Just called both their offices, the first words out of the guy’s mouth in Farr’s office were “how did you find this out?”

Michael E. Capuano phone number in DC is: (202) 225-5111

I see from Slink’s thread that Capuano is scheduled to “pull papers” to run for Teddy’s seat . . . gee, I wonder what Rahm could have promised this weasel

Capuano’s office is refuting the fact he’s backed off of his pledge.

From what I am hearing from folks around Glouster, Trimble, Chauncey, Nelsonville Ohio (Zack Space’s) district in southeastern Ohio. Space is going to have a tough tough time winning again if he does not vote for the public option. We are working the streets

Robert Cruickshank for CA-17

Jane, your ‘pledge’ was bullshit from the start and a huge waste of effort. Why are you surprised at this? Liberals fold faster than Superman on laundry day; it’s in our DNA.

I’m farther north but still in his district. I just called to tell him that it’s time for him to come home and pay through the nose for health insurance, see how he likes it. I’ll work to see him lose, I don’t even care who wins.

Let’s begin to fundraise against them and unseat them at ALL costs.

Sam, Mike, listen up: your worst nightmare is Jane Hamsher making your districts her hobby in 2010. Get back on the pledge bus, right now, dudes.

I worked my ass off for him along with many others. He stands a good chance of losing in his district if he votes no on the public option. Lots of folks without health care in his district. People I am talking with are pissed

If I were him I would challenge the other folks in his district with their so called religious beliefs. You know where is the walk not the talk about sharing, access, compassion and empathy.

Hit the WWJD (what would Jesus do) hypocritical crowd with their own serious contradictions….softly. Space has the skills to do this tactfully
———————–

Thanks for calling him hope you are encouraging others to do the same.

TIME FOR A FULL COURT PRESS FOR THE PUBLIC OPTION

You’re not only a bit over the top but you also seem to be misunderstanding the full point of the pledge — even though it has been reiterated and announced in this very post of Jane’s.

Capuano’s office: (202) 225-5111

Flood him with calls today and tell him that if he votes against PO, we will vote against him and unseat him.

It’s the “blood money talking” – some $245K from the healthcare industry to date.

Remind this fraud that we know how he’s greased his palms with blood money in exchange for obstructing the public option.

We WILL out these charlatans and corrupt frauds one by one and drive them out of office.

Markey will more than likely get that seat

Jane you and your team are a dream team. Thanks for all you are doing for the people.

People over profits….. what a concept

Here’s the list of dems AGAINST a public option. Perriello is toast here in VA. So I hope he enjoys his one term.

John Adler (N.J.), Jason Altmire (Pa.), John Barrow (Ga.), Dan Boren (Okla.) Rick Boucher (Va.), Allen Boyd (Fla.), Bobby Bright (Ala.), Travis Childers (Miss.), Jim Costa (Calif.), Henry Cuellar (Texas), Parker Griffith (Ala.), Frank Kratovil (Md.), Betsy Markey (Colo.) Eric Massa (N.Y.), Jim Matheson (Utah), Charlie Melancon (La.), Walt Minnick (Idaho), Tom Perriello (Va.), Earl Pomeroy (N.D.), Heath Shuler (N.C.), Bart Stupak (Mich.), John Tanner (Tenn.), Gene Taylor (Miss.)

Congressman Markey should have a talk with Congressman Sestak :D

Thanks for this post, we just emailed Capuano as constituents, demanding he support liberal health care reform.

Jane, kick ass and take names. Either these politicians are Democrats or they are not. Support the party’s platform or leave the party. Time’s up.

I think Sestak will win the Senate seat

OT, but related. Tom Perriello’s office say they’re not getting many calls in favor of the public option, that calls are running the other way. Staffer was glad to get on in favor.

I think that’s bull but I will notify the 5th district chair and get folks to call.Thanks!

OT: Rawstory is reporting Spain is going ahead with prosecution of Bush lawyers for torture.

Do they think that voting for a public plan is not already a compromise off of single payer?

why should they see the “public option” as a compromise? After all, when Obama and Baucus took single payer off the table, the “public option” advocates acted as if there wasn’t a damn thing wrong with doing so. The “public option” was not the compromise, because the “A list access” fauxgressives moved the Overton window well to the right by siding with the billionaire-backed “public option” campaign.

