"Capitalism is the state socialism of the rich"

http://porkupineblog.blogspot.com/2005/04/why-free-market-libertaria_111343416772095896.html

WHO F*CKING CARES?!?!

Why are people making such a big deal about this??? Seriously, WHO F*CKING CARES???

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091116/pl_afp/japanusdiplomacyasiaobama

Read This if you Suport Single-Payer

Act Now to Pressure “Management”


Today the House unveiled its healthcare reform package. And the news is all bad.

The Kucinich Amendment, which would give the states a clear path for enacting their own single-payer legislation, was stripped from the bill.

The Weiner Amendment, which would substitute the clean, clear language of HR 676 for the behemoth of a introduced, may not be given its vote in the House—in spite of Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s promise.

While single payer hangs in the balance, PDA will continue to fight for single payer at the state level. Meanwhile, we have a small window of opportunity to get the Kucinich Amendment back in the bill and to make sure that Speaker Pelosi follows through on her promise to allow a vote on single-payer—the first ever in the House.

Democratic House leaders can insert what is called a “Manager’s Amendment” into legislation, even when it is closed to any other amendments. The managers are the majority and minority members who “manage” debate for the bill on each side.

Today, tomorrow, and beyond, we need to call these “managers” and insist that the Kucinich Amendment is restored into the healthcare bill. We also need to urge these leaders to exert pressure on Speaker Pelosi—and exert it on her ourselves—to follow through on her promise to put the Weiner Amendment to a vote.

The “gang” that holds our future in their hands includes:

Speaker Nancy Pelosi: Washington, DC, office (202) 225-4965; San Francisco office (415) 556-4862
Majority Leader Steny Hoyer: Washington, DC, office (202) 225-4131; Greenbelt office (301) 474-0119; Waldorf office (301) 843-1577
Rep. Henry Waxman: Washington, DC, office (202) 225-3976; Los Angeles office (323) 651-1040
Rep. Charles Rangel: Washington, DC, office (202) 225-4365; New York office (212) 663-3900
Rep. George Miller: Washington, DC, office (202) 225-2095; Concord office (925) 602-1880; Richmond office (510) 262-6500; Vallejo office (707) 645-1888
It’s crucial for everyone in PDA to make these calls, to make them more than once, and to tell others to make these calls. Act NOW!

Oh, Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin, your supporters make me sad. They are so ignorant. They blindly support you without considering your faults.

I for one, despite being rather anti-Republican in general, very much respect the 80% approval rating you acquired as Governor of Alaska. However, the fact that you quit the Governorship amid a scandal kind of cancels that out. Still, I like that you went into office with an agenda and (unlike President Obama) you actually made it happen. If only I agreed with your general worldview and policy standpoints (which are just confused parodies, since you don't actually KNOW anything about national politics).

Sigh. I'm so over politics. Can't we all just get along? Ahh, the wealthy elite will never allow that to happen.... if we all agreed to do the right thing in respecting each life on Earth, they would no longer be able to control us through fearmongering and pushing capitalism.

How Do We Fix This?

I believe healthcare is a right, not a luxury reserved for the rich. I think people who want to keep the current system are CRAZY and misinformed. However, all the ideology in the world can't fill in the details of how we're going to make it happen.

I believe single-payer would be best; or if private companies want to provide health insurance, it should be non-profit only. Co-ops are a decent idea, I think; except that a system of co-ops still leaves out millions of people who can't afford to chip in. A public option, expanding Medicare, is the absolute minimum of what we should guarantee American citizens at this point.

Anyone with ideas as to HOW we accomplish the goal of providing healthcare for all is welcome to post those ideas as comments here. If the supposedly great minds congregated in Washington D.C. can't come up with something decent, the rest of us are going to have to figure it out and then try to get them to adopt our ideas!

My Letter to Barack Obama re: Healthcare Reform

I was kicked off my dad's health insurance when I turned 25. The only private insurance I MIGHT be able to afford (only if I cut out all expenses besides the bare-bones minimum, and even then it would be a stretch and certainly some of my payments would be late) is not worth the money for what I would get back if I tried to use it. I would really like the opportunity to sign up for a public option. However, I am concerned with the idea that government-paid healthcare "negotiates" low prices by shortchanging providers. Am I mistaken, or does Medicare keep costs low by forcing doctors to accept reimbursement below-cost? It is ideas like this that fuel opposition to a plan that otherwise would be beneficial to all. Some also have misgivings about the ability of government to provide good healthcare (compare to the DMV, the unemployment office, etc). I find it difficult to argue against these viewpoints because I see the validity. What is your response, or your plan to assure adequate compensation to doctors and hospitals, while still keeping costs low for citizens? I would really appreciate a response. Thank you.

Great Article on Single-Payer Healthcare

Quick read: http://pdamerica.org/articles/news/2009-09-08-13-26-44-news.php

Voices of Reform Silenced by Threats of Termination

Any questions about who the bad guys are here? Consider that a good friend of mine who works for Healthnet was planning on attending a reform rally with me until they threatened to fire any employee caught at a reform rally. I wonder what their motivation could possibly be... hmm....

At the rally, another supporter informed me that Blue Cross had made the same threat to their employees. It seems likely that all of the insurance companies are doing the same. Which of course is entirely illegal.

My Vision (Intro) + Further Reflection on Healthcare Reform

I have grand ideals and lofty goals for humanity as a whole. I am fully aware that the world I envision will come about in my lifetime only through a spectacular miracle. Does that mean I should tone down my dream, or give it up altogether? Those who float through life in a comfort zone rarely make an impact, and the world does not benefit from people who deny humanity's capacity for growth.

The essential problem with our global society is that we differ greatly in our goals, aspirations, and ideals. More on that later. I suspect that many leaders are or become more concerned with their own individual benefit than the benefit of society at large. Some even try to mask their selfish intentions by establishing and maintaining policy positions that purport to result in greater benefit for all; when these theories are put into practice, they consistently lead to exploitation of consumers by corporations.

Granted, the capitalist model has fueled innovations in electronics, communications, and yes, healthcare technology, among other things. However, this same model has produced companies that knowingly conceal vital and often dangerous information about their products and methods; to allow such information to become public would impact the bottom line. To name a few industries where regulation has been necessary to force companies to disclose information vital to the public health: The food industry, the pharmaceutical industry, the banking/lending industry. All large parts of most of our lives. Each of these industries has fought tooth and nail to keep our elected leaders from passing legislation that requires them to disclose details about their products/services that might make us pause a moment before contributing to their profit margin. It makes one wonder what secrets are still being kept from us.

The health insurance industry is no exception. Let us not confuse health CARE with health INSURANCE. Health INSURANCE is supposed to guarantee receipt of the appropriate health CARE. Unfortunately, due to the demands of profitability, health INSURANCE providers routinely refuse to pay for life-saving treatments, therefore effectively murdering people (thus the title of my previous blog entitled "For-Profit Health Insurance: Nothing Short of Murder") -- people who have been paying into the system for years. It is an addmittedly drastic comparison, and certainly meant to elicit an emotional response. I do not say it lightly. I condemn the way health insurance companies do business; I find it morally repugnant. I do not believe that adequate care should be a luxury reserved for the rich, as CEO of Whole Foods John Mackey claims in his Wall Street Journal Op-Ed (see my other post, "You're A Mean One, Mr. Mackey", for a more complete response to Mackey's op-ed, which actually contained some good ideas). Any person callous enough to suggest such a repulsive idea is a person with whom I would be loathe to associate.

To allege that the marvelous human brain is incapable of developing a system that can support the healthcare needs of 100% of people is an insult to every great scientist and every visionary leader. I have been accused by contributor darwinkilledgod (the Libertarian professor I called out in my blog "For-Profit Health Insurance: Nothing Short of Murder") of attempting to solve problems as if it is a bad thing. Or is innovation only valuable if it results in somebody profiting somehow? Even following THAT logic, a universal, single-payer healthcare plan would be acceptable; although the health insurance industry would take a hit, EVERY OTHER INDUSTRY would see increased profits overnight through release from the immense expense of purchasing health insurance for their employees. Take THAT, capitalist pigs!

