but might have mentioned health care, too. Obviously, the constant contact with corporate lobbyists and the instant increased donations that comes with slots on those committees will have quite an impact on any member.

I hope that Kari is right and that Wyden still has his eyes on the prize of universal health care. I think that Ron Wyden is an effective Senator and a good Democrat on most issues. However, like Baucus and most Finance Committee members, Wyden is no Paul Wellstone or Peter DeFazio. It seems that few Democrats are.

The one area I have some confusion with is the claim by torridjoe, daryl and others that Wyden, Baucus, and others need to quit worrying about Republican votes. The McJoan piece seems to be pretty clear that the Democrats can't do this without every single (read 60) Democratic vote. That includes Lieberman, Bayh, Landrieu, Nelson, Pryor, Lincoln. Sigh.

I acknowledge that it seems theoretically correct that they don't need any Republican votes, but I can't imagine the Democrats will land all of their conservative members.

One more point on this. Wyden's staff raises the issue of two senators who are out with health issues. Are they talking about Kennedy? Won't he be back to vote for health care? Who else?

According to opensecrets Obama took 15 MILLION from corporate health cockroaches in one race. And you thought Wyden was bought and paid for!

Sorry I botched your name, Darrel.

Yeah, I think HAA is pretty dead, but Wyden's choice proposal is a spin-off from it. I think he is trying to mine the organs, and as far as the choice proposal goes, that's a good thing.

His choice proposal would give everyone access to a public option instead of just the heavily-subsidized, which is what both houses of congress seem to be heading toward. The bigger the public option, the better. Right? I fear that if the public option is too small, it won't have the economy of scale to truly compete with the private companies. And also, I want it, dammit!

Wyden is pretty annoyingly careful about not mentioning public option too directly when he talks about choice. He just says we should all have all the options, whether they are public or private ones. I assume he's trying to avoid scaring away some conservadems.

You're being a little harsh on Wyden for not getting anything passed - neither has anyone else for about 40 years, and at least he was trying. I give him some credit for pushing it onto the national stage, especially during the presidential campaign. Also, the core of HAA support is Democratic according to Wikipedia - 9 Democrats and 4 Republicans.

Senator Wyden will continue to fight for his long-stated principles: Health reform that's universal, comprehensive, high-quality, affordable, portable, non-discriminatory, prevention-focused, and that brings down costs for families and public budgets.

...... and in addition, reform that creates world peace, cures AIDS, ends homelessness, poverty and global warming.

I mean, heck, as long as you are dreaming, dream big,

The one area I have some confusion with is the claim by torridjoe, daryl and others that Wyden, Baucus, and others need to quit worrying about Republican votes. The McJoan piece seems to be pretty clear that the Democrats can't do this without every single (read 60) Democratic vote.

Actually, they only need 51 votes to pass health care reform. They can afford lose some conservative Democrats.

The only thing we need 60 for is to stop a filibuster. As long as our 60 Democrats are willing to refrain from outright treason against their own party...as long as they're willing to NOT FILIBUSTER their own leadership, we can have up to nine of them vote against the bill itself.

But yes, those two GOP women from Maine are reasonable enough to include in the process, just in case. The other 38 would vote to kill anything that might work, BECAUSE it might work and thereby make Democrats look good, no matter how badly the people need it. Any Democrat who takes those 38 seriously is either a buck-passer or a fool.

Budget reconciliation. That is how you do not need 60 democrats. You need 51.

Admiral, as McJoan makes clear in her story on DailyKos, only the money part of this bill can be done safely with 51 votes (I say 50, actually, because in a tie, Biden votes). That leaves the rest of health reform, the reform part, to be done under the normal tortuous rules of the Senate where any gasbag can filibuster a motion to do virtually anything.

Given that I and you and everybody on BlueOregon long-ago concluded that Lieberman and Nelson are more than capable of "outright treason" as you call voting against leadership on procedural votes, that highlights the value of somebody trying to get Nelson, Lieberman, Collins, and Snowe to come into the health reform tent and piss out. If it has to be Wyden, so be it. Hope he succeeds or health reform is screwed.