Let’s be clear. The “public option” in each of the known bills (HELP and Congress) is a tiny speck next to Hacker’s option proposal. They are not even at the level of weak sisters.

I am angry enough already. When these corporate lackeys do their vulgar disrespect of Jane Hamsher, I go somewhat berserk. Could it be, we are making a difference?

“Centrist” DINO Senator Spaceman Bill Nelson will vote against a public option and in favor of an Insurance Company Grab as will Freshman Congresswoman “New Democrat Caucus” member Suzanne Kosmas.

The CEO of United Health Care “earns” $100,000.00 per hour by denying claims and inventing pre-existing conditions after the fact.

What on earth is your list based on?
Massa is an HR676 sponsor, but has serious, well-founded reservations about HR3200 as written.
On what planet does that get converted to “AGAINST a public option”?

Progressive Dem Rep. Paul Grijalva calls the trigger surrender.

“The vast majority of CPC is not prepared to wave a white flag on public option. A trigger would be a surrender.”

Dam thanks for that. Diary at Seminal? After you

Primary!

Sometimes I think the threat to unseat these a-holes doesn’t hold sway the way it used to because they all get juicy lobbying jobs once out of office.

So, it then makes sense to do their corporate masters bidding even in the face of popular opposition since that’s where the next paycheck is coming from anyway.

There’s no reason the Rethugs and their Blue Dog minions and fellow travelers won’t delay any type of vote on health care reform until it’s too late to file to run against them. Regardless of how the health care fight develops we need to be identifying people to run against Rethugs and those Dems who choose profit over people.

For Senators there’s a two year waiting period before they can lobby. Some retired early before the law went into effect. I don’t know about the House. Doesn’t mean they can’t go to work for a lobbying firm, though.

Yeah, I’m getting on board with that now, too.

I just wish we could find the votes to kill any bill, start over in 2010 (an election year), start with Medicare for All (and improving Medicare), then if a real, strong public option must be the compromise position, so be it. Then let’s see them assholes vote against a public option when the polls are so overwhelmingly in favor of it in an election year.

Kill any bill.

Start over next year.

Reminder to Obama.

Boy, Rahm must have been working overtime this weekend.

It will be interesting to see who else falls under his sway.

And what the hell can we do about the “pro-whatever-coporate-BS” calls being astroturfed nonstop?

from FISA to HCR it’s ALWAYS “Calls are running against it.”

Since in many cases it’s been shown that it’s literally impossible for such calls to actually represent the district in question… how can they be countered?

I’ve asked this before and received no answer… AND FOR MANY OF US CALLING IS THE ONLY RECOURSE WE HAVE. And we are being outcalled by the astroturfers.

For realz? Make them issue a statement!

OT – Obama is giving his speech from Wakefield High School just outside Alexandria, VA. Wakefield was one of Mount Vernon High School’s biggest rivals back in the day. Go Majors! Beat Warriors!

I live Sam Farr’s district, and must say this comes as no surprise. I’ve been emailing him on his position relative to health care for months. At first I got responses that claimed his solid support for single payer, and how he was a sponsor etc etc. But when I pressed him on specifics over the compromise Public Option I would get replies that ignored my questions completely and ranged off into boilerplate about decorum and process. (The same bullshit he laid on me when he was busy funding the Iraq war) My last three emails that were direct references to the pledge have not even gotten replies.

I’ll be giving his office a call today, this should be interesting.
Hate to say this but I now have him down in the same category as Dianne Feinstein.

Y’know, if the Republicans were smart [and unfortunately, they can be pretty damn smart tactically] they would vote FOR the piece ‘o crap bill that’s likely to be presented [no Public Option].

That mandate-laden, no-cost-controls time bomb is going to destroy the Democratic party faster than a “loss” on getting health care reform through.

If Repubs voted “FOR,” they’d make the opposition of the Progressive Caucus irrelevant.