You're a Mean One, Mr. Mackey -- But You Have Some Good Ideas

I am beginning to realize that no matter how we try to reform healthcare, it is not going to be the right thing. Maybe a public option is the best thing for now, but it is so complicated; there is no easy answer.

CEO of Whole Foods, John Mackey, spurred a massive boycott of his company when he asserted in a Wall Street Journal Op-Ed that "While all of us empathize with those who are sick, how can we say that all people have more of an intrinsic right to health care than they have to food or shelter?"

Mackey's viewpoint is disgusting. We try to help the poorest among us by establishing welfare programs and rent-controlled housing because we DO believe that all people have an intrinsic right to food and shelter. Many people are still homeless and starving because of a combination of underfunded programs and a lack of personal responsibility. Many rich people despise these programs because they simultaneously don't want to be forced through taxes to pay other people's living expenses, and they know from their own experiences that perseverence and personal responsibility are the keys to improving one's situation; receipt of handouts virtually guarantees that a person will remain in the situation that led them to receiving welfare because it removes the motivating factor to "pull oneself up by one's bootstraps." However, does this mean that we should not act with compassion towards these people? Does this give us an excuse to let people die in the streets because they should have had the foresight to purchase health insurance? Who Would Jesus Cover?

Although Mackey maintains a callous disregard for those who do not have coverage, I do not believe it is entirely coldhearted. In the WSJ piece, Mackey presents eight of his own recommendations for healthcare reform that do not include single-payer or a public option. While I do think that government should guarantee coverage for catastrophic illness and injury, I agree with most of Mackey's points:

• Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits. Now employer health insurance benefits are fully tax deductible, but individual health insurance is not. This is unfair.

Agreed, not much to say here.

• Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines. We should all have the legal right to purchase health insurance from any insurance company in any state and we should be able use that insurance wherever we live. Health insurance should be portable.

Agreed, and to continue this line of reasoning, there should be uniform guidelines & forms used by all insurance companies to simplify the process.

• Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover. These mandates have increased the cost of health insurance by billions of dollars. What is insured and what is not insured should be determined by individual customer preferences and not through special-interest lobbying.

Agreed, with a HUGE caveat -- we cannot just repeal all coverage mandates and expect that the profit motive will be enough to get insurance companies to cover expensive treatments, at least not at an affordable rate. This is why I believe that we need to enact a single-payer system ONLY to cover catastrophic illness and injury.

• Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. These costs are passed back to us through much higher prices for health care.

I don't know enough about this aspect to comment. However, if a person dies or is handicapped due to a doctor's poor judgment, shouldn't they have the right to seek compensation through a lawsuit?

• Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost. How many people know the total cost of their last doctor's visit and how that total breaks down? What other goods or services do we buy without knowing how much they will cost us?

I don't see what this has to do with anything.

• Enact Medicare reform. We need to face up to the actuarial fact that Medicare is heading towards bankruptcy and enact reforms that create greater patient empowerment, choice and responsibility.

Again, I need more information to make an informed comment. Of one thing I am certain: If government healthcare reimburses providers BELOW-COST, it is a bad system. Reimbursement should be at-cost! This is not okay.

• Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren't covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children's Health Insurance Program.

Sounds great! Who is going to collect and administer these donations? Perhaps the GOVERNMENT through a PUBLIC OPTION.............. perhaps in conjuction with a small tax to be applied only to those who sign up for the program..... except that if there was a tax, I expect that rich people would rather let the poor people pay everything so they can keep more money for themselves (even though they have millions in their bank accounts that is just being hoarded).

Sigh... what a quandary.

Eric Died Because of For-Profit Healthcare

Another example of why we need single-payer healthcare NOW, or at the VERY least, a strong public option. However, a public option would not give us, the people, the same leverage as a single-payer system; with the leverage of a single-payer system, we could negotiate to bring the costs down. Also, eliminating the middle-man (the insurance company) will bring costs down. After all, what is an insurance company doing that a single-payer system would NOT do? --Scraping profit off the top, and denying people the care they need in order to increase said profit. So WHY are we still locked in a system that literally EVERY other industrialized nation has already rejected........???

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Veronica De La Cruz <info@healthcareforamericanow.org>
Date: Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 9:13 AM
Subject: Eric, my brother

Dear Christel:

I want to tell you about my only sibling, my brother Eric De La Cruz.¹

Diagnosed with Severe Dilated Cardiomyopathy five years ago and in need of a heart transplant, my brother Eric passed away far too early this July 4th. All because the health care insurance system in the United States is broken.

Click here to attend an event to support real reform - reform with a public health insurance option that prohibits discrimination or denial based on pre-existing conditions. We need to tell Congress to get it done.

You see, unlike most of us (but like millions of others), Eric couldn't get private insurance. His employer didn't offer it as a benefit. And his heart condition, while treatable, was a pre-existing condition that no private insurers would cover. Sadly, there was no affordable, public option to protect Eric. So he remained excluded from the basic right to life-saving treatment that all people deserve. Although a heart transplant would save him, without coverage, Eric's condition needlessly and slowly deteriorated.

People don't realize how vulnerable they are to the devastating costs - both in dollars and in human life - of an insurance industry concerned with one thing: profit. As a TV journalist and correspondent, I've enjoyed a public platform few have, but when it came to the health and well-being of my family, I'm as susceptible as everyone else. Despite a national online campaign and celebrity fund-raising that amassed nearly $1 million, and emotional and political support from thousands of strangers, Eric couldn't beat this broken system. If it can happen to us, with all of THAT support, it truly can happen to anyone. In fact, sadly, it IS happening to thousands all over the country right now.

Click here to sign up to attend an event to support health insurance reform - reform with a public health insurance option to keep the insurance companies honest.

After Eric's death, I went to Washington this August. I met in the offices of many Senators and Representatives to ask why there is even a debate about passing a strong health care reform bill that would provide all Americans with affordable, guaranteed health care coverage - a bill that would help control the spiraling health care costs that are bankrupting countless families and forcing people to choose between their money and their lives.

Everyone on Capitol Hill was sympathetic to Eric's story, and most were supportive of legislation including a strong public option, but few seem convinced the American people would lean hard enough on Congress to make sure it happened. We must convince them now.

At this critical time, we need you to stand up for reform that would have benefited my brother Eric, and the thousands just like him who are waiting for help now. Click here to attend an event in your area and help win reform now.

In fighting for Eric's life, thousands of people joined forces to get him on Medicare, get him into a transplant facility and raise enough money to pay for his treatment. He just ran out of time. But the clock has not stopped for you.

Though Eric has passed away, he has not been silenced. Your voice can make the difference. By simply clicking on any of the links in this email, you'll help ensure what happened to Eric doesn't happen to your friend, your brother, your neighbor...or you.

Please don't forget your insurance can disappear when you least expect it, because insurance companies CAN rescind policies. If you get sick and don't have insurance now, insurance companies CAN deny you coverage for a pre-existing condition. If you get sick tomorrow, your life can be turned upside down because of your failing health AND runaway medical bills that can force you into bankruptcy. I know you think this could never happen to you. But it can. It happened to us.

We need to get a simple message to Senators: Join with the majority of Americans to support an affordable public option to lower costs, keep insurance companies honest and include everyone, regardless of pre-existing conditions or income.

At this critical time, can you help support reform that the American people want and need? Click here sign up to attend an event in your area.

Help put a stop to these injustices.

Fight to make a difference, not just for you, but for future generations.

Thank you,

Veronica De La Cruz

P.S. You can join me in our fight for health care reform on Twitter as well. I'm at @VeronicaDLCruz.