Polls show that 70 percent or so of the American people want a single-payer health plan or one with a public option. If the current Congress doesn't deliver, then maybe those 70 percent of the people can replace the insurance corporation shills with new representative and senators who will deliver.

Bill Bodden hit the target, but is letting the big BOSS off the hook. Obama abandoned us on single payer. Is it the $15 million he took from health lobbyists in 2008? See opensecrets to see who owns Obama.

Obama is giving notice there will be no Congressional recess until Healthcare is done. He is making arrangements for Michelle and the girls to go ahead of him on vacation.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/7/18/755005/-Obama-pivoting,-NO-August-recess-until-health-care-reform!

So get it done, Wyden!

Another development today... Olympia Snowe is announcing to her constituents at a rally today she is for a public option on day 1. ( I suspect what we'll end up with is public option on the state level.)

Bill Bodden: "Polls show that 70 percent or so of the American people want a single-payer health plan or one with a public option."

Wrong. Better check an updated poll, Bill.

As of yesterday, Rasmussen shows: - Just 35% of U.S. voters now support the creation of a government health insurance company to compete with private health insurers. - 50% of voters oppose setting up a government health insurance company as President Obama and congressional Democrats are now proposing in their health care reform plan. Fifteen percent (15%) are undecided. - 78% of voters say it is at least somewhat likely that taxes will be raised on the middle class to cover the cost of the health care reform plan.

This is from the NY Times on June 20, 2009: "Americans overwhelmingly support substantial changes to the health care system and are strongly behind one of the most contentious proposals Congress is considering, a government-run insurance plan to compete with private insurers, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll." A chart showed 72% of respondents to this poll favor a government-backed plan.

Do a search for "health care polls" and you'll get all kinds of results. Maybe those lying commercials from the insurance industry are having an effect and there are lots of gullible people buying into them.

DJ, you are missing the point. People have been cowed by insurance industry corruptocrats like Obama and Wyden into believing single payer equals slavery. So I could care less what the polls say, and frankly, people who are too stupid now to understand how single payer will benefit them will thank Bernie Sanders and other heroes when we take all profit out of health care.

$15 million from health lobbyists to Obama in one election and $1.4 million to Wyden. Think their naysaying has had any effect on public perceptions of single payer?

Here's a link for the CBO report on the House Bill. It is deficit neutral and yields a six billion dollar surplus. It also closes the donut hole on the Medicare drug plan. This diary replaced the earlier diary on Dkos. Confirmation straight from Speaker Pelosi.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/7/19/754994/-Speaker-Pelosi-and-Tri-Cmte:-CBO-Scores-Health-Bill-as-Deficit-Neutral,-Yields-SURPLUS!

Reality-Based Community nails it, as they often do:

http://www.samefacts.com/archives/health_care_/2009/07/hardball.php

In 1993, Democratic "centrists" on Capitol Hill helped defeat Hillarycare, believing that their power was unshakable and would be increased by teaching the new President a lesson about who was boss. The Gingrich Revolution was condign punishment for them, though what the rest of us did to deserve it I don't know. For Gingrich and his allies, the health care debate wasn't really about health care: it was about destroying the power of a Democratic President. It's not surprising that the Republicans have remembered that lesson, but it's disappointing that the "centrist" Democrats have forgotten it. This bill is make or break for the Democratic Party, and Harry Reid ought to enforce party discipline on the cloture vote. No on cloture should mean no subcommittee chair, no pork, and no money from the DSCC. Every Senator should be free to vote his conscience, or his constituents, or his contributors on final passage, and on amendments. But no Democrat should side with the Republicans in denying the President an up-or-down vote on his top priority, which has been a central issue for Democrats going back to Harry Truman.

thanks.

"Bill Bodden hit the target, but is letting the big BOSS off the hook. Obama abandoned us on single payer. Is it the $15 million he took from health lobbyists in 2008? See opensecrets to see who owns Obama."

This thread is about Wyden. I have made many comments on this site expressing criticism and skepticism of Obama. I'm still skeptical of Obama but am cautiously optimistic he will do some good.

"In 1993, Democratic "centrists" on Capitol Hill helped defeat Hillarycare, believing that their power was unshakable and would be increased by teaching the new President a lesson about who was boss."

