The fact is, Democrats own all this stuff now.

I’ve been saying this for some time now, ever since obama had the democrats vote for the original 700 billion dollar gift to banks with no oversite that the economy belongs to him

and so fisa, afghanistan, Iraq, and defending those who committed war crimes of torture and worse, destroying any hope of ”winning” with their depraved war profiteering

barack owns all this and more

Critters are such triangulators and intellectually dishonest… or as Al Franken used to call it – weasels.

Eshoo

Not a fan of any of these three, but I say let’s eschew Eshoo!

Quite the presentation.

The grand and global strategy of the White House seems to involve public health reform, so-called, with other unrelated issues and scores they want to settle wrt Afghanistan, 2010 election goals, and sundry other political advantages as yet to be revealed to the public, probably after all is said and fait accompli. That is to say, health care reform is merely a crowbar in the game of politics.

Sorry the iframe was keeping people from being able to comment for a bit, we had to remove it. Should be okay now.

Good DLCer that she is, drawing “lines in the sand” is something she reserves for controlling the budget.

Well, obvie. That’s something we all agree on.

[/Evan Bayh]

We were trying to think of how health care would be different if Mitt Romney had been elected, and really couldn’t think of how it would be.

I wish I was George Soros with the $$$ to vote for all of the above

and

finance primaries against all of them!

First time I woted I got a 404-Page Not Found message. Worked this time. Had to go with Debbie. With forked tongue she speaks.

I vote Obama.

for some reason, prev comment didn’t show up

firedogs get it right ! these 3 are symptomatic of the problems we face – mid term progressive veneers and ambition:

although DWS and Eshoo are equally deserving of the crown, I went with Becerra because I believe the ‘winnings’ will have the greatest impact in his district.

Yup. This is Romney Care, except Massachusetts has a more generous public insurance program for those 300% above FPL.

Rep. Anna Eshoo was the Queen of NAFTA. I remember well, back in the days of yore, in 1996 AD, when Rep. Eshoo was happily cheerleading for the North American Free Trade Agreement, which helped ship millions of American manufacturing jobs out of the country. These so-called “liberal” corporate Democrats and well as the worthless Republicans are all just traitors to the American work class.

See, I’m torn between Schulz and Becerra.

I think Becerra is mor odious in his two facedness, but Schulz is awl ovah mah TeeVee allatime! And I think taking the fight TO her, would have a bigger impact b/c she is more of a household name……

Having trouble choosing. It’s sucha target rich environment. Sigh

The Biological drug exclusivity provision is not being characterised honestly.

Current law gives exclusivity in perpetuity. Eshoo/Barton gives 12 years exclusivity. Waxman wanted 7 years. Senate HELP committee gives 12 years and notably had Ted Kennedy’s vote in favor of 12 years.

Eshoo hasn’t committed to a public option. Interestingly I just received a written response to a question I posed at her town hall – she says se will vote for a single payer system when it comes up for a vote.

Where is my post?

Where is my post?

I made my dad stop getting the post, you have a subscription?

I say lose it

If Debbie W-S has leadership ambitions, she might be particularly sensitive to constituent pressure.

The thought of having her district flooded with phone calls and postcards makes me smile. She’s also a Chief Deputy Whip, and so putting pressure on her will also potentially have some ripples in the leadership discussions and the whipping efforts in the House.

When a member comes to her and says “I’ve been getting too many phone calls demanding that I hold firm on the public option to go along with some watered-down bill out of the Senate,” I’d love for Debbie to be able to say “I know what you mean.”

They’re all good targets. I voted for Schutz because she has become such a household name due to her frequent spots on the cable networks. She is the most nationally known. I think taking her on will energize the base to turn up the heat on the others. The other two are not as nationally recognized and I don’t think the impact among the grassroots would be as effective. If the goal is to ensure votes for us, we need pressure from the grassroots on a daily basis. We have to let these turncoats know that we won’t show at the polls unless they deliver for us this time. One of Obamas favorite cadences when he speaks is “this just won’t do, “THIS TIME.” Well, we have to let them all know, that this is our “THIS TIME” line in the sand for future support.

Citizen perris:

No dear, I’m sure you were thinkin of the “toast” yer dad always had with his breakfast…he musta beenm smart enough to know there aren’t any nutrients in the Post.

[modnote: there’s nothing back here Norske]

Here I go again.

