Just like magic if you read many of the headlines, Governor Christie "just found money" to enable scrapping his plan to make seniors pay more for prescription drugs. I have a few deep thoughts regarding this latest development.
I can't help but wonder what the reaction would have been if Corzine was the Governor doing this. See a Democrat who changes from their original proposal is a Pandering Flip Flopper. But as we've seen with the coverage of this one, a Republican who does this is a Course Changer.
Oh and about that found money, it's actually savings from the dreaded healthcare plan that was recently passed. Senator Lautenberg reminded people about that:
"Today we see how President Obama's health care reform law is already working to deliver tangible benefits for New Jersey's seniors," stated Lautenberg. "Thanks to the health care reform law, New Jersey's seniors will be shielded from the budget ax that threatened to make their prescription drugs more expensive and less accessible. The new health care reform law will soon bring even more benefits to millions of New Jerseyans."
You know, the new awful healthcare law that the right wing wants Christie to join a lawsuit to repeal? The one that Christie hasn't said he won't join yet, but is willing to take the benefits of? Yeah, that one. Maybe someone in the media could ask him why he isn't ruling out joining suit to overturn the healthcare law at the same time he's taking the benefits of the law to score political points.
Politics I say? What else do you call "finding the money" right before you speak to a group of seniors and a day before you meet with the AARP. But Jay Webber will accuse of the Democrats of playing politics. Move along, no politics to see here.
Updated 3:51pm to include statements by Sen. Frank Lautenberg and NJDSC Chair John Wisniewski.
Following is text of Democratic leaders' response to Gov. Christie's budget fix announcement today that he would eliminate his proposed cuts to state pharmaceutical programs for seniors and the disabled.
(For another perspective on this, here's a diary by Bill Orr.) Senate President Stephen M. Sweeney (D-Gloucester/Cumberland/Salem)
The Governor may be applauded for listening to the voices of senior citizens from across New Jersey, but this in no way ends the very important debate the Senate will still take up tomorrow.
For someone who famously criticized Trenton for its Alice In Wonderland budgets, the Governor has apparently been staring into the same looking glass. While Democrats have identified a solid revenue source to protect our elderly and disabled, the Governor is cobbling together a mishmash of what-ifs and maybes from the federal government and the pharmaceutical industry.
Countless seniors are still facing property tax increases that threaten to drive them from their homes while the richest New Jerseyans are still going to get a massive income tax cut. Just like the Queen of Hearts, this budget still yells 'Off with their heads!' to too many.
The Governor may be trying to write a new chapter, but it still reads like the same old story.
Assembly Speaker Sheila Y. Oliver (D-Essex/Passaic)
It's about time Gov. Christie started coming around to our point of view on protecting senior citizens, and we welcome him to this discussion sparked by the Democratic Legislature.
The governor's plan still shoves at least a $1,295 property tax increase onto senior and disabled residents, and that's unacceptable.
We'll evaluate the governor's proposal, but our plan provides the means through true shared sacrifice to ensure senior citizens get the prescription drug help and property tax relief they need. We will move forward with it as planned to guarantee property tax and prescription drug help is on the way to our most vulnerable residents.
Senate Majority Leader Barbara Buono (D-Middlesex)
I am pleased that Governor Christie reversed his course in response to mounting pressure from the Legislature to restore cuts to prescription drug programs for seniors. There is so much need as a result of these unprecedented economic times.
However, I seriously question the likelihood we will achieve the savings the Governor predicts will pay for this restoration.
The issue remains why half-a-percent, or 16,000 taxpayers, who earn over a million dollars shouldn't be made to sacrifice a little so that others don't have to sacrifice so much.
Assembly Majority Leader Joseph Cryan (D-Union)
While I'm pleased to see the governor begin moving toward the Democratic plan to protect senior citizens, I see no reason for anyone to trust this new plan on face value. This is, after all, a governor who has so far only kept one campaign promise - protecting a tax cut for the rich.
The governor's latest plan still pushes a massive property tax increase onto seniors and is based on questionable assumptions.
Our plan guarantees property tax relief and health care assistance for senior citizens while ensuring everyone joins in the shared sacrifice. I look forward to its passage and hope the governor continues to move in our direction to provide senior citizens with reliable prescription drug and property tax relief.
