Primary them in anticipation!

Impressive response on the survey.

Last night we polled our list

But what do Real Americans think?

More seriously: Primaries that defeat worthless incumbents, even if the seats flip, are fine by me.
Primaries that move the incumbent to the left (see Specter, Arlen) are even better.
And primaries that result in the election of actual progressives are best of all.

We had to respond or Jane would have taken us to the woodshed.

Note to incumbants: You can always join the Joe Lieberman party.

Liberals yesterday, Progressives Today, Socialists Tomorrow.

I’d like to point out, some of my responses were different based on certain assumptions.

For instance, I am not against mandates if there is a STRONG public option. I am VEHEMENTLY opposed to mandates otherwise. I would also be more ammenable to a tax on middle class benefits IF there was a STRONG public option, mandates for employers and all americans, national exchanges and revocation of anti-trust exemption. I’m sure I could go on, but you get my point ( i hope ).

So I found the survey awkward at times. Also note: I’d love to start primarying people who don’t support single payer.

i’m already an unashamed socialist, does that mean i’m working my way towards ‘commie pinko’? :)

Jane, I want to make one point about the individual mandate question. My answer was wishy-washy, because I’m in the “it depends” camp. If there truly were a viable public option, I’d be reluctantly in favor of it. Otherwise, I’m not. There was no way I could see to make that evident.

That might or might not affect the results of that question, but it gave me a few moments’ doubt as to how to answer.

You may consider auditioning at MSNBC. Matthews, Maddow, O’Donnel and Olbermann need more like minded talking heads! You could help their ratings. A “Commie Pinko’ segment, is not out of the question!

Boy do I agree. Primary them pre-emptively! Is there any evidence out there that they will suddenly change their votes? I don’t think so, They’ve already shown their stripes.

I too, am in the it depends camp, as far as the mandates go. I’d be more apt to support a mandate with a PO in place.

LOL!

“Must remove anti-trust exemption for insurance companies.”

92.3% >=”Important”
____

Yeah. That, coupled with a true “”public option” (and federal insurance regulation) would solve a lot of things.

Consequently, it will never be permitted.

yeah,
No meaningful Public Option, no mandate.

I hate to say this…maybe Lynn Woolsey should go. She has not done her part in whipping the vote in the CPC. And she is supporting Blue Dogs.

Oh yes siree, Jane, I think this is a strategy in play:

“I’ve heard some chatter that the reason the House wants to delay passage of a health care bill is to get past many of the primary filing deadlines out of fear that a vote for these provisions will be unpopular and trigger enthusiasm for primary challenges.”

Jane told us:

I’ve heard some chatter that the reason the House wants to delay passage of a health care bill is to get past many of the primary filing deadlines out of fear that a vote for these provisions will be unpopular and trigger enthusiasm for primary challenges. I didn’t put much stock in it at the time, but looking at these figures it may well be true.

I’m thinking we should get ahead of the game and begin primarying some of the obvious folks for whom we can identify candidates right now, while they are talking. Any show of strength we can muster at this point…

Who would you replace Woolsey with?

I wonder when corporate Dems will figure out that Obama’s leading them to the doghouse with voters over healthcare.

Jane, I’ll help organize the new Progressive party and write about that if you want.

May I suggest a strong push for instant run of voting and fusion ballots. They seem like the two “relatively” easiest ways to increase the power of third parties.

Matt Gonzalez? Don’t think he’s north of the bridge, though.

It’s a great question. I remember having a conversation with a person who considered running against her back in ’02. He probably would be worse.

I don’t know enough about people involved, so I’m asking out of pure ignorance, so I can have some names in mind to look into.

I just realized that we are talking past each other. I meant who should replace Woolsey as progressive whip, and you meant who should replace her in her district.

Matt Gonzalez ran against SF mayor Gavin Newsom back in the day. It was a close race.

Woolsey was challenged most recently by Joe Nation, a DINO conservadem who was a CA assemblymeber. A real jerkoff.

One criticism that I have heard of Woolsey here is that she has not brought the pork back to the district even tho she votes the right way usually.