I think we should be concentrating on state legislative races in 2010. Influencing redistricting for the coming decade is strategically much more important than punishing democrats in safe districts. Some DINO blue dogs are going to be defeated by Republicans next cycle, all for the good.

Unfortunately corporate democrats in safe district will likely survive progressive primary challenges partly because of strong corporate funding. Which will make them even less likely to support progressives going forward.

Supporting progressives for state legislatures offers both the strategic advantage of influence on redistricting and tactical advantages in development of a progressive farm team of future candidates for Congress. Get people elected in 2010. Some will have chances in newly competitive Congressional districts in 2012 as primary opponents for corporate democrats. Some will push progressive policy at a state level after re election in 2012. 2012 should be a good year for renewed activist energy.

good point, he is a very smart man, he certainly would have known that…especially here where it would have been the new york post at that

Quite a handle you’ve got there, buddy!

Debbie W-S claims to champion breast cancer and is a survivor herself. Will she stand up for other women in Florida who don’t have access to coverage like she does when they are faced with breast cancer? I don’t live in her district so I’m barred from contacting her. Thank you for giving me another forum to do so!

Yes, Eshoo was the queen of NAFTA.

The interests of Big Pharma and AHIP overlap in some respects but conflict in others. Private insurers hate extended marketing exclusivity on biologics, because it forces them to pay out more. So the wet kiss to PhRMA in this case is a raspberry to insurers.

While Big Pharma opposes a public plan with purchasing clout, those objections are mitigated by extended marketing exclusivity on their products. Forced discounts based on group bargaining (if Congress overrides the ObRahma deal) would be minor compared with price reductions from generic competition.

The 12-year protection afforded by the Eshoo/Barton amendment is comparable to (though technically not the same as) the 12-year marketing exclusivity amendment Kay Hagan and Orrin Hatch secured for the Senate HELP bill. FYI, as I noted here at the time, Ted Kennedy was pushing for a 13-year exclusivity.

All this is to say that Eshoo’s support for a public option may not be as weak as you think, which is not to say that she can be trusted absent a pledge.

It bugs me that Eshoo, (gesundheit!) from a very progressive district, isn’t 100% pushing for the PO, not to mention Single Payer. Just shows how the Corporate masters really control Government IMO.

likud debbie who pals around with the rahms and the republicans.

ok i have called all three of these critters and questiond their staffers on this discrepincy in public policy of support of p.o and how they reconcile that with the campaign contributions they have taken from these health industry pacs and lobyists that are trying to kill the p.o , thanks to fdl investigating i had plenty of figures and names to quote , they all got nervous and thought i was a reporter and ! I SUGGEST ALL OF YOU DO THE SAME SHAME THEM WITH THE TRUTH AND FORCE THEM TO VOTE FOR WHAT THEY SAY THEY SUPPORT! P.S call their d.c numbers easy to get just google their name!!!!!!

I voted for Debbie for three reasons…
1.) I’ve seen her on TV and she sure comes on strong…I was sure that she could be counted on;
2.) California ghas enough problems right now; and,
3.) If this tactic turns Debbie around, I’d be in for going after the other two!

i dissagree the country has been takeing a nose dive i think some sleepy americans are really starting to wake up to the fact of who induced their coma and from which drug companies the meds came from and i think we need to continue to expose the corporate democrats as well as push for progressive challengers in all

I got a letter from Eshoo on Saturday saying she would vote for single payer.

yeah big deal these politicians make me laugh they say that they will support something that they know wont pass, its cover for them to hide under and im sick of it, we need to concentrate on their record and campaign contrabutions NOT WHAT THEY SAY!

I can hardly contain myself. I just noticed that Obama stated that he was humbled by the opposition to his health care reform. Now I assume that he was surprised by the conservative reaction, however, he is probably equally surprised that the progressives didn’t roll over and play dead. After all it appears at this time that he favors a mandate without a public option, which, if I remember correctly is the exact opposite of what he promised us during the campaign. Not to mention this would leave people in even worse shape than now. As for the winner of this particular contest – choices, so many choices.

If she votes for single payer and it doesn’t pass, and then votes for an insurance industry bailout that causes a huge transfer of public wealth to the insurance industry and makes sure single payer can’t happen for another generation, does that count?