This is very similar to how Walter Karp described how Democratic Party oligarchs, led by Tip O'Neill in the house and Robert Byrd in the senate, attacked Jimmy Carter and helped ruin his presidency. Tip O'Neill, on the other hand, proved to be a good ally/accomplice for Ronald Reagan. It is probably a good bet to presume Obama is in the same situation as Carter and Clinton.

Peter Orzag, budget director says this morning that many of those who want to delay the health care vote want to kill it. He does add further that not all fall in that camp. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/19/orszag-republicans-trying_n_239888.html

He also said that the administration is still pushing for an Aug. vote.

I would add that if Dems don't do this this year, the party is finished, and Health Care is finished. And Wyden deservedly should not be re-elected if he is unwilling to make this happen now, having been revealed as a cynical careerist who has betrayed the people of Oregon and the coalition that has supported him for decades.

I have been voting for Wyden since the 1980s and have talked to him on more than one occasion at various meetings. His story has always been, 'when Dems have the presidency and a majority in Congress.. then we will accomplish all these great things, including universal health care...' Well, this is the moment, Ron. You deliver now or this has all been a pack of lies to get yourself elected.

Sari, Kari, but even your blinders allow you to navigate the internet. But you were right - I was off by $4 MILLION (more). Obama took $19 million from the for-profit health industry! Who cares whether the checks were written by lobbyists - they were written by the ones who pay for the lobbyists.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/indus.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638

And Bill, while the thread is about Wyden, my point is that we can't call out Wyden's actions for their connection to the $1.4 million he has taken over the course of his senate career, and then pretend as though Obama didn't take $19 MILLION from those same health profiteers. It is self-servingly selective. Either they are all corporate whores, or they aren't. You can't take $19 MILLION in one election from the health industry, call single-payer too radical, and ask to be held to a different standard than Wyden, Lieberman, Kennedy, Snowe and every other politician who lines up for these contributions.

Re: "Now imagine how to explain to your constituency, either as a moderate Republican like Snowe/Collins, or a Democrat, why you voted to kill health care reform."

Although the Dear Leader has betrayed his base on virtually every issue that progressives care about, his favorability ratings remain high. It's obvious that those in the throes of secular mysticism don't care about facts or logic. So I wouldn't be so sure that failure to create a sane health care system will work against the DP corporatists.

Tuesday, July 21, 2009 07:30 PM Powell's City of Books on Burnside, Portland, OR Pulitzer Prize winner Chris Hedges's Empire of Illusion (Nation Books) charts the dramatic and disturbing rise of a post-literate America that craves fantasy, ecstasy, and illusion.

"Although the Dear Leader has betrayed his base on virtually every issue that progressives care about, his favorability ratings remain high. It's obvious that those in the throes of secular mysticism don't care about facts or logic. So I wouldn't be so sure that failure to create a sane health care system will work against the DP corporatists."

The problem is that most registered Democrats first and foremost are endowed with loyalty to their inherited or chosen tribe. Just as the Sunnis and Shi'ites give their tribes priority over what is best for Iraq, so to do the Democrats and the Republicans place their perceived tribal interests ahead of the nation's.

If Wyden should be challenged by a better independent or, against the odds, by a better Republican, party loyalty - and corporate donations - will most likely prevail.

Apparently Wyden is not left enough and needs to be replaced by someone who is more far left and mainstream America. After all the fat left is America now?

Where does tha leave the moderate progressives like Marc Abrams?

Kari, it is hardly surprising that you would defend Obama for taking $19 MILLION from health interests when your paying client has taken $1.4 million from those very same health interests. I used the exact same source for the $19 million Obama figure as everyone is using for you client Wyden. So what if some of them are doctors? We are not going to cut your guy any slack on his doctor contributions, either. In fact, perhaps you should remove your blinders and look here, Bub:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-blumenthal/senators-call-for-health_b_238157.html

I attended several Obama events starting with a half-full convention center room, the Memorial Coliseum rally, and finally the Waterfront Park 70,000. I even made an ad for Obama as part of the Move On contest.