Of course by voting “FOR,” they’d be tarred by the same brush, but I’m surprised they can’t find enough sacrificial lambs in their party — folks who are planning on retiring to the greener fields of lobbying anyway — that they could pull it off.

well, all you have to say is ‘let not the perfect be the enemy of the good’ or ‘you have no choice but to support the least worst option’ and these cause an automatic response amongst those who are proud of their ‘pragmatism.’

the capitulation to a bad position is a widely applicable reflex, as is the pivot and condemnation of those ‘purists’ or idealists who refuse the bad deal to begin with.

From The Hill

http://thehill.com/homenews/ho…..-on-reform

If it’s wrong, guess someone should tell them.

Then put the mandate on the same trigger. If health insurance companies are to be given time to “improve” then the public deserves that same amount of time to decide to purchase health insurance without being forced to do so by the government. If it doesn’t work, we get a mandate AND a public option all at the same time.

A lot of people are happy with their insurance coverage
and see government option as a means for congress to
take over a large part of our economy.

As Jane noted, Capuano and Farr are co-sponsors of HR 676. Or were. They’re part of the huge groundswell of support we’re told exists for single payer in Congress — that is, until a single-payer bill actually comes up for a vote, at which point they run for the hills.

hard to imagine how these guys believe they’ll get away with this, hailing from the two most liberal/progressive counties in the entire country (cambridge, ma and monterey, ca). the grass roots constituencies there need some serious fertilizing action!

A-yep. They claim to be for single payer, but didn’t do much to fight for either it or the PO — and in fact are chickening out now that it’s coming up for a vote — and now they’re abandoning both for Baucus’ “triggers”.

But when I pressed him on specifics over the compromise Public Option I would get replies that ignored my questions completely and ranged off into boilerplate about decorum and process.

You do know that the Congressperson never writes these responses, right?

It’s a “legislative secretary” [someone charged solely with churning out boilerplate to incoming constituent letters], or, if the letter’s from a lobbyist or someone meriting something further up the food chain, by a Legislative Assistant who covers the subject.

Your incoming letter, despite its persuasive arguments and important facts, has NO influence other than its number: i.e., get a lot of your friends, co-workers & family to write pithy postcards or send e-mails, ’cause the Congressman isn’t pouring over your letter trying to muster countervailing arguments.

If you do call the office, ask to speak to the LA in charge of health care. You’ll at least get someone other than the receptionist who’s just tallying incoming calls [although if the office has “wised up,” the LA will be unavailable or “at lunch.”]

[I used to work in a Congressional office and write these letters.]

Excellent!

Not if I can help it. But, if I can help focus Markey’s attention to be a much more responsive Rep than he has been, maybe I won’t work to get him out of the House…

Just called both their offices, the first words out of the guy’s mouth in Farr’s office were “how did you find this out?”

Ah, they must yearn for the days when only wingnuts did political stuff online.

which just goes to show that you cannot trust Democratic politicians on anything.

they routinely advocate for lefty policies when campaigning or out of power, then do nothing about them when in power.

its been like that always, except now more people are waking up to the sham, and will refuse to perpetuate it out of some misplaced devotion to voting (D), no matter what.

“Both are single payer supporters.”

NOT! They never were; they talked the talk when they were sure it wasn’t going to pass, that’s all.

Mmmmm, tasty sausage.

Politics remains the art of the possible. And, the perfect is the death of the good. So a bill with a trigger is bad if that is all you can get? Do you just want to kill everything? Let the rethugs win? Because the rethugs are telling lies all day every day to the sheeple and all you are doing is working on congress. Don’t you people get it? It does not matter how much pressure you think you are putting on congress, they get back in office by the number of votes they get and the sheeple hold the cards. Any bill that starts things out is good because that is all that is possible. Threats by Unions are meaningless, they are only a minority. Threats of withholding money by FDL are meaningless. It takes millions to win and who has the money? The corporations do. In the end, if the dems want to win in 10 and 12 they need a health care bill. The public option is DOA. Right now. If a trigger is used that could get enough votes to pass. The congressperson will always look to his bottom line and that is getting reelected. period. all else is BS

OT for SouthernDragon — spent fifteen months of my youth just south of Mt. Vernon. (Little place called Ft. Belvoir.) You from there?