THANKS JANE FOR THE AMO THE FACTS AND NUMBERS ON THESE CRITTERS, BRILIANT WORK , AND I THOUGHT YOU WERE WELL SPOKEN AND CONCISE ON RACHEL MADDOW!

I’ve been watching Bill Moyers, Dylan Ratagan, and a few others with ideas about healthcare reform, and I think I’m starting to understand what Obama meant when he said the public option was only a “sliver” of the package. Turns out (or maybe some of you already knew this), only about 5-10% of Americans would even be eligible for it. And this marketplace they talk about — it’s not going to be nation-wide, just mostly within states. Obama says “If you like your insurance, you can keep it…” but what he doesn’t say is that if you DON’T like it, you can’t change it. If you get insurance through your employer, you’d have to take what he offers. That means roughly 60-70% of people wouldn’t even be able to use this exchange.

I’m certainly no expert, but I wonder if we’re fighting for the right thing — I don’t think it goes nearly far enough. I think we should be able to buy any insurance sold in America, just like for our cars. That marketplace should have every insurance company on it, and a public option (of course) in the mix — AND, there should be no restrictions on who can and cannot buy from it. They can put in all the language that if you’re getting any government dollars then you have to be a citizen and can’t buy any plan that pays for abortions, etc. Then they can put restrictions on the insurance companies that they can’t decline those with pre-existing conditions, drop you when you’re sick, etc., in exchange for a mandate that delivers them millions more customers. They can throw in some tort reform since that’s what the right seems to have as a talking point at the moment (although Texas has the strictest tort reform of any state and it hasn’t brought healthcare cost down one bit) — put a cap on how much over damages you can actually sue a doctor for like the cap on out-of-pocket expenses.

Why must this be so “complicated”?? Is it so we won’t understand it, or they want us to think we can’t understand it?? Oh, I know — it’s because our congress has been bought and paid for…

Follow up on Engel: I finally had a chance to drop by his Bronx office and ask about support for the public option. Response I got from a staffer was “That’s what he wants to see.” But I could get no commitment on a vote against legislation that does not include a public option.

Related item: these flyers were pasted up all over Riverdale for much of August. Funny stuff. I snagged one as a keepsake.

http://www.mishu.com/misc/engel.jpg

Money talks.

Congressional district boundaries change in 2012. How they change is not determined yet, it will happen in state legislatures in 2011 after the census. I think we should be concentrating on getting progressives in position to exert influence.

Exposing corporate democrats is necessary work. It doesn’t make them less electable except at the margins.

Running primary opponents against them is somewhat quixotic – it feels good to tilt at perceived evil giants. There’s downsides to it though, burn out of activists and retrenchment of corpDems being the most obvious ones.

Seriously what do we expect in a primary in a safe district? Fundraising is going to be a disadvantage – incumbent CorpDems will have $3 for $1 for a progressive candidate. Party machinery gives parity or advantage to the incumbent for volunteers and GoTV.

Say we try to primary 10 CorpDems in 2010 at a cost of $4M. We see our candidates lose at margins from 55/45 to 90/10. Now one would hope that the CorpDem in the 55/45 race would learn something, but they’ve got the general election coming, need money for that which comes from Corporate interests, not progressives. Who do they love after the general election, the progressives that made life uncomfortable for them?

Spread that $4M around to 4 state legislative races in each of 10 states. We elect an average of 2 people in each state. They help set district boundaries that make progressive candidates electable in previously blue dog or Republican districts. These district boundaries persist for 10 years.

I’ve got a strong opinion that we should be working for the 10 year advantage. Take our anger at CorpDems, expose them for sure. And use some finesse to take them out on shifted playing field after redistricting. Delayed gratification, revenge served cold, there’s lots of idioms for this.

I’m expecting her to vote for HR3200 as it stands. If what comes out of conference has a more robust public option I expect her to vote for that as well. If what comes out of conference doesn’t have it she’ll probably still vote for “reform” because of the goody bag and the need to “get something passed”.

I don’t like it. I won’t be working to get her reelected and probably would vote for a protest candidate in the 2010 primary and general elections.

I’ve had two congressional representatives that have been responsive and respectful to me. Anna Eshoo and Lee Hamilton. Francis McCloskey, Mike Sodrel and Baron Hill didn’t meet that minimal level of respect and responsiveness (they are the other people my districts have sent to represent me). Should Anna do better? I ask her to do better frequently. Her responses say se knows what’s right.