Senator Frank Lautenberg
Today we see how President Obama's health care reform law is already working to deliver tangible benefits for New Jersey's seniors. Thanks to the health care reform law, New Jersey's seniors will be shielded from the budget ax that threatened to make their prescription drugs more expensive and less accessible. The new health care reform law will soon bring even more benefits to millions of New Jerseyans.
Under the new Health Care Reform law, people with pre-existing conditions can no longer be denied coverage by an insurer, and insurance companies will no longer be able to drop people's coverage when they get sick and need it most. In addition, the law will create a Health Insurance Exchange to provide people who don't receive coverage through their employment to choose among affordable health care plans. It will make health insurance policies more affordable and improve access to quality, affordable health care for children and vulnerable populations. The new health care reform law also strengthens Medicare by phasing out the prescription drug coverage "donut hole," and extending the solvency of the Medicare Trust Fund. Starting June 15, 2010, seniors who reach the Medicare prescription drug coverage gap or "donut hole" will receive $250 payments to assist them with their drug costs.
NJDSC Chair John Wisniewski
I applaud Governor Christie for finally recognizing that his warped vision of shared sacrifice, when applied to our older residents, would have forced many of them to do without important medicine that enhance and preserve their quality of life. Today Chris Christie, bowing to pressure from Democrats, announced he was reversing course on huge cost increases for seniors in New Jersey's PAAD program. I hope instead of trying to act like a heroic convert, he thanks who is truly responsible for the 'found money'. Most of the funding cited by his office today comes as a result of the passage of the historic Health Care Reform passed by Democrats in Congress and signed by President Obama.
So while he refuses to stand up to his many Republican colleagues in the legislature pushing him to sue the federal government to stop health care reform, he has no problem taking credit for the benefits from the bill."
Hopefully Governor Christie will also come around on our plan to restore property tax rebates to hundreds of thousands of senior and disabled homeowners.
They'll complain about how the state has no money and then at the same time want us to waste resources suing over the recently passed healthcare reform law. Now 17 Republican legislators have joined the call of the tea partiers to have the state join in on the legal challenge. Here is the list:
Assemblyman John Amodeo (R-02)
Assemblywoman Mary Pat Angelini (R-11)
Senator Anthony Bucco (R-25)
Assemblyman Michael Patrick Carroll (R-25)
Assemblyman Gary Chiusano (R-24)
Assemblyman John DiMaio (R-23)
Senator Michael Doherty (R-23)
Senator Sean Kean (R-11)
Assemblywoman Alison Littell McHose (R-24)
Senator Steve Oroho (R-24)
Senator Kevin O'Toole (R-40)
Assemblyman Erik Peterson (R-23)
Assemblyman Vincent Polistina (R-2)
Assemblyman David Rible (R-11)
Assemblyman Scott Rumana (R-40)
Assemblyman Robert Schroeder (R-39)
Assemblywoman Charlotte Vandervalk (R-39)
Christie spokesman Michael Drewniak said the governor is still weighing whether to join the lawsuit and examining how the federal legislation will impact insured and non-insured people in New Jersey.
We will see whether Christie stands up to the right wing of his party or caves. Some on the right have speculated that Christie chose the fight with the supreme court in order to tamp down the disapproval with him not joining the healthcare lawsuit or the movement to recall Senator Menendez. Jim Whelan was the only Democrat who responded saying he opposed the lawsuit and the Justice Department has begun offering their response to the challenge.
Senator Lautenberg took to the floor of the Senate to challenge his colleagues to put their money where their mouth is and drop their own health insurance coverage if they can't bring themselves to give it to others. Here's the video:
Many Americans were celebrating over the last few days now that healthcare reform is finally the law. While there was a lot of good in this bill, it was far from perfect. Because of the Senate caving into demanding corporate "Democratic" senators like Ben Nelson (D-NE) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) the public option was stripped out of the Senate bill, and is not law. Many such as myself think that the public option is the best way to keep insurance companies honest and stop them from the price gouging they are so well known for
Fortunately, many of the things that were stripped out of the Senate bill have been introduced as separate legislation. A bill that would remove the antitrust exemption currently enjoyed by the health insurance industry (the only other industry that enjoys this is major league baseball) passed the House ovewhelmingly with bipartisan support. Currently it is stalled in the Senate along with so many other bills.