Jane,

The following is a quote from one of Bob Cesca’s posts over at his blog.

“Here’s a trigger I can support. Let’s have a primary trigger. If (insert name of congressman, senator, president here) votes against a robust public option, his vote should trigger a major netroots movement to recruit a primary challenger to kick his ass in 2010/2012.

These trigger guys, including Rahm Emanuel, apparently don’t get it. If they want universal coverage, they have to include a strong public option. Mandates but no public insurance plan amounts to the government forcing all Americans to subsidize the private insurance cartel. This is unacceptable. And if they want a revolt within the Democratic Party, this is what will “trigger” it.”

I think this is one of the best ideas ever. We should all use this as our war cry and threaten the hell out of them whenever they’re getting of course.

Don’t forget that you can also go to their facebook pages and post on their walls.

Yep. Lived on Old Mt Vernon Rd. Ft Belvoir and Mt Vernon (the estate) met at the end of the road, about 1/2 mile. Built our own house in 53 and lived there until I joined the Navy in 61. My house, if it’s still standing, would be directly across the street from the new Mt Vernon HS.

its been like that always, except now more people are waking up to the sham, and will refuse to perpetuate it out of some misplaced devotion to voting (D), no matter what.

Perhaps that’s why Tom Friedman was so pissed on MTP about the “internets” being an “open sewer of untreated, unfiltered” information. [He, of course, is the appropriate one to provide the filter.]

“Goddam peasants, getting their information from someone other than me!”

http://www.salon.com/opinion/g…..index.html

That’s what we need, more “filtered and treated” information. What an asshole. Hope his wife’s shares drop even more in value.

SD — thanks. Some other thread we’ll have to talk. 22060 from Sept67 to April69. DC at night was this youngster’s delight.

I still don’t think the point is landing about a public option being a compromise from single payer. It was a preemptive, unilateral compromise, nothing the other side ever agreed to. I understand why Jane thought single payer wasn’t realistic, and I trust her political savvy in general. But in this case, it seems clear that a public plan is being treated as the “ask” from which people are negotiating. We would have been better off leaving single payer on the table. Ironically, it would have been a more realistic way of going after a public plan.

We live in hope because we don’t want to believe the system doesn’t work. Expectations presented in these comments-we will primary the sob’s and defeat them; people will remember stances on the public option in November 2010; that threats of withdrawing financial support work-maybe they do if you’re big pharma-are nice. Maybe they’re not going to happen. Do we have a fallback position, just in case?

Basically the HCR bill will end up looking very similar to what McCain would have come up with. Obama’s Afghan/Iraq policy is very close to what we expect from McCain.

I have had enough, I’m about ready for a third party presidential run in 12′ …….Howard Dean would be credible.

Friedman, what a tool.

I still read Greenwald, even though what he writes now makes many Democratic loyalists uncomfortable, so they avoid him.

good posts at #43 and #51.

I bet a few (R)’s can be induced to sneak across the aisle and vote for this insurance cartel bailout – their strenuous posing at opposition may have a bit of kabuki to it.

Does it help to know the name of the LA when calling in? thats something the internets could help with, crowdsource.

From the article you link to:

Rep. Eric Massa (D-N.Y.) a supporter of a “single-payer” system, opposes it [HR3200] because the public option isn’t strong enough. Other “single-payer” supporters in the party’s left wing could balk as well.

I don’t see this as opposing a PO, but just the opposite.

“People who loved their country too much to give their country anything less than their best.” Obama just now (on my radio, anyhow.)

I’m workin’ on it, man, I’m workin’ on it.

I just got off the phone with Capuano’s office and he’s weaseling as best he can. I made it very clear that I will not support his candidacy for Senate (should he choose to run) if he caves and he appears to be in full-cave mode. It is really interesting that after two months of trying to pin down Markey on making the pledge that his staffer did so this morning without hesitation. Meanwhile Capuano who had signed the pledge is now going soft. I suspect Markey really does want Teddy’s seat and is willing to say what it takes to get it.

You bet. You may very well have seen my dad play jazz in those days.

OT for SD — jazz, huh? Cool! We’ll have to meet up at an Early Morning Swim.