1. Veronica De La Cruz speaking at a health care rally with Senate Majority leader Harry Reid in Las Vegas, August 31, 2009: http://www.lvrj.com/news/breaking_news/56471332.html

Sen. Russ Feingold Sums Up Why We Need Real Reform

Statement of U.S. Senator Russ Feingold
In Support of a Public Health Insurance Option

“A public option is a fundamental part of ensuring health care reform brings about real change. Opposing the public plan is an endorsement of the status quo in this country that has left tens of millions of Americans uninsured or underinsured and put massive burdens on employers. I have heard too many horror stories from my constituents about how the so-called competitive marketplace has denied them coverage from the outset, offered a benefit plan that covers everything but what they need or failed them some other way. A strong public option would ensure competition in the industry to provide the best, most affordable insurance for Americans and bring down the skyrocketing health care costs that are the biggest contributor to our long-term budget deficits. I am not interested in passing health care reform in name only. Without a public option, I don’t see how we will bring real change to a system that has made good health care a privilege for those who can afford it.”

Wow, I've Got Some Work Cut Out for Me!

I'm thrilled to see that the professor whose views I cited in my entry "For-Profit Healthcare: Nothing Short of Murder" has taken the time to craft a thoughtful rebuttal and posted it here on Tune In. It's quite the essay and will take me some time to research and prepare my own response.

What I know for a fact, and what I posted along with my signature in this petition for a public option, is this:

I am an uninsured, single female who cannot afford to purchase insurance from the greedy for-profit companies. ... I am also keenly aware that even if I paid into an insurance plan for years, if I were ever to get seriously ill or injured, the company would do everything in its power to deny coverage of the appropriate treatment. Please implement a public option so that I can stop worrying!

I refuse to fatten the coffers of health insurance giants with my hard-earned money, when, as Randi Rhodes asserts in her blog, "the way it is now, the only thing that's really insured is insurance company profits."

Response to: For-Profit Health Insurance: Nothing short of Murder

This is a response to: http://tune-in-op-ed.blogspot.com/2009/07/for-profit-health-insurance-nothing.html

I find it useful when debating someone to recognize whether they are an individual who is trying to be right or trying to win the argument. If someone is trying to be right, they will follow arguments, check and recheck their assumptions, and try to identify the inevitable tradeoffs that surround complex issues. When someone is trying to win, they will appeal to emotion, speak in hyperbole, and attempt to “solve” problems rather than improve an imperfect world. So far, this blog post has been almost entirely of the second variety. It’s not hard to see coming when the title of the blog is something akin to, “if you don’t agree with me, you support murder.” Generally it is a waste of time to argue with people that just want to win because they’re not willing to change their mind when shown better answers, and they typically derail serious conversations with both attacks on their opponents’ motives and statements about their own desire to do good. Still, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and try to explain the libertarian position on healthcare and why increasing the involvement of government would do more harm than good.

Start with the basics. Everyone is going to die. People do not like the thought of dying and therefore are willing to work – to some extent – to prolong their life via dieting, exercise, and taking precautions. Some very smart individuals study very hard in order to learn how the human body works so they can help people whose health is failing. The question before us is who gets access to these experts, who has to pay the expert in order to work on those with access, how much money do we give those experts, how many experts are we going to have, how much incentive will they have to work and study, and who qualifies to be an expert? There are two philosophies on the table that answer those questions: free markets and socialism. Theoretically and especially empirically, free markets are better.

Creationists do not understand how life, so beautifully crafted and organized, could have come about by any method other than an intelligent powerful being piecing it together. I often refer to Democrats (and many Republicans for that matter) as “economic Creationists.” They generally believe that if you want something to happen you have to put some powerful agency in charge of it, take people’s money, and mandate that people do what the agency says to bring about that outcome. The idea that millions of tiny actions without any guiding force can create better, more sophisticated, more efficient, and more innovative products than a directed system is laughed at by creationists of both kinds. Nevertheless, it is true. Even in your post you refer to the great American past in which we invented the telephone, automobile, airplane, rocket ship, and atom bomb. Technically a Frenchman made the first automobile, but it was the free American system that mass produced it and made it available. Just for the smirk factor I will point out that the first rocket was made by Robert Goddard who suggested it could be used by the American government in the upcoming war with Nazi Germany. The government ignored him and the New York Times mocked his suggestion that a rocket could get to the moon:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_H._Goddard
The point, however, is that these inventions were mass produced, invented, refined, lowered in cost, made more available and more efficiently in the United States. Why? You say in your last paragraph “Our (once) great nation was founded on a grand ideal.” It was. But you don’t seem to know what that ideal is. It was the antithesis of what is being suggesting for healthcare. Our republic was founded on the notion of a limited government of set and enumerated powers that was met at every turn by checks and balances. The most important rights were retained by the people, and that the government was only allowed to interfere in certain areas, such as approving patents, running a post office, maintaining a military (but only for 2 years at a time), etc. That restriction of government, frequently called “freedom”, is what led to America’s success. It’s not as if Americans are smarter or work harder than the rest of the world. We don’t have many natural resources. What we have is a relatively free market. I don’t have time to explain the free market in detail (it’s about as complicated as natural selection), so I’ll just refer you to Milton Friedman. You can learn a lot by spending an afternoon watching him on youtube. This clip in particular should give you an appreciation for what a market can do and how it can outperform top-down planning:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5Gppi-O3a8

When you say that I ignored the examples of a free market failing, you didn’t mention any. Every time in the course of human history that a market run by free people competed with a centrally-planned system (such as socialism) the market has won. I don’t know of a single exception. Cases in which free markets produced a better standard of living include: West vs. East Germany, North vs. South Korea, Hong Kong vs. the rest of China, Singapore vs. Malasia, Western Europe vs. Eastern Europe, post-WWII Japan vs. pre-WWII Japan, the United States vs. Soviet Union. This last example is of particular interest because the race between the US and SU was always considered close. They went to space, we went to the moon. We made nukes, they made nukes. Our national team won gold metals, they won gold metals. Etc. You’ll notice in all these comparisons it is the Soviet government competing with the US government. That’s why it’s close. If you look at what US markets produced, it was night and day! US cars were far superior to the eastern blog Trabant (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trabant) which required that you fill it with gas and oil every time you filled up and then literally shook your car back and forth. Keep in mind that the East Germans had a socialized car industry “so everyone could get a car.” Of course the average wait time was 15 years. The US entertainment industry dominated the Soviet Union, and American movies and clothes had to be smuggled in past government regulators. American food and drink was better so that when the iron curtain came down McDonalds popped up like Starbucks over there. We invented fast food, soda, and bred far better crops much more efficiently. There was a famous story about Margaret Thatcher and Mikhail Gorbachev during their first meeting. The Soviets were in the middle of a food shortage and millions of people were starving (they had socialized crop production “so everyone could get food”). The story goes that Gorbachev asked Thatcher how she fed her people. She said, “I don’t.” Yet somehow the English, South Koreans, Americans and Western Europeans haven’t starved since they adopted a free market in food production while North Koreans are eating pine tree bark and dying (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwedNY3QzM8); so many people died in the Ukraine that it’s been labeled a genocide. The Chinese in 1958 attempted the “Great Leap Forward” so that “everyone would have plenty to eat!” The result? Twenty to thirty million people starved to death. That’s about twice the number who died in the Holocaust.

Thomas Sowell accuses politicians, mostly Democrats, of engaging in “stage one” reasoning only. If people need healthcare, you take money and give it to them to buy healthcare. What happens? Stage one: people get money and pay for healthcare. And then they stop thinking, collect their votes, praise themselves, and move on. But what happens at stage two? What are the incentives of the people involved? They don’t think that far. Neither did the Communists in China, or North Korea, or the Soviet Union.