THe public option currently has over 51 senators that would support resurrecting it via reconciliation. Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL), known for calling out his Republican colleagues on their BS and his spine, recently introduced the public option in the House as a separate bill. The 4 page bill (hey Republicans, don't complain about the length of this one), HR 4789, would open Medicare to anyone who wishes to buy into it, regardless of age. It does not create a separate program, just expands an existing and popular government program. I believe this bill is the solution to resurrect the public option and control insurance costs.
In less than two weeks, Grayson's bill has already gotten 80 cosponsors. Currently, the only New Jersey Congressmen who have signed on are Rush Holt and Donald Payne. By emailing, tweeting, Facebooking, calling, and writing your rep encouraging him (I only use this term because New Jersey has no women in Congress) to sign onto Grayson's bill as a cosponsor, we take the next step forward to making health care more affordable for all Americans.
As we see healthcare reform getting passed, I am reminded that this bill is pretty much worse than nothing. With that, I am recommending that New Jersey pass a single-payer healthcare bill, based somewhat on Pennsylvania's SB400/HR1660 and the federal HR676.
This bill would cover every New Jersey resident with a low-cost, not for profit, single payer plan which would cover all necessary medical (physical and mental health) treatment, including transition therapy. Not covered would be unnecessary plastic surgery.
The baseline funding methods (with premiums and deductibles no longer an issue, NJans will have more money in their pockets) would be as follows:
A new 10% payroll tax (5% employee, 5% employer)
15% of all revenues for the income tax
Any other funding sources, whether from state general fund or federal grants
In addition to these stable revenue sources, I propose that a supplemental 8% sales tax be imposed on these following items:
Soda
Candy
Fried Fast Food
Cigarettes
Cars that are high polluters
and others
The reasoning behind this supplemental sales tax is simple, if people consume these items less, there will be less revenues, but less health problems. If people consume these items more, there would be more revenues, but more health problems. This provides a method in which people can take responsibility for their own health within a universal health system.
All monies from these funding sources should be put into a trust fund in which the funds within are untouchable save for actual medicare care and the small administrative costs that come with it. This trust fund should be budgeted separately, not unlike the Social Security Trust Fund, to prevent raids.
Furthermore, with the establishment of this system, we can eliminate the need for Medicaid.
You can peruse the 27 page proposal for PA here, this is to be used as a baseline for my proposed system:
Of course, we have Christie in office, so barring a recall, choking on a big Mac, or being impeached, we will prob not see this for another four years. But that doesn't mean its not important!!!
It is imperative that NJ take the lead on this issue
While Republicans try to say there is no downside to the tactics they utilized in the healthcare debate, Senator Menendez and the Democrats believe that when people see the talk doesn't measure up, there will be consequences:
"When this bill goes into effect, and none of the things Republicans warned about begin to happen - none of the death panels, none of the government takeover, none of the socialism - Republicans will have no credibility," Mr. Menendez said.
They may not have any credibility, but that doesn't seem like it will stop them from jumping up and down like their hair is on fire trying to repeal the bill. Even if they could actually pass legislation to repeal healthcare, wouldn't the President just veto it? And what kind of message and strategy is running on bringing back pre-existing conditions?
After the initial amusement of watching Congressman Garrett get schooled by Rep. Weiner for citing a memo that was proven to be a hoax, more information started to trickle out about just when the memo was determined to be fake - or at least the distinct possibility that it was not real. And with that, I started to wonder if Garrett knowingly cited a fraudulent memo on the House floor - or if he should have known and was irresponsible in his actions.
I'll look at two things in this post: (1) Garrett's past history of being deceitful with his constituents on healthcare and (2) the timeline of events on Friday leading up to his House floor speech.
For starters, Garrett's own website cites a study by "The Lewin Group", which is supposed to show just how evil health care reform is and how bad it is for the American public. Garrett also cites The Lewin Group in other pieces as "proof" of his views. What Garrett fails to mention is that The Lewin Group is WHOLLY-OWNED by United HealthGroup, so he is citing the insurance industry for his support without disclaiming that there is a tremendous conflict of interest, at best.