This was partly because of my belief in him as a candidate but mostly because I couldn't face 4 more years of disastrous Republican rule.

I have been disappointed by President Obama on the pace and chance of Wall Street reform, plus on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 But I'm 100% sure what's driving President Obama on healthcare reform, and it's not some contributions by anyone. It was watching his Mother suffer and die of cancer while trying to navigate a wilderness of insurance companies so that she could afford treatment.

 I watched a good friend of mine do this. He died 7 months ago and his last 10 months was a wasteland of forms. Incidentally, he did have health insurance but he still accrued huge debts at a time where he needed to focus on getting better. The insurance companies have a real interest in your death compared to expensive treatments to make you well. That's the problem. Until you see it, and most of us will get sick before we die, you cannot believe how cruel and screwed up the system is right now.

  Good heath insurance usually just means you better stay in good health. If you get sick it's another story.

   You can call President Obama out on a variety of topics. (I wish he'd prosecute Dick Cheney for example.)

   But his motivation in this area, is from his experience watching his Mom get worked over by our healthcare system.

   I'm convinced of that.

Nice try, Kari, sneaking Lieberman in your "Republicans" list.

Too bad it's a lie.

As for health care, I say get half a loaf now. The camel's nose will be inside the tent, and there will be no going back. Those who want it all now may end up with nothing.

"What bad effect comes from a medical office receptionist donating $50 to a candidate?

None that I can see.

So you're going to have to be more specific about exactly how much of those donations you see as problematic. "

Probably no effect at all. Candidates don't pay much attention to the people paying chump change because the big donors usually have their undivided attention. On the other hand how much effect did those $20, $50 and $100 checks have on Obama? Much of what Obama has done has been business as usual and not the change those small donors thought they were getting. His cabinet and teams are stacked with Wall Street and other corporate types.

Check this article: White House treatment of Stiglitz reveals lack of respect for 'progressive-economist wing.' It is probably fair to say that most of those small donations came from the "progressive" wing.

Because I'm often accused of just seeing things in "black and white" terms, let me say I recognize some possibilities of change. If Obama's deeds match his words on a public option for health care and he stands firm on his latest pronouncements regarding Israel and Palestine, then he will be worthy of a lot of credit. Time will tell.

I think another question here is whether Kari's political instincts favor waiting and slowing down on healthcare. If so, he's not half the political operative I thought. The right is preparing to drive a stake right through this and Wyden and the crew are doing nothing but help end the one good chance we have to do something for the next 8 years. I would bet Kari feels the same way but he's forced to side with his clients. At least he had the class to call it a WTF moment in the title.

Sari, Kari and Bills, but opensecrets wouldn't have any idea about a $50 contribution from a medical receptionist because contributions of under $200 aren't even identified on the Federal Election Commission reports. Opensecrets can does the math on properly attributed contributions. And while some small percentage of the $19 MILLION probably came from doctors and nurses, I would bet a year's salary that the majority of that money came from corporate executives from insurance, hospital, medical device, and drug companies.

Many have raised the contributions received by Wyden as the cause of his approach on health reform. So why the heartburn over me raising the same issue about our President, especially when he changed his position on single payer after the campaign? Suddenly single payer is too "radical" AFTER the campaign contributions. We need to be consistent when holding their feet to the fire.

AMERICA’S NATIONAL HEALTHCARE EMERGENCY!

It’s official. America and the World are now in a GLOBAL PANDEMIC. A World EPIDEMIC with potential catastrophic consequences for ALL of the American people. The first PANDEMIC in 41 years. And WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES will have to face this PANDEMIC with the 37th worst quality of healthcare in the developed World.

STAND READY AMERICA TO SEIZE CONTROL OF YOUR NATIONAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEM.

We spend over twice as much of our GDP on healthcare as any other country in the World. And Individual American spend about ten times as much out of pocket on healthcare as any other people in the World. All because of GREED! And the PRIVATE FOR PROFIT healthcare system in America.

And while all this is going on, some members of congress seem mostly concern about how to protect the corporate PROFITS! of our GREED DRIVEN, PRIVATE FOR PROFIT NATIONAL DISGRACE. A PRIVATE FOR PROFIT DISGRACE that is in fact, totally valueless to the public health. And a detriment to national security, public safety, and the public health.