If we take a look at the incentives created by socializing health insurance, we can see the following results:
- By allowing more people to see doctors for more and more trivial reasons we will allow doctors to charge more and still see a full day of patients. Insurance ALWAYS increases the price of a good because people will buy more when something is covered. This increased price will require everyone to pay more for insurance. If you bought music insurance that would pay 90% of the cost of concert tickets you (and many others) would go to more concerts. The people who put on the show would then raise their prices. That raise isn’t much though because you only pay 10% of the cost. So the price goes up dramatically until you stop seeing so many concerts. Of course the sky-rocketing price of concerts will lead Democrats to call for more concert insurance because they’re so expensive.
- The government will increase mandates about what must be covered. The government already requires insurance to cover specific treatments that some people don’t want to pay for like chiropractors and psychiatrists. This happens because lobbyists for the group that provides the treatments talk to Congress (often by handing them money) and there is no lobbyist for doing nothing. Increasing mandatory coverage raises prices because more people will use these services when they’re already paying for them.
- Because of regulations, public hospitals will be forced to see patients on the government plan (as they are currently forced to take Medicare and Medicaid patients). The public plan will then mandate prices that are too low (i.e., the hospital will lose money and go out of business if they charged that all the time) which leads them to raise prices for private insurance patients. This again has already happened with Medicaid. The result is private insurance probably going out of business. Once the hospitals can no longer pass on the costs to their private patients they will no longer be able to pay all their doctors and still meet the bottom line insisted on by government. They will cut back expensive care, go out of business, cut pay to their employees or refuse patients with expensive diseases. The result will be fewer doctors giving less care, to fewer people.
- Restrictions and regulations will decrease the number of healthcare providers. Government workers, unlike businessmen, answer to rules and regulations, not customers. So they put up rules about who is qualified to provide different services. This is one of those regulations that hurts people. If Einstein were alive today he wouldn’t be qualified to teach physics at a public school; he hasn’t done the teaching training that the government thinks is necessary. There are people who have invented new medicines that the government doesn’t think are qualified to prescribe them because they don’t have the license. You can’t braid someone’s hair for money in New York because you don’t have a license for haircare work. Once a doctor without some special training accidentally injures a patient some politician will get some votes by increasing “regulation” and insisting all doctors have even more training…reducing time they see patients, incentive to be doctors, number of people who can work as healthcare providers and generally annoying everyone and driving up prices.
- The government already has horrible regulations that waste doctors’ time (resulting in higher prices and presumably deaths). These include the silly notion that only a doctor can prescribe a drug; that you have to see a doctor every time you want to renew a prescription. Nurses aren’t allowed to do simple surgeries that they are perfectly capable of doing. Doctors aren’t allowed to teach patients to treat themselves for minor aliments. The result of all is this is a waste of doctors’ time, increased cost and increased wait times. Socialized insurance will probably increase these costs because the federal government routinely bribes businesses by requiring even more stringent rules before they agree to pay.
- Increased demand will be problems for hospitals. Hospitals can't increase the amount of time in the day, so all they can do is annoy doctors by requiring them to work long hours, which will decrease the number of doctors because some will quit, others retire early, and fewer people will want the job. The way to get more doctors is to pay them more so they can afford the increasing costs of education, the massive amount of financial damage done to them by trial lawyers that Democrats won't reel in, and increase the incentive for smart people to be doctor's rather than lawyers, professors or community organizers. But individuals working in government don't have the right incentive to pay people what they're worth. That individual bureaucrat doesn't gain by incentivizing another generation of doctors, he only gets credit for following a budget. The result will be fewer doctors, a problem Canada is dealing with which leads to massive waiting times:
http://www.waittimealliance.ca/June2009/Report-card-June2009_e.pdf
My favorite part is when you have to wait on average (median) 57 days when you have bright red rectal bleeding.

I admit there are problems that the freemarket cannot solve such as military defense, diffuse environmental pollution, etc. These are public goods meaning that they cannot be owned. I can't own my security from terrorists without also paying for yours. In that situation the free market will fail. Also, the free market produces benefit-benefit transactions (i.e. trade). It cannot be used effectively to produce cost-benefit transactions, such as punishing a criminal who doesn't want to be punished. For that, we need police and the justice system generally. None of these apply to healthcare.

When dealing with goods and services that can be traded, capitalism is better than socialism. If we can't agree on that, we probably can't agree on anything. That's why I find it so strange that people (usually Democrats) say that the free market is good for soda and video games but on important issues like health and schooling we really need to use the worst system! I'd happily socialize video games and lose Warcraft to the pong-like video games the government would create for $200 each before I gave up healthcare to them. If you think my numbers are off I'd remind you of the commonly talked about $18 million website factoid that's been out there. It's actually a little inaccurate...they spent $18 million to RE-DESIGN an old website that worked fine. http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/07/18m-being-spent-to-redesign-recoverygov-web-site.html

The price of capitalism is that rich people will get better healthcare than the poor. The reward is that the poor always get access to the leftovers of rich, which in most cases are better than the richest people one generation earlier. There's not a poor working person in America that doesn't have better entertainment, better healthcare, and better transportation than the rich people did in the 1950s. Take a moment and look around the room your in. You’ll see example after example of wonderfully cheap products that massively improve your life in ways the richest people in the 50s would be amazed by. I’m typing on a computer that the richest man in the world couldn’t get in the 70s. I’m watching TV on a flatscreen that the richest man in the world couldn’t afford in the 70s, connected to a DVD player that even the poor in the US have now, watching movies with better special effects than anyone had in the 80s. My cell phone is sitting here, cheaper than the government-run phones in the 50s, next to my wallet with free credit cards in it. My old Nintendo is sitting next to the TV and costs about $6 these days; better than anything the richest oil tycoon could buy 20 years ago.

Corporations do more to make your life better than any other institutions on earth, and you hate them for it. Almost every luxury you currently enjoy was conceived, invented, tested, refined, advertised and delivered to a number of convenient locations near your home by corporations. And they do it all without taking a single thing from you! The CEOs get money from a board of director, elected by stockholders. If you think they’re cheating, don’t buy their stock. They don’t take your money, I can’t say it enough, and I can’t say it about the regulators. (By the way, if you think health care insurance makes 30% profits, by all means buy their stock and spend the extra income on charity if you like. I wouldn’t recommend it though, the actual number is 2-4%: http://the-american-catholic.com/2009/08/03/excessive-health-care-profits/). You are welcome to
“refuse to believe that the world is so starved for intelligent businessmen that $1 to 5 million a year would not attract a perfectly brilliant, innovative and COMPASSIONATE leader.” That’s what Ben and Jerry said. They decided to practice “caring capitalism” and limited their CEO pay to no more than 5-7 times what the lowest paid workers got. Unfortunately the applicants sucked, so they had to bid up to 14 times what the other workers got. Of course that didn’t work either, so they had to hire another and finally sold the company. (You can see the story in John Stossel’s book, page 247). Being a CEO is extremely difficult. Do you refuse to believe that you can’t get the best basketball player in the free world for less than $14 million a year? What about the best musician, or the best actor?

Ultimately the free market solves this problem because you don’t get to decide CEO pay any more than I get to decide how much to play football players. Those decisions will be made by people spending their own money, and they know better than you or I, and they’re the ones who pay the price if they get it wrong. The people spending their own money believe that getting a better CEO is worth that much money. Remind me why either of those decisions should be, in any way, up to us? We aren’t running a company, we don’t know what it takes, and we’re not spending our own money. Thomas Sowell summed up government regulations nicely when he said, “It’s hard to imagine a worse way of making decisions than putting people in charge who pay no price for being wrong.” That’s what regulations of pay do.

Finally, a few quick corrections. I didn’t say the government required insurance companies to cover cancer, insurance companies did that on their own to attract customers. They were mandated to cover stuff that most customers weren’t willing to pay for such as psychiatrists, but they have no choice once the government makes a mandate (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105912)

Eliminating the profit motive would NOT eliminate the motive to give CEOs 6-figure bonuses. The profit motive constrains what you are willing to pay someone because you need to meet a bottom line. Having no bottom line means you can pay people anything you want. For a list of salaries from non-profit organizations go here:
http://swz.salary.com/salarywizard/layouthtmls/swzl_narrowbrief_CS02.html
The most relevant comparison would probably be Chief Managed Care Executive which I think is proportional to the CEOs of health care companies you’re talking about. They make an average of $200,000 and get bonuses of… that’s right, six –figures: $200,000. Of course they still have to answer to their donors even if they don’t have to answer to their stockholders. Income is always constrained by those who give you the money. There is one exception, which is the only organization in the US that gets to determine their own pay by taking from others: it’s Congress. And yes, they have a six figure salary, benefits like you wouldn’t believe, and access to brand new jet planes.
http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/97-1011.pdf

I agree that socializing health insurance wouldn’t kill medical innovation (though I think it would harm it). That was an argument about socialized medicine more generally, which I agree isn’t what’s being proposed in Congress at this point. If it does become a problem, government grants will not solve it. Governments are terrible at allocating grant money because they don’t have the incentives that businesses do. If a government grant is wasted no one cares; it wasn’t their money. If a private grant gets no return the people who spent the money see their profits diminish. They don’t like that, so they take more time and energy directing money at the most profitable research (i.e. the research that produces cures and treatments that people are willing to pay for). And once again, if the private grants don’t work they’ve only wasted their own money. If government grants are wasted (and they are) then they waste your money…and mine.