And exactly how much does that threat really mean to your congressperson? Really. How many actual voters are in each district? How many rethugs? How many dems? How many indies? How much money does any congressman have to raise to run a campaign? Realistically how much actual threat does Netroots mean to any dem congressperson? Where does his/her money come from? No, the dems screwed up big time when they did not jump out front on this issue. Just like every time in the past 20+ years, the dems are “surprised” at the way the rethugs operate. Every time they let the thugs gain all the advantage with their campaign to make the sheeple believe their story line. The voters. The dems have not had any leaders since the 70s. If you think that Obama-who really screwed the pooch on this issue-can fix everything with 1 speech you are dreaming. As for finding someone to challenge the congressperson in his/her primary. Think about CT. How did beating Liberman in his primary work out? Did Netroots really win anything? Think that you can find a candidate that can actually win? Did any Netroots candidate win against any dem incumbent in 08?

Roy Rogers’ Horse was named Trigger

I bet you are wondering why this headline appears on our blog? Also I am sure younger readers are wondering “Who was Roy Rogers?” Well, he was a Movie and TV cowboy in the 1950’s and 1960’s. Roy had a horse named Trigger. What is the big deal with Trigger? You see those yahoos in Congress are up to it again. (Cowboys used this word for a bunch of irrational people that represent the worst side of humanity.) They want a Trigger (Trojan Horse) placed in the health care bill.

The Trigger would automatically bring into law the Government Option to health care if certain conditions were not met by the existing providers of health care insurance. Definition: They plan to put unreasonable conditions in the “New Health Care Bill” knowing full well that their objective is to put the original concepts of HR 3200 Government Health Care into law when the conditions are Triggered.

Isn’t it nice we have these scum committing that last crime against their people before they are thrown out of Congress? It will be nice next election when we pick up another 50 progressives due to the actions of some flea bitten dogs.

Thanks for pointing that out. Got any ideas how we can STING ‘EM, AND make it hurt?

We are toast boys and girls. I ain’t saying give up but the Supremes will do us in pretty soon with their corporate decision on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. When that happens you can kiss our access to one another and the world good bye. The health care problem will pale in comparison to what is going to happen.

Sorry for bad attitude.

Really? You think that? With the rethugs being such an authoritarian organization? What could possibly be a reason for any rethug to go against his party leaders? Remember the rethug goal is to make Obama fail. Any possible weaklings will get heavy pressure not only from party leaders but from rush limbaugh. So get real. Do not ever think that any rethug will vote for HCR. Their leaders have made it plain. Sink Obama on this and they will regain the congress in 2010. And please, everybody stop with the hubris that the rethugs will never win again. That is just plain stupid. As is treating the rethugs as if they were idiots. That is one thing they are not.

just called both , stated i had been duped and i wanted my money back!Capuano’s office said he hadent really backed off his promise!

neither capuano nor farr are “running for the hills” on 676. Indeed, no one is actually ‘running for the hills’ — what very few of last year’s co-sponsors of 676 are doing is being good little Oborg, and supporting Obama like you want them to (obama says “take single payer off the table”, and they agree not to vote for it.)
_
The problem here is the Oborg like yourself tell congresscritters to “compromise” with a “public option” because that is what Obama said he wanted. Well, why should they stop “compromising” with just a public option if Obama wants them to “compromise” with a trigger, or co-ops, or a weak “public option”? You’re the people who pushed us onto the slippery slope, and now you’re insisting that the brakes be applied?!?!?
_
Fauxgressives betrayed their principles for access — and now the chickens are coming home to roost

I know but single payer isn’t even in the REMOTE future. So he throws the baby out with the bathwater and won’t vote for anything unless it’s single payer? So he’s taking a STAND I guess. Admirable.

try to hold 2 things in yr head at once:

Jane posted earlier that she agrees with Josh at TPM when he says:

“Am I the only one who thinks that if the Dems pass a bill with mandates and subsidies for poor and moderate income people to purchase it but no public option or competition with the insurers, that it will be pretty much a catastrophe for the Democrats in political terms?“

add to that what you already think, that ” Remember the rethug goal is to make Obama fail. “

passage of an obscene bailout of the greedy, despised insurance cartel would likely result in (D) political failures, big time, therefore some (R)’s may be induced to cross the aisle, with or without the tacit endorsement of their leadership.