Chalk me up as another whose answer was a little confused re: PO and insurance mandate. The two issues are very tied together in my mind. IF we get a PO, or a substantial increase in Medicare THEN an insurance mandate is fine. And only if there is a clear mechanism to control premiums/OOP expenses and ensure minimal coverage. But do not force me to buy something I have no choice but to pay a ridiculous amount for.

Heh. Indeed.

Amen!

How do we get these established?

Ok here’s my new thought. I hope Coakley loses in MA.

It would force Senator Reid to change the Senate fillibuster rule to pass GOOD health care.

It would prove to Rahm and the President they can’t take Progressives for granted.

I think we should call everyone in MA and tell them not to vote for Coakley.

That’s a terrific response rate, too!

Hardly anyone ever gets such a large proportion of responses to something like this.

I loved completing that survey!

I actually think we’re talking about two different things here when we’re discussing “mandates”.

I’m against (always have been) forcing people to buy products from private companies (the “mandate” that’s being discussed). That’s why the public option was important, on principle, no matter what else happened. It may (may) be okay to allow people to opt into buying private insurance instead of participating in a government program, but without that government program, it’s absolutely wrong.

What we’re talking about now is nothing but tribute. It’s not a tax, it’s much worse than a tax.

Please read this thread Jane and the comments on it !!!
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/24217

We have a unique opportunity right now and a spokesperson is exactly whats needed !!!!

I just love these apology pieces for today’s 1300s style feudalism we’re still living– “The History Behind Insurance” (http://www.thehistoryof.net/the-history-of-insurance.html and http://www.investopedia.com/articles/08/history-of-insurance.asp).

Meanwhile, “Citigroup Bonuses on par with 2008″ (http://www.americablog.com/2010/01/citigroup-bonuses-to-be-on-par-with.html).

The health bill will probably fail if the special election goes south fro the Dem’s in Mass. Offering an ultimatum to the house, before Tuesday would be a threat we could actually deliver on of incredible proportion !!!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/15/a-brown-win-could-kill-he_n_424910.html

Is there still time to do the survey?? I was out of pocket last night and most of today.

That is baloney. It would force the Senate to change the fillibuster rule to pass GOOD health care reform.

About the only valid thing this poll tells us is that most FDL readers are pretty progressive/liberal and that these are very important issues to the respondents.

Some of us have been socialist for a while. We’re just waiting for everyone else to catch up.

yes, I was surprised by the percentage of those opposing a mandate, but the discussion string above explains why. If they take our money (in taxes) to pay for the public option and give good health care to everyone, then that’s a given. I agree with Jane’s # 31 that this is an immoral tax (tribute) and should not be included. Start warming up protest candidates.

Demand the progressive caucus kill the bill NOW or we will kill democratic chances Kennedy’s vacant seat through posting on the entire blogosphere and letters to the editor in all 50 states explaining our case and soliciting contributions for the opposition candidate . We have the next 4 1/2 days to make good on the threat !

If Coakley loses, it will force the Democratic leadership and Senator Reid to change the fillibuster rule to pass health care.

We would probably get a better health care bill.

Consequently, I hope she loses. Don’t buy into the 60 vote majority rubbish. We know it’s bs. This would just force the leadership to actually lead.

I hope Progressives stay home and send Rahm a message.

Progressives win if Coakley loses imo.

I agree. By all means, we should target the entire Stupak contingent. Anyone who was supporting that mess the first time around is somebody who should be working elsewhere. The heinous offenders have already identified themselves. We don’t want to (and don’t have the resources to) primary each and every rep based on the final vote, but for the bonehead amendments they introduced or pushed for all along.

Wiener’s a good example. He’s going to support it going forward for the team effort, but he was on the right side of the issues as the disaster unfolded in the Senate.

Agreed. But I read today that if Coakley loses, the State would need up to 2 weeks to certify the results and that’s why they’re rushing the lousy bill. Hope they get the message from this primary and there’s a way to stop the bill.

Why not send a strong message that we will actively work against Coakley’s candidacy over the rest of this election unless the progressives who pledged to kill this bill without a PO make good NOW on their promises ?
It’s better than playing dead and will serve as a wake up call for those facing re election in November !Unused muscle turns to useless fat !