“History has proven over and over again that when left to their own devices, for-profit companies rarely choose a path of innovation, honesty and consideration for the value of life.” There are two problems with this. One, it’s not true (see any store near your home for examples of free market innovation). Two, it’s only relevant if the history of government power has been one of choosing innovation, honesty and the value of life. I don’t imagine you’d be willing to make that argument so I’ll leave it be.

Finally, “This is OUR WORLD – let’s make it a world that supports EVERYONE.” This isn’t your world, and you don’t know how to make it support everyone even if it were. Your post acknowledged that there were problems with socialized medicine and insurance in other countries and said that we should just fix those. Problems are problems because it’s not obvious how to fix them. Wanting people to have more is noble. Actually getting them more is hard, especially when you’re the government. When I think of the government trying to help a complicated and well balanced economy it reminds me of a joke about Edward Scissorhands being a proctologist. Sure, you want someone to do something...but you’re not sure he’s the right man for the job. All the government can do is take money from people who earn it doing work people are willing to pay for, give it to people they like (usually who have paid them money) and then not monitor what they do with it very carefully. If you think that will result in a better healthcare system you’re welcome to argue it. But all I see is the American people bent over in front of a sharp pair of scissors.

EDIT: fixed some links that weren't working

Senator Feinstein Pussies Out on Food Safety

I have a longstanding problem with Senator Feinstein. She consistently makes the wrong choices on what's best for her constituents, or simply refuses to take a stance. I just wanted to share her email to me in response to my questioning her position on the recent food safety legislation. The proposed legislation gives extra police power to the head of the FDA regulation task force, who just happens to be a former executive at Monsanto (the corporate giant responsible for the sketchy and possibly dangerous genetically modified food that has been creeping into our food supplies while those in charge keep the public blissfully unaware).

The proposed legislation also requires farmers who raise livestock for meat to implant expensive ID chips in each animal. This rule is supposed to aid in the tracking of contaminated meat, however the law contains a convenient loophole for giant factory farms, which are the true origin of the increasing problems with contamination. The loophole allows industrial farming operations to use a single id chip for an entire herd, which CLEARLY defeats the entire purpose of the id chipping rule ... until you consider that the small, clean, family farms that provide locals with quality meats will likely be put out of business by the new regulations. With the small farms out of the picture, factory farms will have a monopoly on food production in the U.S.

Clearly a minion of big business, SenateWHORE Feinstein declined to take a clear stance on the issue when confronted with all of these details. I think she just doesn't want me to know that she plans to vote in favor of the giant corporations at the expense of her constituents.
--------------------------------------------------------



Dear Ms. South:

Thank you for writing to share your concerns about legislation intended to improve food safety. Your correspondence is important to me and I welcome the opportunity to respond.

As you know, recent outbreaks of food borne illnesses and concerns about the safety of imported food have prompted numerous legislative proposals to increase the safety of the U.S. food supply. While I am concerned about deficiencies in the U.S. food safety system, I believe that reforms must be well thought out to avoid unintended consequences.

On June 17, 2009, Representative John D. Dingell (D-MI) introduced the "Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009" (H.R. 2749) and on March 3, 2009, Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) introduced the "FDA Food Safety Modernization Act" (S. 510). Each of these bills would increase the Food and Drug Administration's regulatory powers over the national food supply and food providers. I am currently reviewing both pieces of legislation and will keep your thoughts and priorities in mind as the Senate considers the bills.

Again, thank you for writing. I hope that you will continue to share your thoughts and ideas with me. If you have any further questions or comments, please feel free to call my Washington, D.C. staff at (202) 224-3841.

Sincerely yours, Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

Further information about my position on issues of concern to California and the Nation are available at my website http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/. You can also receive electronic e-mail updates by subscribing to my e-mail list at http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ENewsletterSignup.Signup.

Sen. Ben Nelson Scrambles to Defend His Anti-American Policies

From an email alert I received:
------------------------------------------------

Today, we begin another week of our TV ad holding Sen. Ben Nelson accountable in Nebraska for undermining the public option.

And Ben Nelson is really scrambling.

Immediately after our ads were announced, Nelson called the small-business owner featured in our ad and defensively tried to get him to stop speaking out. Then he called Howard Dean, founder of Democracy for America -- our partner on this ad!

And today Nelson began airing his own ads in Nebraska, playing defense -- a highly unusual move for someone not up for re-election until 2012.

Ben Nelson is feeling the heat -- and this is all possible because people like you chipped in to fund our ad.

We'll keep holding Ben Nelson accountable as long as folks keep chipping in. Click here to see our ad and Nelson's -- and help us match Nelson ad-for-ad on the air.

Mike Snider, who appears in our ad, tells us that people are consistently coming into his restaurant to shake his hand and say thanks for holding Nelson accountable.

And the pressure on Nelson is not just local. Our ad was featured 5 times by national TV shows: ABC's This Week, MSNBC's Chris Matthews, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, MSNBC's Ed Schultz, and even FOX (OK, that only counts as half a show, but you get the point). Together, we're making waves.

With Ben Nelson kicking off his August recess back in Nebraska, now is the time to keep the pressure on.

Nelson needs to know that if he wants the public pressure to stop, the solution isn't a bunch of defensive phone calls to his critics or a PR ad blitz -- it's to support giving his constituents the choice of a public option.

Click here to help us keep our ads on the air -- and keep the pressure on.

Thank you, as always, for being a bold progressive.

-- Michael Snook & the PCCC team

P.S. We're still collecting more real health care stories from around the nation to highlight in the media and on TV. If you have one, please let us know. Or pass along to others who have stories.

Pimp a Senate-Whore

Senator	Lifetime contributions from Insurance/Pharma
Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT)	$1,203,205
Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)	$206,297
Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND)	$442,165
Sen. Mike Enzi (R-NV)	$342,228
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA)	$702,595
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME)	$161,706
TOTAL:	$3,058,256

Stop the Governator's Horrifying Budget Cuts

EMAIL FROM CREDO ACTION:

When Arnold Schwarzenegger signed the budget on Tuesday, he used his line-item veto power to slash millions of dollars of funding for children's health care services, HIV/AIDS testing and prevention, domestic violence shelters, and many other core programs.

If these cuts are allowed to take effect, the consequences will be brutal and long-lasting.

The only sure-fire way to stop these cuts is for the Legislature to override the governor's vetoes.

But rather than deal with this issue, the Legislature went on vacation.

It's no time for our legislators to take a vacation. Tell Assembly Speaker Karen Bass and Senate President pro tempore Darrell Steinberg to call a veto override vote immediately.

http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/ca_override/?r_by=5248-1606812-YTOgMrx&rc=paste

Thanks!

For-Profit Health Insurance: Nothing Short of Murder

When I turned 25 this year, I was kicked off my father’s health insurance policy (they are still charging him the monthly premium even though I am not covered). I live paycheck to paycheck and can no more afford a monthly insurance premium of several hundred dollars than I can a one-time payment of the same amount for medical care.

http://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/

With all of Obama’s pretty promises, I had high hopes that we would finally establish a Universal healthcare system in the United States – the last industrialized nation in the world to remain in the clutches of a for-profit system.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/06/29-6

What happened to the America that always strove to be at the forefront of innovation? Sure, the examples we have of so-called “socialized medicine” have their shortcomings, but are we as Americans so frightened of confronting those issues that we would prefer to keep dealing with the same problems over and over?