Massa seems to be saying that, in lieu of HR676,
which I think he admits is not going to happen,
he won’t vote for something unless it has a better
PO than HR3200, and other improvements in terms
of Medicare reimbursements, etc.
And, yes, I do believe that’s admirable.

Get’em! Those who break promises should never, ever be allowed to get away with it!

Hardly BS or Congresscritters wouldn’t be worried about it. It’s not just Jane’s pledge anyway; her efforts are seeding the clouds and it’s gonna rain on a lot of faux progressives’ parades.

It will storm if a credible public option and other reforms are not enacted and we are, instead, forced to buy unreformed “insurance contracts” from “health” insurers. The only thing they insure is their own profitability.

Fauxgressives betrayed their principles for access — and now the chickens are coming home to roost

they are utterly habituated to the notion that sellout equals pragmatism – one of the reason’s that their reactions to activists who won’t pre-compromise become so emotional…

hildebrand is pissed at obama while frmr staffers protest in dc and vow to organize a primary challenger in 2012. oy obama and rahm get with it. front page politico

Yup, something that was driven home in Kent Conrad’s home state today by a little scandal concerning BCBS bonuses:

Nearly $15 million in employee bonuses that were almost assured regardless of performance.

Sales reward trips to posh resorts totaling $1.2 million.

A $3.5 million investment in a murky hotel partnership lacking audited financial statements.

All this and much more during just the past five years are among almost half a billion dollars in expenses detailed in a report by state insurance examiners who probed spending practices by Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Dakota.

Unfortunately, the whole story is only in today’s dead-tree Fargo Forum, but the excerpts therefrom are juicy reading.

we should start an Actblue page and start raising funds to oppose weak democrats and help progressives in trouble. I am sure Jane could come up with a way to administer the fund. As the fund grew between now and election we would gain influence as the fund grew.

And, your plan for fighting back is what? Getting down on all 4s, sticking your ass up in the air, and saying “O.K. I’m ready?”

This time FDL is guilty of spreading misinformation. I called Farr’s office, too and they read me Farr’s quote that you are taking way, way out of context. Shame on FDL for creating havoc and turning off public option supporters when we need all we can get. BTW, the Farr quote is: “The only way I could see it [the trigger option] getting progressive votes is by making sure the apublic optin is strong and goes into operation.” (from today’s Roll Call newspaper)

… making sure the a public option is strong and goes into operation.”

If this is really what Farr said, it’s gobbledygook.
A trigger that ensures that a PO goes into operation is not a trigger.

I don’t understand how that can be a sincere statement by the staffer but perhaps someone could explain it to me?

These people surely know what the opinion polls say. If 2/3rds to 3/4s or more of Americans support the public option, and you can bet the few who don’t would never vote Democratic anyway, why on earth would his staff be conducting a head count of phone-ins as a way of judging public support, especially when everyone knows about Republican astroturfing?

That comment makes no sense to me as a sincere comment.

Bullshit. The purpose of a trigger, and it’s the only purpose of a trigger, is to prevent the Public from ever getting at that damn Option.

Saying that the trigger will not be rigged is lying in our faces because the only reason for the existence of a such a trigger is to be rigged.

The corporations don’t need “second chances”… they are currently on their fifth or sixth chance since 1994 and the only change they’ve made is ever-increasing levels of obscene profit on the back of the taxpayer.

Trigger == capitulation to the corporations and it can mean nothing else in this situation.

Could you shed light on my question above then (comment 94)?

If 2/3rds to 3/4s or more of Americans support the public option,

the Public Option, whatever it is on any given day amongst the many bills, has no authentic constituency outside of Liberal policy wonks who were told by Obama that Single Payer was ‘off the table.’

the PO is confusing, contradictory, conflicted, undefined and complicated, and there are several floating around at once. The poll numbers are in response to more general questions like:

The New York Times and CBS arguably have the best question wording on a public plan: “Would you favor or oppose the government offering everyone a government administered health insurance plan – something like the Medicare coverage that people 65 and older get – that would compete with private health insurance plans?” Their most recent poll shows 66% support.

many are aware that this support does not translate to a watered-down, defective by design, postponed ‘public option’ that kicks in conveniently after the election cycle of 2012.