Garrett also disingenuously referred to the health care bill as "having bipartisan opposition", yet the Medicare Part D bill in 2003 (which he voted for) was (1) grossly and willfully underestimated in terms of cost; (2) was a giveaway to big Pharma (noting that Garrett was one of a handful to vote for allowing insurance companies to continue collusion and price fixing a few weeks ago) and (3) had the vote kept open for HOURS while deals were cut to pass by a single vote - and had bipartisan opposition.
So, to say the least, there is a history of him being deceptive and taking the moral low road in order to push his personal or political agenda.
12:30PM - Republicans first "learned about" the memo. Interestingly, some Republican offices did nothing with this information since the origin could not be verified;
12:30PM Democratic Senate offices started receiving inquiries as to whether the claims were true (not whether the memo was real or fake though);
12:45PM - Politico story posted about the memo (also posted on right wing sites like Washington Times and Breitbart). Picked up by Drudge;
1PM - Rep. Boehner's office sent the memo to reporters, without verifying whether it was fake;
2:40PM - After Democrats verify memo didn't come from any offices, they pushed back on it;
Mid afternoon - The Atlantic posts apology for posting the fake memo, Politico takes down the memo and The Hill tweets that it opted against posting the memo;
3:40 PM - Press conference with Eric Cantor and other Republican leaders indicating they knew the memo was fake but dismissed its importance (after pushing it hard all afternoon);
5:15PM - Scott Garrett makes remarks on House floor
Now, Garrett's excuse was that it was distributed by a "reputable Capitol Hill newspaper" and he didn't know it was retracted. But neither Politico nor Washington Times would have issued this in a print version, so he had to have received it online. And with his House colleagues/leadership all knowing a few hours earlier that this was at a minimum, not necessarily a real memo (not to mention the fact that there was no name and nobody could source the memo), it is incredibly irresponsible for him to cite something that could not be verified, was only received electronically, was taken down and refuted by numerous sources throughout Washington at various points throughout the day, and Garrett - someone with a history of bending or cherrypicking his facts to suit his agenda "didn't know" about the retraction, the updates on every blog and publication, the press conference by his own caucus or even the hint that this memo was fraudulent?
A standard talking point of the Republicans throughout this healthcare debate is that the Democrats are trying to propose a government takeover. The foolishness of that contention aside, Congressman Rush Holt reminds us what a real government takeover looks like, invoking memories to the Terry Schiavo case:
To know what a real government takeover looks like, one should revisit that resolution. That midnight vote was a grotesque legislative travesty. For 215 years it had been a solid principle of this country that Congress not get involved in life-and-death issues like the tragic case of Ms. Schiavo. Yet, on that Sunday -- Palm Sunday -- Congress broke with tradition and inserted its own judgment. On that Sunday, the Republican Congress sent the message that it knew better than families, doctors, and hospital chaplains.
To my friends on the other side of the aisle who repeatedly claim that Congress is passing a "government takeover" -- I kindly remind them that's their work, not ours. Our work expands private insurance while increasing choice and competition and protecting consumers from the worst abuses of the insurance industry and leaving medical decisions in the hands of doctors and their patients. We intend that patients, families, and doctors -- not the government, not insurance companies -- have control over health decisions.
See Republicans only seem to want government involved when they can use it as an instrument to advance their agenda. Healthcare for their constituents doesn't make it over that hurdle I guess.
Don't miss the pix after the jump. Promoted by Rosi
I posted the other day with an open invitation to Blue Jersey to a rally outside Congressman Frank Pallone's district office in Long Branch today. It was a beautiful day for a political rally, and in my opinion the rally was a success :-)
About 40 progressives and the Bus for Change showed up with signs. It was definitely a better turnout than the 27 who showed up in February demanding that Pallone be given a pink slip this November. We had one teabagger show up, and she proudly admitted that (unaware of the meaning of the term). She shouted at us and cars "we want the same health care Frank Pallone has" which is actually in the bill (that she wants to kill). Just shows how misinformed the teabaggers really are. After this thing passes, maybe she'll like it and realize what a moron she really was for opposing the legislation (and perhaps flip her vote but I doubt that).