Progressive democrats the Tri-Caucus and others should stand firm in their demand for a robust government-run public option for all Americans, with all of the minimum requirements progressive democrats demanded. If congress can not pass a robust public option with at least 51 votes and all robust minimum requirements, congress should immediately move to scrap healthcare reform and request that President Obama declare a state of NATIONAL HEALTHCARE EMERGENCY! Seizing and replacing all PRIVATE FOR PROFIT health insurance plans with the immediate implementation of National Healthcare for all Americans under the provisions of HR676 (A Single-payer National Healthcare Plan For All).

Coverage can begin immediately through our current medicare system. With immediate expansion through recruitment of displaced workers from the canceled private sector insurance industry. Funding can also begin immediately by substitution of payroll deductions for private insurance plans with payroll deductions for the national healthcare plan. This is what the vast majority of the American people want. And this is what all objective experts unanimously agree would be the best, and most cost effective for the American people and our economy.

In Mexico on average people who received medical care for A-H1N1 (Swine Flu) with in 3 days survived. People who did not receive medical care until 7 days or more died. This has been the same results in the US. But 50 million Americans don’t even have any healthcare coverage. And at least 200 million of you with insurance could not get in to see your private insurance plans doctors in 2 or 3 days, even if your life depended on it. WHICH IT DOES!

If President Obama has to declare a NATIONAL STATE OF EMERGENCY to rescue the American people from our healthcare crisis, he will need all the sustained support you can give him. STICK WITH HIM! He’s doing a brilliant job.

THIS IS THE BIG ONE!

THE BATTLE OF GOOD Vs EVIL!

Join the fight.

Contact congress and your representatives NOW! AND SPREAD THE WORD!

(http://action.firedoglake.com/page/s/publicoption) (http://www.actblue.com/page/healthcareheroes)

God Bless You

Jacksmith – WORKING CLASS

"On the other hand how much effect did those $20, $50 and $100 checks have on Obama? Much of what Obama has done has been business as usual and not the change those small donors thought they were getting. His cabinet and teams are stacked with Wall Street and other corporate types."

"Watch What We Do, Not What We Say"

Nice Blinders, Kari. You have intentionally evaded my fundamental point, as have, surprisingly, all the Bills.

I am using these numbers from opensecrets.org:

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=Career&cid=N00009638&type=I

In fact, it's worse than I thought. Obama has taken over $20 million over the course of his career from the health industry.

No one disputed the veracity of opensecrets' numbers when many commenters on Blue Oeregon called out Wyden for taking $1.4 million from health sources. So why the evasion and silence when I simply state the facts about Obama? No, Obama's health contributions are not primarily from Florence Nightingale any more than Wyden's are.

"I am using these numbers from opensecrets.org:

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=Career&cid=N00009638&type=I"

Open Secrets is a great site that I have plugged on several occasions, but it has one shortcoming. It doesn't list the other ways corporations and their lobbyists legally bribe politicians. Open Secrets, or some other site, needs to list the "consulting jobs" and other scams set up for relatives or promises of future employment. Billy Tauzin from the "wonderful" state of Lousiana steered a prescription bill through the house that was a bonanza for Big Pharma - and to Tauzin. He was later hired at the end of his term to a one-million-dollar-a-year job in the pharmaceutical industry. If anyone believes that was just a coincidence, let me tell you about a tropical resort on Mount St. Helens that is in foreclosure and going real cheap. Check with your real estate agent for the details.

Exactly Bill! I would love to know what PHRMA and BIG HEALTH have offered Obama to get him to abandon his campaign support of single payer.

We have to go the single payer route, it is what we all want. Why can't they get this right?

Why is everyone ignoring that Wyden took big insurance money and the (R) plan is the same as in 1993, "Delay it until it dies"? It's a real eye opener and we know that we live in a corporate/fascist state now. Lobbyists buy policy. The people only get to watch. Could the truth REALLY be that Ron is being part of that delay as per request of the donors? Like all bills. Let's get a bill passed and tweek it later. This does NOT have to be perfect first.