Matt Taibbi’s piece suggested the house progressive caucus cut a deal with Pelosi to guarantee a vote on a public option (something like that). I do not know if this is correct but Pelosi has made a number of strong statements for a (any?) public option. At any rate obvious they were the ones to have to cut the deal since its them who had to drop single payer.

It is unclear to me if that hypothetical deal was good or not.

Part of it will be the results of people stirred to action by targeted blast emails etc. etc.

But astroturfed calls are a major part of the problem, as I stated in a comment above. Give lobbyist phonebankers, or even better wingnut volunteers, some zip codes and street addresses from congressional districts in question and voila!… instant groundswell of support for the latest corporate bullshit.

Some Representatives have twigged to this and ask for more than a zip code now, and others do more thorough checks for the sake of their voter base records, but all too many do neither.

I believe that’s where the progressives were actually told by Rahm Emanuel that a show vote for single-payer would be allowed in return for them shutting up about the public option.

That’s a win-win for Rahm as he gets to set up a poor showing for single-payer and teach those fucking bloggers a lesson and he gets the progressives trapped on board just in time for the Baucus train wreck.

A trigger is garbage! I’m not going to be forced to patronize the blood sucfking insurance companies. We should all have the choice of a public option we’ll run these clowns out of office as easily as we voted Obama in! We will use that same energy to bring them all down!

It doesn’t matter now because if they pull this, they’re gone! We’re willing to blow the party up…..AGAIN!

Or,Spork, one could say a little something like this:

“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

-The Declaration Of Independence

Hm… well, this makes my decision easier. I was going to support Capuano in the special election over Martha Coakley. Guess I’ll have to keep my options open now, but I shan’t be voting for ANYONE who doesn’t draw a line in the sand on the public option.

No I mean this:

Even the Congressional Progressive Caucus, whose 80-plus members have overwhelmingly supported single-payer legislation in the past, decided not to draw a line in the sand. They agreed to back down on single-payer, seemingly with the understanding that Pelosi would push for a strong public option — a sort of miniversion of single-payer, a modest, government-run insurance plan that would serve as a test model for the real thing. But one of the immutable laws of politics in the U.S. Congress is that progressives will always be screwed by their own leaders, as soon as the opportunity presents itself. And with a bill the size and scope of health care, there was plenty of opportunity.

Bottom of page 3 of 7 here:
http://www.rollingstone.com/po…..nd_wrong/3

If the deal was to get a strong PO then they got screwed because none of the house versions was strong. If so then why do they not go back to demanding single payer? Deal off?

Or do they see Pelosi as still supporting a strong PO per her recent statements? But it seems clear this process will never achieve a stronger PO than the best it has already produced which would not be strong at all (far too few people, no price control and not starting until 2013).

Just called both campaign offices. No answer at either (hmmm). Left a message and asked for a phone call back.

I agree any Democratic Congressman who reneges on his or her promise to demand a public option should face progressive, primary challengers, but I think we should go further. I suggest that FDL advocate that any Democratic Senator who will not vote to revise Senate Rule 22- the filibuster rule- should face a progressive, Democratic, primary challenger the next time he or she runs for reelection.

I realize the idea to revise Rule 22, aka the “nuclear option” and the “constitutional option” was originally proposed by Republican Senators in 2005 and was opposed by Democrats Senators. Nevertheless, I think the Republican arguments were constitutionally sound and that true change in this country is unlikely unless and until Rule 22 is revised.

Pro-nuclear option Republicans argued that they had won recent elections and in a democracy the winners rule, not the minority. They also argued that while the Constitution requires supermajorities for some purposes (such as 2/3 needed to ratify a treaty), the Founders did not require a supermajority for confirmations, and that the Constitution thus presupposes a majority vote for confirmations. The same would be true to pass legislation.