Most of the cars driving by in the Democratic stronghold of Frank Pallone's hometown Long Branch were honking and waving their thumbs up supporting us. I just hope that they come out and vote in November.
We've written quite a bit over the past few days (and months) about soon-to-be one term Congressman John Adler's sticking his thumb in the eye of those who helped elect him - those who thought they were getting the Congressional version of John Adler the progressive State Senator and not someone who would look to sell out his supporters for the pipe dream of gaining any Republican support for his willingness to so frequently "prove his independence" from the Democratic Party.
As if there was some magic perfect bill that will suddenly fix everything. Aside from the fact that this letter looks a lot like the ones we see up here in the 5th District from Scott Garrett on just about everything - "I like it but there is something that I don't like so I have to vote no" - there are a couple of things worth noting.
It is pretty much universally accepted that one of the biggest issues with "the broken health care system" is the abuses by the insurance industry; whether it be retroactive denial of care or the "pre-existing condition" denials or the obscene jacking up of rates arbitrarily or the miles of red tape to get anything paid for. But while more than 10% of Adler's district is uninsured, he has been one of the health insurance industry's bestest friends, taking more than $400,000 from the health industry in his less than one term (compare to first term Republican Leonard Lance, who has taken almost 40% less than Adler). That total is also more than Sires, Smith, Garrett and Payne - and not all that much less than LoBiondo or Holt.
if they vote against it, then they're going to be voting against health care reform and they're going to be voting in favor of the status quo.
Interestingly, voting as a Republican for the status quo against Democratic bills is something Adler is very fond of, casting close to 100 votes in his less than one term against the Democratic Party.
Either Adler doesn't realize that this will (1) not endear him to his base as well as not gain him any votes from Republicans, or (2) realizes it but doesn't care. Neither is a good outcome, and we can bet to see former Congressman John Adler as an insurance industry or Wall Street lobbyist (or with a cushy job a la Harold Ford) come next January.
Today, on the House floor, my wonderful Representative and embarrassment to the state, Scott Garrett, read from a "memo" that was already discredited as fake earlier in the day. Rep. Anthony Weiner completely shredded Garrett's willingness to talk about fake memos as opposed to things like reducing the deficit or expanding health care or, as Weiner said so well - "we're here to solve the problems of the American people, not quote from fake memos".
Here it is, for your viewing pleasure:
But wait, there's more! Weiner and Garrett faced off on Good Day New York as well (although after watching this, he is also debating the Good Day host, who lobbed softball questions to Garrett and went hard at Weiner as well):
This is TODAY, at 2:30 in Long Branch. - - Promoted by Rosi
As anyone who has not been living under a rock knows, healthcare reform has been the hot button issue during most of President Obama's time in office. It is now closer than ever.
Many of us have dealt with the misinformed and industry funded opposition to reform that has showed up in large and small numbers at events throughout the country and gaining media attention. For too long, we have stood there silent and afraid to speak our mind. Now, our turn has arrived.
Congressman Frank Pallone (D-Long Branch) has been influential in this debate as chairman of the health subcommittee and has been working on healthcare for a long time. He is very aware of how his work on this bill has made him a prime target for the teabaggers. He and most members of Congress will tell anyone that the opposition to healthcare reform is more vocal than the support.
Join Monmouth Democracy for America, Progressive Democrats of America, Organizing for America, and the Bus for Change for a rally outside of Congressman Pallone's office at 504 Broadway in Long Branch on Saturday March 20 at 2:30 P.M. If he's in New Jersey, he will address the crowd. Whether he is in Washington or New Jersey, it is very important that he knows that we support him and this bill.
Bring friends and signs to show your support for the legislation (that is not perfect, but is a good step in the right direction when it comes to controlling rising health care costs and insuring 30 million additional Americans.)
The zig-zag progress of health care legislation through Congress has caused any number of Americans no small amount of agita. While the suffering over minute details can be enlightening, I suppose, it also shows how few of us understand how Congress work. Even the false outrage over reconciliation - is it an evil, backdoor to introduce unfavorable legislation or just another legislative step? - has shown us that Americans really have no concept as to how their government works.