I worked to GoTV for Baron Hill in 2006, in spite of his contemptible lack of response and disrespect for constituents. He didn’t change his blue dog stripes in any way even though he had slim margin of victory and would have lost without progressive support. I gave money to Gretchen’s quixotic primary challenge to Hill in 2008, knowing damn well it was quixotic. I taunted Hill’s campaign staff at farmers market through the general election campaign… Felt good.

It’s always important to look towards state-level redistricting, but I think you need to do a little more homework. Several states — California among them — now put redistricting in the hands of a “non-partisan” commission. So in those states, while electing Democrats to the legislature is a laudable goal, it wouldn’t have much effect on redistricting.

I’m not saying it’s a bad idea, just that I think you need to do some more research on it before throwing it out as a proposal. We want to target any effort where it will have the most impact as well. Defining which states’ legislatures are at a partisan tipping point and which are likely to lose or gain seats because of demographic changes matters as well.

“Let’s organize right now around this other thing” can sometimes be seen as a unwelcome distraction to the matter at hand, which is deciding who among our FDL Congressional finalists should get immediate direct attention for their hypocrisy on a health care stand, the vote for which might happen this month. While I fully support your idea, you’ve mentioned it several times and I think it deserves a)more research and b) its own diaried effort that isn’t simply dropped into comments on other peoples’ posts.

ymmv

I voted for DWS. Her national profile and leadership position makes her the best target, meaning the FDL effort is most likely to be noticed by cable gasbags. Sorry Anna, sorry Xavier — you’re next though!

I have indeed mentioned it several times.

You’re absolutely correct in both of your points – more research is needed and a ongoing thread are good ideas. I’ve been throwing the idea out because I think it deserves consideration soon.

I hope that no one is offended by my predicting 2010 primaries are going to be unsuccessful – I hope that they are and we can get some decent democratic party candidates in the 2010 general elections.

necessary conditions for impact on redistricting:
Democratic governor.
existing progressive caucus among state legislative democrats.
state houses in democratic control or close to it.
legislature controls redistricting.

There’s the potential for increasing the size of the House gumming up the works.

i went with debbie. she’s got leadership ambitions, but clearly she’s not leadership material. After all, universal health care is a plank of the party platform: if she can’t lead on this, she can’t (and shouldn’t) lead on anything.

Besides, i’m still angry about the refusal to support fellow democrat Anette Taddeo in favor of Debbie’s BFF the awful republican.

so over the side with you debbie!

I think after not having changed the direction of any of the things you mention it’s fair to say he owns those things now. If he’d been pushing an agenda on any of these items that said “Look, what we’re doing is crazy, we need to change”, I’d be disagreeing with you. The sad truth is, though, that he hasn’t.

No one rides for free.

Yes, she’s another fine example of leading from the rear. Plus, she’s the only one of these people I’ve heard of. I could get all intellectual and analyze who’s been doing the worst job and being the biggest whore to special interests, but you know, name recognition is really important in politics.

Is there a time limit to this vote? I keep getting a 404 error, voted for Debbie Wasserman-Shultz, or tried to.

Rahm and Nancy put her in charge of the Red-to-Blue program even though she’s never faced a competitive Congressional election herself, primary or general. She’s not qualified to hold that job, and she’s been getting lots of exposure lately. Undercutting her in her own district could pay real dividends down the road.

So why am I getting a “404″ Page Not Found error???

I filled in all the fields…

Jane “Despite all the noise in the Senate, the only true firewall that will keep a bill from passing without a public plan is a 40 vote block in the House.’

thank you Jane

I find it especially hypocritical of Debbie Wasserman Schultz to push a health care plan on the rest of the American people which she knows full well would have killed her a year ago with her battle with cancer. She NEVER would have gotten the expensive testing and the large number of surgical procedures under the public option and her chances of being cancer free today would be far less than they are. Her ability to take from her generous Congressional health care paid for by the American people and then turn around and push a far inferior public option on her constituents is beyond contempt.

and DWS it is! she was just on Rachel’s show this morning doing the whole “I believe in a strong public option, BUT…” crap. “The important thing is A bill gets passed, can’t get hung up on the perfect, blah da blah blah…”

she says a bill will ready to go to Obama just before the December Holiday break.