Maybe someone could appeal for extensions to the primary filing period in order wait & see how they vote! If some clever lawyer types could link the extension to successful completion of the HCR vote, and it were widely publicized, it might cause an interesting change to the vote calculus. The extensions would probably be denied, but it would place a media spotlight on the reps whose districts requested them.

Kennedy’s seat is very symbolic !

Short of a national strike this would be the most visble possible shot across the bow of the status quo immaginable !!!

I hope Jane will send this message. Progressives stay home in order to force the Senate to change the fillibuster rule. Then we can get a GOOD health care bill.

Rule 22 of the Senate, governing filibusters, can be changed or eliminated by a simple majority according to the US Supreme Court in U.S. v. Ballin (1892) Senate rules call for 67 to change the cloture rule, but Democrats should be able to rewrite the rules since they control the Rules Committee. Rule 22 can go out the door all together or be modified. Republicans under Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist threatened to blow up the filibuster in 2005 with far fewer numbers. What are Democrats waiting for?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jamie-court/call-to-change-senates-fi_b_394451.html

There is nothing magical about 2 weeks imo.

Pass good health care reform with a simple majority.

Progressives stay home. Force the President and others to take us seriously.

Jane, I know it would be hard to say don’t vote for Coakley. It’s an anathema to all of us probably posting here.

I’m not sure I could even do it. That said, it would make a difference imo.

Why not make the message as strong as possible and offer to actually work against the candidate if they do not comply with the stated wishes of the American people ? A show of strength would strike terror into the democrats assumption of the lesser of two evils vote .
Symbolism is very important and will play to the public , on both sides of the aisle ,like a crescendo !

Actually I’m not proposing Jane does this by herself . I’m proposing a full court press .All 50 states ,newspapers, internet , e mails , representatives phones and by every disaffected progressive who hears the call .
AFTER A LAST CHANCE TO DO THE RIGHT THING BY THE PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS !

What this poll strongly suggests is, when coupled with the very well stated push for EQUITABLE HealthCare Reform by Jane & team, is our elected Dems & President DO NOT BELIEVE PROGRESSIVES will abandon the party come election time. They just do NOT believe how upset their old game politics (sell ou to the highest bidder) have made us. I hate everything Scott Brown stands for but donated TWICE to his campaign. I know of no other way to make the point – I will no longer tolerate our elected Dems stooping to the same corporate giveaways as their opponents. Instead of “being loyal” I’m going to do my best to see they all lose their jobs asap. Shame on them, shame on them all!

Indeed you may. IRV and Fusion voting are great ideas.

It would be nice to see the Dems and the Repubs are the two minority parties in the next 20 years.

Progressives must offer an ultimatum NOW within the next few hours to the democratic establishment about the race in Massachusetts ! If Jane gets on board we have a spokesperson !!!

A show of power is what the progressive movement needs to make waves and the symbolic value of Kennedy’s seat popular discontent plus the democratic candidate trailing slightly are all made to order .

This is a one time opportunity !

Please hear me !
Now is the time !!!
Kennedy’s seat is at the heart of the democratic establishment and a threat , one which could actually be accomplished ,could very well make the house take stock .
We say jump …. they ask how high ! Coakley is not a progressive and the democrats are , according to all the polls, doing themselves in for the Nov. elections !

Well, let’s see. In a letter from my insurance company today, I found out that my monthly premium is increasing from $329 to $478, a 45% jump. This is for a HIPAA plan, which I *thought* meant that it was under some sort of cost control.

So, how about this for a priority: Make sure that premiums can’t jump that much that fast. Is it crazy to think that’s even possible?

She ran an awful campaign, that’s for sure.

I am all for a Progressive revolution. If the Progressives in MA sit home, instead of buying all the DLC propaganda, this country will be better off for it imo.

It will send the message we are not voting any longer until something changes.

The only exception being primaries against targeted Democrats like Lincoln, Landrieu, Nelson, Bayh et al.

This bs 60 vote majority vote has got to go.

Staying home will send a message but offering to actively effect the outcome unless demands are met would send a far greater message !

Thsi needs to be done like a military campaign ! Take no prisoners ! The symbolism of such an event would be staggering !

I like IRV. People I’ve mentioned it to seem skeptical, but I think it would improve the chances of progressives. I had never heard of fusion voting. Interesting idea.