And it seems as if the people running the government don't even know how it works. Some of the objections from various Congressional people are just political positioning. But some seem to totally miss the reason for what they are doing.
"Since June, I have consistently expressed my serious reservations about the House and Senate proposals," Adler said in a statement. "While the final bill takes positive steps to provide insurance coverage for working Americans, I am not satisfied that the final bill will reform our health care system and prevent excessive increases in premiums for families and small businesses."
Three members of Congress have switched from their no vote last time to a Yes on this bill. The CBO estimate today said that the bill would save $130 billion over the first 10 years and $1.2 trillion over the second decade. It is estimated to expand health insurance coverage to 32 million more Americans. Adler even talked about the many positive things the bill does in his explanation for why he was voting against, but said it doesn't meat all his goals. Sometimes you have to get some of what you want now in order to be able to eventually get everything later.
I helped elect John Adler partly because he ran on his support for healthcare. This isn't the bill many would want, but its the chance we have to move the ball forward. And instead, he's standing in opposition. I haven't understood the political or practical calculations of that stance all along, but that's apparently above my pay grade. This vote by my Congressman is disappointing to say the least. The only thing that could make it worse is if they fall one vote short of passage. I'll put the email he sent to supporters about his decision below the fold.
Congressman Adler has been a continued focus for healthcare watchers over whether he would give his support to the legislation making its way through Congress. Meeting with the Courier Post, he said this:
"I would vote against the Senate bill," he said while meeting with the editors of the (Cherry Hill) Courier-Post. "The Senate bill has different fundamental flaws and some of the same fundamental flaws that the House bill had."
He left open the possibility of supporting the bill that would make fixes to the Senate bill if it includes more cost-containment measures.
I don't really know what cost containments they would add at this point to satisfy him and get his vote. But he may not get a chance to vote on the Senate bill depending on how things proceed:
Under the procedure, known as a "self-executing rule" or a "deem and pass," the House would adopt a rule for a vote on a package of fixes to the Senate health-care bill, with passage signifying that lawmakers "deem" the underlying bill to be passed.
Labor and progressive leaders are threatening House Democrats who oppose health care legislation with potentially destructive third party challenges in November.
The Republicans are going to attack him no matter what he does or how he votes. They'll attack him because he's a Democrat and tie him to what the leadership did to get the bill passed that he may ultimately vote against. While some reports have him as a solid no, he's still leaving the door open to something according to his comments, so you should call and let him know what you think. Yesterday Adler could look out his window and see those opposing the bill while today he can see the Citizen Action rally in favor of it. If you want to call and let him know your opinion, numbers are:
Poor Scott Garrett. He was complaining the other day on the Dylan Ratigan show with Ed Shultz show that the President isn't reaching out to him and that Republicans have ideas that are being ignored. I guess he's not paying attention to the ideas that have been incorporated into the Presidents proposal. The White House even put out a list of the ideas they have included. That didn't matter for Garrett as he said Obama hasn't been genuine and has just talked down their ideas. Then they moved onto talking about abortion, because what else will we talk about when it comes to healthcare. Garrett pointed to Conservative Democrats and Congressman Stupak as stumbling blocks for Speaker Pelosi:
Senator Bob Menendez appeared on MSNBC the other day with Savannah Guthrie and Chuck Todd for the Morning Rundown show. When asked about what his members will say to the argument that using reconciliation for healthcare is an end run, which it's not but the media continues to perpetuate, he said:
Look, no matter how hard we tried, no matter how hard the President tried, the Republicans just weren't serious about solving the problems of millions of Americans that get denied health insurance because they have a pre-existing condition, of tens of millions of Americans that have no insurance whatsoever, and all the rest of us who have insurance and the price keeps going up, even though we get denied more and more when we make a claim with insurance companies.
You can see the segment here:On the campaign side, Menendez talked about how the DSCC will be supporting Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas in the primary, who now has a challenge from a Progressive candidate. He said they always support incumbents, but don't broadcast their strategy of what they will do to help out. Lincoln turned around and started attacking the public option, voiced her opposition to cap and trade and painted Washington as children in her latest ad. While Washington may be acting like Children, Lincoln is one of the people throwing dirt in the sandbox.
.gif)