We should be excited! Here we have an opportunity to turn ourselves around and become the Greatest Nation on Earth once more! Instead of pointing to the problems that other countries experience as reasons not to even try a new direction, we can figure out the solutions to those problems so that America’s new healthcare system will be the best in the world! Then, people from other countries will come to America for treatment – unlike today, where we see hundreds of thousands of people going abroad for surgery and other treatments annually.

http://www.miamiherald.com/539/story/256204.html

***

Recently, I was discussing the healthcare issue with a staunch Libertarian – Libertarians being, in essence, Republicans who want to legalize drugs. Key to Libertarianism is the unwavering worship of the free market. Citing isolated examples of free market successes and blithely ignoring all evidence to the contrary, Libertarians maintain that less regulation (preferably NO regulation) unfailingly leads to better service and more innovation.

http://www.lp.org/

http://world.std.com/~mhuben/libindex.html

This particular individual is a highly educated professor at UC Santa Barbara, a man who does ample research and gives much thought to his opinions. He actually had me going for a while, arguing that the reason healthcare is so expensive is because Congress passed legislation requiring insurance companies to cover cancer treatment. Somehow, in his mind, this does not count as evidence that we should implement Universal healthcare. Yet the cost of cancer treatment would not be so much of an issue were it not for the 30% profit margin that allows insurance giants to pay their CEO’s insanely high numbers in annual salary and bonuses. Consider Ron Williams of Aetna, who took home a total compensation package of over $24 million in 2008.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/5/26/735411/-Health-insurance-industry-CEO-salary-survey,-stay-calm-for-this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5690433

http://blogs.webmd.com/mad-about-medicine/2007/08/ceo-compensation-who-said-healthcare-is.html

Eliminating the profit motive would also eliminate the motivation to pay six-figure bonuses to employees who search the health records of people requesting treatments for any reason to deny care. As heart-wrenchingly illustrated in Michael Moore’s documentary, “Sicko”, people have died because of these practices. That alone should be reason enough to put an end to it.

http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/index.html

http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/6145

http://www.theledger.com/article/20090714/NEWS/907145003/1037/EDIT02?Title=Too-Many-Patients-Die-Because-Health-Care-Coverage-Is-Denied

The professor’s next argument was that without a profit motive, there would be an end to innovation. At first, the argument makes sense. Why invest in research and development when there is not even a chance of recouping the money through profitable operations?
What the professor, and others who share this view, fail to consider is that INSURANCE COMPANIES DO NOT MANUFACTURE MEDICINE NOR EQUIPMENT. Furthermore, the issue of financial compensation is easily addressed by offering government grants for research expenses. Besides that, there is absolutely no reason that a private company would not be competitive in offering for sale advanced medical technology from a for-profit position. A single-payer system merely protects the recipients of care from being grossly overcharged for the sake of profit, while ensuring that every person has access to care when needed. Private companies can still remain profitable, they just won’t be able to compensate their CEO’s such egregiously large amounts. As for the argument that those sums are necessary to retain the skills of those CEO’s – and this goes for ALL grossly overpaid CEO’s – I refuse to believe that the world is so starved for intelligent businessmen that $1 to 5 million a year would not attract a perfectly brilliant, innovative and COMPASSIONATE leader.

http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/2009/02/24/health-buzz-obamas-push-for-healthcare-reform-and-other-health-news/comments/#3708665

Legislation forcing people to purchase overpriced healthcare from for-profit companies is not a solution, and I find it insulting that the concept is even on the table. Eliminating regulations is not a solution. History has proven over and over again that when left to their own devices, for-profit companies rarely choose a path of innovation, honesty and consideration for the value of life. In the sad majority of cases, we see profit-motivated corruption overtake even the best of intentions, replacing innovation with cheap shortcuts, honesty with secrecy, and consideration for life with exploitation.

The healthcare industry is no exception. PROFIT demands the denial of expensive treatments to those who require the treatment to live. GREED motivates CEO’s to create a structure that funnels money out of the pockets of the populous and into the wallets of the wealthy – namely, themselves.

COMPASSION asks that we recognize the worth of each individual life as a piece of God, and treat each other accordingly. Jesus said that as we treat the lowliest among us, we treat Him. I am not a Christian but I do recognize the value of Jesus’ teachings. And what Jesus is saying is that the spark of life IS God, therefore every living person should have our respect as if they WERE God.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_did_Jesus_teach_people_about_how_you_should_treat_your_fellow_humans

Living from that perspective can free us from ALL of our suffering. We don’t HAVE to wait until we die to experience peace and bliss; we just have to accept the responsibility each of us has to truly live a life of love. That’s what Jesus recommended for us. These are my ideals. It’s nuanced, and I certainly don’t live up to it all the time. But I hold in my mind a picture of how it should be, and figure out how to create it as I go.

All great change starts with a mere idea. Our (once) great nation was founded on a grand ideal. Who invented the telephone? An American. Who invented the automobile? An American. Who invented the airplane? The rocket ship? The atom bomb? AMERICANS. Americans can reinvent the world. Young Americans, this is OUR time to shine. This is our time to stand up and create a new reality – create a future where we can ALL THRIVE.

This is OUR WORLD – let’s make it a world that supports EVERYONE.

Who Needs Food Safety When We Have Cloned Corn?

In response to the email alert I posted a little while ago, I've called Representative Henry Waxman, Senator Dianne Feinstein, and Senator Barbara Boxer to share my thoughts about HR 2749. If this is the same bill I heard about a few months ago, and I believe it is, the law would require farms to purchase expensive microchip tracking systems for its animals. The theory behind it is that tracking the animals will reveal sources of contamination and help prevent food poisoning. The problem? Giant factory farms, already the proven sources of most if not all of our food safety issues, are EXEMPT. They can use one chip for an entire herd -- which OBVIOUSLY defeats the entire purpose of the plan. Besides that, what good is microchipping animals if we don't require the farms to operate under strict safety standards?

History has proven that when former executives of corporations are responsible for enforcing regulations in their industry, the laws are NOT enforced and the problems stay the same or get worse. The latest so-called food safety bill, HR 2749, is no different. With a former Vice President of Monsanto (the corporation responsible for the genetically modified foods that most of us are eating unknowingly and therefore unwillingly) heading up the FDA Food Safety task force, we can be certain that factory farms will be allowed to continue producing unsafe food in filthy conditions, while small farms that supply wholesome food will be driven out of business by unrealistic regulations that do nothing to actually improve food safety.

HR 2749 is a boon to giant corporations and leaves concern for the lives of consumers in the hands of a person who is obviously committed to the interests of corporations like Monsanto. We cannot allow this corruption to continue any longer. Politicians pay lip service to the issues and take no action to make any real changes; meanwhile, people are dying from completely preventable causes.

Under Obama, Corruption Still Flourishes

An email alert I received today:

Announcing The Most Powerful People's Advocacy Tool EVER!!

The word we are getting is that our "good for nothing but photo-ops
and grandstanding" Congress may try to sneak through HR 2749 real
fast, the latest phony food safety bill on a suspension of rules any
day. Yes, we do need to take action to protect our food safety. But,
no, this bill does absolutely nothing to identify or address the real
problems. And by NOT addressing the real problems it can only do more
harm than good.

But we now launching an incredibly powerful new advocacy tool,
especially for the fight against HR 2749, and to stop all such future
lunacy in its tracks, the People's Phone Lobby interface. It's so
simple to use, just go to the page below and call your members of
Congress and there is even a link to give you all their direct
congressional and local district office phone numbers.

HR 2749 People's Phone Lobby:
http://www.peaceteam.net/lobby.php?bill=HR2749

Then when you speak to the staffers in your congressional offices,
you don't JUST tell them your position, first you ASK them for their
position. Are they supporting HR 2749 or not? And THEN you give them
your position and MAKE them defend theirs if they do not agree with
us, that HR 2749 is just more very bad news, another deceptively
titled bill that in fact does the opposite of what it purports to be
about, assuming it is anything besides totally worthless.