Sometimes I think it might be a good idea to mix the seating up in the House and Senate instead of dividing it by party. Maybe even make any mention of party within the chambers taboo. It would probably slow down business though, and we know they don’t need any help with that. The whole concept of parties often seems more destructive than helpful, especially when we just divide into halves.

same here, Cujo. Also I was not sure about the national exchange.

I agree with you. Come up with a plan.

Very little time now. Start posting this opinion on other sites.

People just need to think. Change doesn’t come without a price.

Jane I just read the Huffpost piece about what’s happening in Mass. I find it interesting that everytime the Dem base stays home and foreshadowing massive losses that the White House blames the candidate as running a weak campaign.

Mass. has had the reform that Obama is pushing and they know that its unaffordable with 21% of the population getting hardship waivers. The base feel betrayed by Jettisoning of the PO and inclusion of the mandate. Yet noone in the WH will admit that they cause the political situation by torpedoing the the PO. AT least they can’t blame this on the hatred of incumbents issues.

Why are these folks afraid of looking in the mirror? Obama is so afraid of taking responsibility for the potential drubbing in Mass. that he wanted to keep away and its only by intense lobbying that he has agreed to spend a few hours there.

Too bad they don’t understand that PO would turn things around politically and energize the base. I thought Obama was regarded as politically astute. Maybe the plan is to attached it to a bill after the bigger package is passed just intime for the November election, one can only hope these guys wake up and smell the demoralization of the democratic base.

The plan is easy , but without a high profile spokesperson impossible to implement .

Agree we need a spokesperson.

Especially with the short period of time.

We need FDL and Jane or Arianna Huffington or someone with popular clout and viewer recognition that has the connections to begin the process.

You are correct imo. The public option would turn everything around even for Harry Reid.

They just don’t get it though.

If Coakley loses, they may finally get it.

I posted my first plea on this thread one minute after Jane posted @ 31 . Ocean and cujo both appear on the other thread where the idea was first conceived moments later but jane is still a mystery .I have posted this plea on a number of other threads here and received some support from other bloggers but without the spokesperson it’s a best half hearted .

This needs to be framed as a threat and lacking a public figure , it can’t be done in the time available .

Well maybe we will hear something back from Jane.

A few well written posts could be used on both the blogosphere and in the newspapers , perhaps organizations like move on could help disseminate the message via their mailing lists .
TV appearances could be hastily put together because the topic isn’t very difficult to explain , we’ve been talking about most of it for months .
Jane please say yes or no .I’ve been blogging since I woke up this morning and fatique is getting the better of me , can I hand off the baton for a while ?
Wthout your help it’s wasted energy anyway .

The world has a lot going on. If HCR fails this time it will require Dems to have 60+ seats to try again. When would that happen? Maybe never.

Coakley for Massachussetts. Coakley for HCR NOW…or never.

Jane, your poll looks great, but I’m waiting to see what Rasmussen has to say. /s

ROFLMAO

Actually the 60th vote is symbolic as well !

Corporate Dems. don’t care about the party.

A PUBLIC OPTION DEMAND FROM THE HOUSE OR THE LOSS OF KENNEDY’S SEAT IN THE SENATE , THE DEMOCRATS SUPER MAJORITY IN CONGRESS AND OBAMA’S HEALTHCARE REFORM ALL IN ONE FELL SWOOP !

THIS IS A ONCE IN A LIFETIME OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PROGRESSIVE MOVEMENT !!!

please no typing comments in all caps — it is difficult to read

With respect, you are wrong.

The Senate fillibuster rule could be changed.

Your insurance premium is getting close to a so-called Cadillac plan. I bet it doesn’t feel like one.

Filling out last night’s survey was a feel-good exercise. It is obvious by the results, that we must choose targets and come up with a strategy.

Knocking Coakley out seems like a focused activity that promises high visibility to our cause.

I see GREAT merit in what you just said . . . .

Then we need to regroup plan and attack . It may be possible to make this high profile without a well known spokesperson . So thayt stratedgey remains a possibliltiy .
The power in Washington is very vulnerable for the next few days .

There’s only ONE thing wrong with all this kind of thinking, and believe me, I’d like to believe we progs have SOME leverage on the system, somehow. But I don’t think we do, yet.