If the Democratic Senators are to be believed, there should be at least 51 Senators who support a public option, ENDA, repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, etc. I suspect, however, that some Democratic Senators are hiding behind the filibuster rule to conceal their true values and beliefs. They know how difficult it will be to get 60 votes to stop a filibuster on progressive issues. It’s time we find out who the other closeted Blue Dog Democrats are in the Senate, who proclaim support for legislation, which they know will not get past a cloture vote in the Senate. At the same time, they continue to take campaign contributions from big business, insurers, Wall Street, phrama, etc.

The Constitution and the structure of the Senate already give considerable power to small states. California, New York, Pennsylvania and Illinois have the same number of Senators as Wyoming. There is no justification to further increase the undemocratic power of red states or Blue Dog Democrats by the super-majority filibuster rule. I think the current filibuster rule is unconstitutional and unconscionable.

I called Sam Farr’s office, spoke with his staffer Alison.

She insisted that the congressman is sticking with the progressive caucus pledge to vote against any bill that doesn’t have a public option.

I suggested that if there is misinformation or the congressman has been misquoted that a statement be posted on his website or here – that he isn’t going to vote for a “triggered” public option.

Alison said she can’t control when the Congressman is misquoted, but she can do the PR work needed to make it clear what his views are. If she’s not blowing smoke I expect that there will be a press release re-affirming the congressman’s support for the progressive caucus letter and spelling out in more detail what he will and will not vote for.

Farr could be my congressman after 2012 and I pointed that out to his staffer.

Which is why it’s important to keep reminding our elected representatives that a meaningful public option is the centrist position. It is the only way to introduce a new market participant who has a genuine interest in driving costs down while obtaining healthier outcomes for its patient population as compared to its peer groups.

If you introduce a public option then the private insurers can either respond to the new competition or they can try to maintain their pricing power. Why any politician should think that the private health insurance industry must be exempt from competition, a la OPEC, is beyond me.

You’re right. The next step was the “gut the public option in favor of allowing a just-for-show vote on single-payer” attempt by Rahm et al.

As for what happened to the public option… thank Jane Hamsher that it hasn’t been gutted altogether.

That bare minimum where FDL drew the line is now Pelosi’s “strong public option.”

And yes, the Dem “leadership” will disappear that version as well if given even a tenth of a chance.

Jane:
Thanks for doing what you’re doing and encouraging other people to do more. I don’t think your pledge is “bullshit.” Uneducated cynicism is bullshit. Caving is what we’re trying to get the Democrats to stop doing–it’s unfortunate but there’s only a sliver of the Democratic party remaining that feel legitimately accountable to the electorate and Greens aren’t viable on a national scale. So pressuring them from within with cajones is our best option right now.

Sort of makes Ms. Coakley a netroots fav, doesn’t it?

Make him pay.

No public option now, no mandate now.

The vacillation of Capuano & Farr (and J. McGovern, & Pascral — in RC) and their likely capitulation indicate the enormous pressure being put on members of the Progressive Bloc. The third-way, corporate DLC in and out of Congress & the White House (including good-cop Obama & bad cop Emmanuel) have long ago decided that they don’t want a strong PO. Rahm has been pushing “triggers” since early July. That’s their strategic goal.

They’ll be infinitely flexible tactically as to how to achieve this goal. What we’re going to see in the next few weeks is an intricate kabuki dance that’ll alternate between making Progressives seem like the White House supports the PO one day — only to change their position the next day. Or as Matt Taibbi accurately descibes — the possibility of a strong PO, in this case, will take place by ” showering a real problem with a blizzard of ineffectual decisions and verbose nonsense, then stepping aside at the last minute to reveal the true plan that all along was being forged in the furnace of monied interests and insider inertia.”

We’ve already seen a version of this procees at work in Geithner/ Summner/Bernanke’s obscene bailout of Wall Street — a bailout with very few strings attached, and real regulatory reform only a distant possibility.

It’s not that Obama, et al.don’t feel strongly about bringing affordable, quality health care to Americans. It’s just that they feel stronger about looking out for the interests of their corporate sponsors and donors.

Let’s see whether Progressives in and out of Congress can hold together in a strong push-back to what the White House, the DLC, and their monied interest friends really want. I hope so. I think so — oh hell, I’ll go all the way and say I know so!