Why is this such a powerful new approach?? Because when you go to the
link above and record your notes of your phone calls with your
members of Congress, it becomes a permanent public record of just how
many of us are calling, and just how many of them are trying to
completely ignore the voice of the people, that any of their
constituents can go out and read for themselves.

To protect your privacy, the record you make of your conversations
with them will only display your initials and your city and state on
this new blogging site. But then ANYONE can see for themselves the
real numbers as to how many of us are demanding real change, and
which members of Congress think our calls can just go in one ear and
out the other. Go to the page below and put it to work for you and
your family now.

HR 2749 People's Phone Lobby:
http://www.peaceteam.net/lobby.php?bill=HR2749

In fact, this is basically just what the corporate lobbyists do
behind our backs day in and day out and all night too. They jam
members of Congress about their positions on bills. And if they
aren't falling in line they apply pressure. But now with this
revolutionary logging tool, we can jam them right back. Why, we can
see them huddled in small groups in their cloakrooms even now,
talking about, "OMG, the people are on to us!!"

The fact is that a REAL food safety bill would be easy to write.
Provision one, force the filthy factory farms, which are breeding all
the antibiotic resistant bacteria and mutating viruses now, to clean
up their act. And JUST the big factory farms, not the small, healthy
organic farms that are the backbone of our real food safety.

Provision two, ban all ban GMOs until AFFIRMATIVELY proven safe and
require full disclosure labeling of all such products, cows shot up
with bovine growth hormone, etc. Of course, GMOs can never be proven
safe because they AREN'T. Rats fed GMO soybeans get sick and die!
That's right, they wouldn't feed this stuff to rats, but they want to
give it to our children.

So Congress having gotten the directive from the corporate special
interests that put profit ahead of our real food safety, a directive
to IGNORE the real problems and look somewhere else, along comes HR
2749, which lacks even a preamble to identify why the bill even
needed to be written in the first place, or what exactly it is
intended to correct.

Instead, ALL HR 2749 does is grant the FDA expansive and
unprecedented new POLICE powers to the FDA with no guidance of
congresional intent as to how that power should be exercised. And who
will be the administrators wielding this awesome new and truly
frightening power, you ask? Why, President Obama just appointed a
former Monsanto VP to oversee the FDA food safety group. There's a
example for you. What a coinky-dink!!

Remember when Obama told us not to worry (because HE was the
"decider") about all the drop dead creeps he was appointing to
government administrative positions, the worst of the worst, the SAME
people who were under all the rocks in the Bush administration? So
what happens when THOSE same people are making all the real policy
decisions because Congress has totally abdicated it's policy making
function? Well ... we get wolves in sheep's clothing legislation put
forward like HR 2749. It MUST be stopped.

And by getting on the phones now and making a public record of all
our calls at the page below, we can generate so much bad PR for
members of Congress who won't listen to the people, that even the
most tone deaf of them will have to start dancing eventually. So
let's get it started, and show the whole country how many tens and
hundreds of thousands of us are on to them.

HR 2749 People's Phone Lobby:
http://www.peaceteam.net/lobby.php?bill=HR2749

The problem with food safety is NOT that the FDA doesn't have enough
Gestapo like police power to harass small farming operations. The
problem is that the FDA is perversely determined not to look at the
real source of all the filth in our food supply, and Congress is
doing nothing by way oversight to make them do it. And HR 2749 just
gives more powerful weapons to people who can't be trusted to use
responsibly the ones they already have.

And yes, you can also respond to this action through the new Twitter
gateway. Just send the following Twitter reply, and add any personal
comment you like.

@cxs #p996

And if you want a step by step explanation of how to set up the
Twitter thing here is the link for that.

Twitter Activism Step-By-Step: http://tcxs.net/step_by_step.php

Please take action NOW, so we can win all victories that are supposed
to be ours, and forward this alert as widely as possible.

If you would like to get alerts like these, you can do so at
http://www.peaceteam.net/in.htm

Military Lets Down Its Members, Again

Obviously, it's a much bigger deal that we don't provide the members of our military with proper protection in combat zones; soldiers whose tours of duty are cut short after injury in the field are asked to return their signing bonuses; and the way we treat veterans is deplorable. However, I wanted to share a little story which is indicative of the utter disregard afforded the brave men and women of our armed forces on all levels.

I work for a moving company, and today I spoke with a very nice lady living in Northern California who needed to move to San Diego. She and her husband are both in the military and have been separated for the last 4 years due to orders which kept her in NorCali and her husband in San Diego. Now her orders are to move down to San Diego with her husband; however, the army or whichever branch she belongs to only budgeted for a local move.

Their logic apparently is that since her husband already lives in San Diego, and she is moving into San Diego, that it is a local move. Nevermind that it's like 700 miles away.

So, even though the military has ordered her to move, she will probably have to take out a loan to make up the difference between what the army will pay and the actual cost of the move. I asked her if she could contact someone to explain the situation and get them to modify the allotted amount, but she said "orders are orders." WTF. Good thing I never joined the Air Force -- I would have gotten kicked out for sure! Anyway, the point is that the military establishment routinely gives individual soldiers the short end of the stick, whether it is a mundane issue like moving costs or a life-or-death issue like proper body armor. This is NOT okay.

Fox News Correspondents Provide Aid and Comfort to the Enemy

We all know Fox News is just a thinly veiled avenue for corporate propoganda and warmongering. Okay, some of us think Fox News is actual news (I believe this segment of society is normally referred to as ignorami, not to be confused with the Illuminati). But recently, high-profile representatives at Fox News took it to another level.

Pfc. Bowe R. Bergdahl went missing from his post on July 2nd. Later, the Taliban released a video of captive Bergdahl in which the obviously shaken soldier made scripted comments encouraging the U.S. to vacate the region.

Fox News military correspondent Lt. Colonel Ralph Peters responded to the situation by calling Bergdahl a deserter and suggesting that the Taliban should go ahead and murder their hostage. The Pentagon has publicly condemned the Lt. Colonel's comments as "providing aid and comfort to the enemy". Peters then went on The O'Reilly Factor and restated his wildly offensive opinion. Peters actually asserted that Private Bergdahl is a liar and that he was drunk and abandoned his post and suggested that perhaps Bergdahl had willingly joined the ranks of the Taliban.

Another despicable right-wing lunatic to add to the Treason pile.


Links:

http://chattahbox.com/us/2009/07/24/will-fox-news-fire-bill-o%E2%80%99reilly-and-peters-for-giving-%E2%80%9Caid-and-comfort%E2%80%9D-to-the-enemy/

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/20/ralph-peters-kill-soldier/

Key Vote on Healthcare Reform Friday -- Call Your Representatives!

At last night's press conference on healthcare, President Obama shocked the media with a very inconvenient truth:

"I want to cover everybody. Now, the truth is that, unless you have a single-payer system, in which everybody is automatically covered, then you're probably not going to reach every single individual."

So why won't our elected Democrats in Washington fight for a single-payer system that will cover everyone? Especially when it's the only system that will actually save money by eliminating 30% in utterly wasted overhead from greedy insurance giants?

A dedicated group of 86 Democrats are fighting for single-payer ( H.R. 676 ), and they need our help today.

The battle over single-payer is in the House Energy & Commerce Committee (E&C). The committee was supposed to vote on Rep. Anthony Weiner's single-payer amendment on Monday, but chairman Henry Waxman keeps postponing the vote because it might pass - just like the Kucinich Amendment for a single-payer state option passed on July 17 by a shocking 25-19 bi-partisan majority.

Lean Yes Diana DeGette CO01 202-225-4431 Jane Harman CA36 202-225-8220 Christopher Murphy CT05 202-225-4476 Frank Pallone NJ06 202-225-4671 @FrankPallone Bobby Rush IL01 202-225-4372 Peter Welch VT00 202-225-4115

Today we're told the vote could be tomorrow ( Friday ). This week we asked our 600,000 supporters to call all 35 Democrats. Based on your calls, we identified 7 solid yes and 6 more lean yes:
http://www.democrats.com/single-payer-committee-whip

Can you call the 6 lean yes and convince them to become solid yes on Rep. Anthony Weiner's single-payer amendment in the Energy & Commerce Committee?