What’s wrong with the idea?

The Dems and Pubs are both fully paid for and bought by corporate feudalists.

Corporate feudalists own the country, military, all three houses of governence.

They own the media, they control the communications.

If the Pubs win in MA, it won’t matter in HCR. It will only force the Dem’s to water it down more, to get yet one more vote . . .

And Reid et al, along with Pelosi et al, and the WH and Obama/Rhama are all bought off.

It don’t matter WHO rules the roost, we can boycott Dem’s all day long, and we’ll still get corporate feudalism legislated night and day, with or without the Dem’s.

So, what I’m saying is, the Dem’s can’t BE leveraged, or forced, to do better change.

They don’t care if they are in the WH, or the Congressional Majority, they all get paid by the corporations, they all get their cuts of the spoils.

So hoping Brown wins to impact the HCR bill voting, and hope for a more positive final bill, it’s not translatable.

I don’t have any answers . . . . it all seems to suck . . . .

But I LIKE the idea of pressing Coakley for 4 and a half days to see if we CAN shake some reform out of the WH and both chambers of Congress . . . . I DON’T like giving the seat up to Brown.

Ok, yer losing any cred ya had here, calm down wild eyed patriot . . . that musket ain’t loaded, is it.

Spoken like a true insider of the Insurance/Provider Industry.

And I gotta ask, is Freeman and that Jones fella having a personal conversation in here, or do they work for the same company you do?

Hey man ,no pain , no gain .

And no no not at all your invited ….. need a little gunpowder ?

I enjoyed seeing so many responses to last night’s poll. Polling companies make judgments on the opinions of fewer people; yes, I know almost all respondents were progressives. We are American citizens, but we live in Canada. I have secondary insurance provided by NC since I retired from that state. To keep my wife on my insurance, I had to pay almost $500 per month (We dropped the coverage). In the states, our medications cost over $200 per month: In Canada, most drugs cost $15 per month. From our experience, single payer, universal coverage, is the only moral way to provide excellent health care to a large population. But Obama and friends are paid by corporations to do as they are instructed by their pay-masters. Coakley is controlled by the same pay-masters.

I think if we got public option, then there should be a mandate.
As it is now, it’s a huge giveaway to insurance just like the bailouts to bankers.
Perhaps we should also ask about medicare for all. I think the numbers would be even higher even in general population.
With the number of people who die for lack of insurance, why couldn’t that be added to the bill so if you don’t have insurance because you lost your job or no insurance company will take you (affordable) then you can join medicare.
Is there anyway to make this into a legal case. People die – 18,000 per year. That is definitely denial of life and liberty and no happiness. If private insurance is the only option and they deny you due to pre-existing condition, or make it unaffordable.

Without a public option, a mandate to buy insurance (everyone is not going to be charged the same without regard to age, sex, etc.) and backed by the full force of the IRS, is taxation without representation. This oughta be illegal. IRS collecting taxes for private corporations.
It should be set up like social security. Everyone pays a percentage of their income. 1 plan for all.
Single payer is the only thing that makes sense.

I agree, am I the only one that saw this is just like the Mass plan? They don’t like it either, its not what they thought it would be. The best thing to do and we’ll be back in 20 years to try it again unless we do it now, is Single Payer.

I don’t buy the super majority either, you only need to beat a Republican fillabuster and you don’t need 60 votes, you just need 1 more vote than they have.

This majority has not done the heavy lifting, they refuse too.

This is because the Progressive only number about 40 in the Senate, that means there in Party of the Big Tent, we have some fools that rather do the bidding for a few and not the many.

I am not scared we’ll loose a seat in Mass, it would send a message to the WH that the “bass” ain’t playing with his ass. We want REFORM that’s what we put you in office for, now do it.

Au contraire, Mademoiselle. They all like a good martini. ;)

Your post makes no sense.

First, imply that MarkH works for the health care industry because he wants to pass the current health care reform.

Then you ask if Freeman and I work for MarkH’s same company. Clearly from my posting, I am not for passing the current health care reform. I want a public option and deletion of the antitrust provision for health care providers to provide competition.

I suggest, you shouldn’t make it personal on here, just because you don’t agree with someone’s position.