Won't Say / "Not Enought Votes" Rick Boucher VA09 202-225-3861 Bruce Braley IA01 202-225-2911 G.K. Butterfield NC01 202-225-3101 Lois Capps CA23 202-225-3601 Kathy Castor FL11 202-225-3376 John Dingell MI15 202-225-4071 Charles Gonzalez TX20 202-225-3236 Gene Green TX29 202-225-1688 Jay Inslee WA01 202-225-6311 @RepInsleeNews Doris Matsui CA05 202-225-7163 Jerry McNerney CA11 202-225-1947 John Sarbanes MD03 202-225-4016 Bart Stupak MI01 202-225-4735 Betty Sutton OH13 202-225-3401 Henry Waxman (Chair) CA30 202-225-3976

Hill staffers privately tell us your calls are "very helpful." Please post a comment about your calls so we can update our whip list here:
http://www.democrats.com/single-payer-committee-whip

In addition, these 15 Democrats won't say whether they support single-payer, or claim there aren't enough votes for it to pass. But if they all vote for it, it will pass! See if you can convince them.

Also, be sure to send our Single Payer petition to your Representatives, and forward it to everyone you know who needs and deserves better healthcare:
http://www.democrats.com/single-payer-petition?cid=ZGVtczMzNzY1N2RlbXM=

And finally if you can be in DC on Thursday July 30, join us to celebrate the 44th birthday of Medicare and rally/lobby for single-payer:
http://www.democrats.com/node/19877

Thanks for all you do!

Bob Fertik

#####

Let's bring the Twitter Revolution to the USA!

Follow Bob Fertik:
http://twitter.com/bobfertik

Follow David Swanson
http://twitter.com/davidcnswanson

Follow our Activist Alerts:
http://twitter.com/democratscom

Follow AfterDowningStreet
http://twitter.com/afterdowningst

#####

Forward this message to everyone you know!

Subscribe to our email Activist Alerts by creating a free Democrats.com account:
http://www.democrats.com/user/register

Thank Supporters of True Healthcare Reform

Email from Russ Feingold:

Christel -

I've got great news. Recently, the Senate HELP Committee passed the Affordable Health Choice Act which includes giving everyone in America the choice of a strong public option.

The pressure is working! We would be nowhere on this important legislation without your continued hard work and dedication putting the pressure on your elected officials through phone calls, petition deliveries, and local actions.

Now, I've teamed up with Democracy for America to thank Senator Kennedy and his colleagues on the HELP Committee for their commitment to real reform. Help me send a clear message to my colleagues that when Senate Democrats stand up and lead, Americans won't forget. Will you join me today?

THANK SENATE DEMOCRATS ON THE H.E.L.P. COMMITTEE
FOR THEIR HEALTHCARE LEADERSHIP

Twelve colleagues put this bill together under the leadership of Senator Kennedy with help from Senator Dodd. Here's the whole list so we all know who they are:

Edward Kennedy (MA) - Christopher Dodd (CT)
Tom Harkin (IA) - Barbara A. Mikulski (MD)
Jeff Bingaman (NM) - Patty Murray (WA)
Jack Reed (RI) - Bernard Sanders (VT)
Sherrod Brown (OH) - Robert P. Casey, Jr. (PA)
Kay Hagan (NC) - Jeff Merkley (OR)

I'm not interested in passing a bill in name only, and neither are my Democratic colleagues on the HELP Committee. Every American deserves the right to quality healthcare and allowing Americans to choose a strong public healthcare option will help ensure that for all of us.

This fight for real reform is far from over. Please add your name to our thank you and remind Senate Democrats that when we stand with the American people, the American people will stand up for us.

JOIN ME -- ADD YOUR NAME NOW

Insurance industry executives and special interests shouldn't rule the debate, and they shouldn't rule decisions about the kind of health care your family needs. The Affordable Health Choice Act is the first step towards giving families a choice, and making sure that all Americans are covered.

So keep the pressure up. We need to hear from you. All of us in Congress need to hear from all of you. There is too much at stake to sit at home hoping for change. It's up to each of us to work together to make change happen.

Thank you, Christel, for all of your hard work.

Sincerely,

-Russ

Russ Feingold
United States Senator

Racial Discrimination or Rowdy Kids?

Last week, I got an email alert from one of the progressive news subscriptions that clog my inbox daily, claiming a group of African American kids were turned away from a community pool in a predominantly white area, because they were black. At first I thought, this must be a misunderstanding. Surely the kids were kicked out for being too rowdy or something.

Here is what I found:

An article by Karen Araiza at nbcphiladelphia.com seemed to confirm the claims of racial discrimination. The kids at Creative Steps Day Camp had (collectively) paid $1,900 for a membership at Valley Swim Club in Philadelphia. When the African American kids from the camp got in the water on their very first day, all of the white kids immediately left the pool. Caucasian club members were overheard making racial comments. According to one of the parents, pool attendants then told the kids that minorities were not allowed at the club and they had to leave. The next day, their membership was suspended.

A later article carried and official statement and rebuttals from members of the swim club. Members insisted that their issue was with overcrowding of the pool; one said she paid for a private swim club and she basically felt that giving memberships to summer camps made it not such a private experience. Maybe it has "nothing to do with race," or maybe she is justifying; maybe she doesn't even realize that she is subtly racist. Whatever the case, it is difficult to justify a statement like the one given by Valley Swim Club President John Duesler: "There was concern that a lot of kids would change the complexion … and the atmosphere of the club." Sounds like racism to me.

Sign the petition: http://www.colorofchange.org/swim/

Links:

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Pool-Boots-Kids-Who-Might-Change-the-Complexion.html

http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Swim-Club-Members-Nothing-to-Do-With-Race.html

http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/2009/07/60-black-kids-booted-from-philly-pool-for-being-black-speak-out/

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/9/751578/-Valley-Swim-Club:-Day-Two-%5BACTION-Alert%5D

"Section 1981 Summary," Employment Law Information Network
http://www.elinfonet.com/1981sum.php

Tool of the Day: Senator Max Baucus

No time to comment at the moment (but just wait until I can afford to have internet access at home so I don't have to blog surreptitiously at work!)....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/20/AR2009072003363.html

Break Obama, Break the Nation

Today I received an email alert from one of the many progressive groups to which I subscribe:

Christel -- Last week, Republican Senator Jim DeMint made it pretty clear why the opponents of health care reform are fighting so hard. As he told a special interest attack group, "If we're able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo. It will break him." Here's how the President responded: Think about that. This isn't about me. This isn't about politics. This is about a health care system that is breaking America's families, breaking America's businesses and breaking America's economy. And we can't afford the politics of delay and defeat when it comes to health care. Not this time, not now. There are too many lives and livelihoods at stake. With Congress only days away from finalizing their plans for reform, it's time to stand up with the President and fight back against this disastrous brand of old-style politics. So we need as many people as possible to publicly support the President's principles for health care reform and call on Congress to act. Before the first full votes in Congress, we'll publish the signatures in newspaper ads across the nation, to make sure your voice is heard. Watch President Obama's full response, then add your name in support of reform. Or if you've already signed, please forward this message to every one of your friends and neighbors so they can join you. The President is more dedicated than ever to passing health care reform that satisfies the three requirements he's been talking about for months: Health care reform must reduce costs, guarantee choice -- including the choice of a strong public insurance option -- and ensure all Americans have quality, affordable health care. If we do not reform our broken health care system this year, we will only shackle future generations with spiraling costs and deteriorating care. The cost of inaction is simply more than this country can afford. But the special interests who profit from the status quo won't go down without a fight. The ads, the smears, and the attacks -- targeting both President Obama and members of Congress who support reform -- will only get worse. So it's crucial that we show huge backing before Congress finalizes their plans this month. Stand with President Obama on health care reform: http://my.barackobama.com/hcdeclare Thanks for standing up for change. Thanks, Mitch Mitch Stewart Director Organizing for America

Paid for by Organizing for America, a project of the Democratic National Committee -- 430 South Capitol Street SE, Washington, D.C. 20003. This communication is not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.