DEMS ARE TRAITORS - Here's Why: 1-Pelo$i Fund Raiser @United Healthcare Lobbyist 9/24/09 2-Obama Will Pass Any Healthcare Bill: IIPPEA 3-Baucu$/Conrad/Lincoln/Nelson/Carper Defeat Option Amendments

DEMS ARE

TRAITORS –

Here’s Why:

1-Pelo$i Fund Raiser

@United Healthcare

Lobbyist 9/24/09

2-Obama Willing To

Pass Anything

Called Healthcare:

IIPPEA

3-Baucu$/Conrad

/Lincoln/Nelson

/Carper Defeat

Senate Finance

Committee

Public Option

Amendments

Tabacco: There is an office building fire in your city, threatening the lives of everyone with whom you work. The company you work for in this building is Private Capitalism, Inc. It is owned by Simon Legre I, who signs your paycheck, and his son, Simon Legre II, who makes out the checks. Both are in the burning building with you and the other non-related employees. There are 20 other “employees” including you. Your main business is offshore in FairTaxLand where all corporate records are kept.

The rest of the gang are all nice people, whom you like and admire and have worked with for many years.

Through some miracle, you commandeered a scaffolding, used to wash the windows, however there is only room for three persons. Those, not on that scaffolding, will surely perish!

Now, which two of the others do you save?

And your answer is: ? and ?

Then we have Nancy Pelosi, Democratic Speaker of the House, who had a fundraiser on September 24th at the home of Steve Elmendorf, Lobbyist for United Healthcare @2301 Connecticut Avenue NW, DC, Apt 7B, and arranged by the DCCC (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee).

We also have Max Baucus, Democratic chair of the Senate Finance Committee, who has raked in about $4 million from the insurance lobbies over the past few years.

Then we have President Obama, who originally favored Single-Payer, then Public Option, then Public Option With A Trigger Mechanism, then Public Option For Uninsurables, and now he can make do without it altogether. I am positive the President wants a lot more than his name on legislation bearing the title “Health Care Reform”! Is Obama just backpedaling as fast as he can, or were these retrenchments part of his original “COMPROMISE” with Big Insurance & Big Pharma?

Will Pelosi, Baucus & Obama save you the Public with a serious Public Option, which will lower medical insurance costs for everyone as Single-Payer Medicare does for Seniors while drastically reducing insurance company healthcare profits, or will they save the Insurance Companies and their Lobbyists, who sign their checks, by denying you the Public a Public Option?

The options are clear and mutually exclusive. It’s a simple problem, which requires little thought and virtually the same answer as above.

And your answer is: SEE “HYPOTHETICAL” ABOVE!

 
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/30/insurance_industry_whistleblower_wendell_potter_blasts

September 30, 2009

Insurance Industry Whistleblower Wendell Potter Blasts Senate Panel Rejection of Public Insurance Option

Efforts to create a government-run health insurance plan were dealt a setback Tuesday after the Senate Finance Committee rejected a pair of amendments to create a public option. Both amendments were defeated when a group of Democrats, including Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus, joined with Republicans to oppose the public option. We speak with Wendell Potter, the former chief spokesperson at CIGNA, one of the nation’s largest private insurers, and now one of the health insurance industry’s most prominent whistleblowers. [includes rush transcript]

Real Video Stream

Real Audio Stream

MP3 Download

Guest:
Wendell Potter, For twenty years he was a former executive at CIGNA and Humana corporations, among the nation’s largest health insurers. Last year he left his job as head of communications for CIGNA. He is now Senior Fellow on Health Care for the Center for Media and Democracy. Potter testified last month on the health insurance industry at a Senate committee hearing.

Rush Transcript
This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution.
Donate - $25, $50, $100, More...

AMY GOODMAN: Efforts to create a government-run health insurance plan were dealt a setback Tuesday after the Senate Finance Committee rejected a pair of amendments to create a public option. Both amendments were defeated when a group of Democrats, including Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus, joined with Republicans to oppose the PUBLIC-OPTION. Supporters of the public-option say a government plan is needed to help keep private insurance plans honest.

Baucus voted against both amendments, as did Democrats Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Kent Conrad of North Dakota. Democratic Senators Bill Nelson of Florida and Tom Carper of Delaware voted against one of the public option amendments (Rockefeller's) but supported the other (Schumer's).

During Tuesday’s debate, committee chair Max Baucus of Montana defended his vote.

      SEN. MAX BAUCUS: As I’ve said before, I see a lot to like in a public option. There’s a lot here. I included, for example, a public option in the white paper that I released last year. And the public option would help to hold insurance companies’ feet to the fire. I don’t think there’s much doubt about that.

      But my first job is to get this bill across the finish line. There’s a lot in this bill that will reform the insurance market. There’s a lot in this bill that will control costs. And there’s a lot in this bill that would expand coverage to millions of Americans. Those things have to be my priority, and thus I’ll have to vote no today on this amendment.***
Tabacco: That 4-Million Dollar$ Baucu$ got from the Insurance Industry guarantees that bill will be in effect the “Insurance Industry Profit Protection And Enhancement Act” (IIPPEA).

Therefore NO INSURANCE REFORM is better than IIPPEA! IIPPEA guarantees more profits for PRIVATE INSURANCE and little else. Why would we want to support HIGH PREMIUMS with our own TAX DOLLAR$! IIPPEA is another BAILOUT – but this time it benefits an Industry that doesn’t need it!

AMY GOODMAN: Senator Max Baucus has been widely criticized for his close ties to the healthcare and insurance industry. The Montana Democrat has collected over $4 million from the healthcare industry throughout his career. His chief health adviser, Elizabeth Fowler, is a former executive for the insurance giant WellPoint. His previous chief health adviser, Michelle Easton, now lobbies for WellPoint.

To talk more about the Senate Finance Committee vote, we’re joined by Wendell Potter, former top executive at CIGNA, one of the nation’s largest for-profit health insurance companies. Up until last year, Wendell Potter served as head of corporate communications at CIGNA and as CIGNA’s chief corporate spokesperson. He also once headed communications at Humana, another large for-profit health insurer. Wendell Potter is now a fellow at the Center for Media and Democracy and has become one of the industry’s most prominent whistleblowers.

Wendell Potter, welcome again to Democracy Now! Your reaction to the Senate Finance Committee vote?

WENDELL POTTER: Well, thank you, Amy.

It was expected. I don’t think many people really expected that the Senate Finance Committee, led by Senator Max Baucus, would report out a bill that included the Public Option.

But I think the important thing to remember is that this is one of a number of committees that is working on this and reporting out bills and that, by no means, is the final answer on this. I’m very optimistic that the final bill that reaches the President’s desk will include a public option.
Tabacco: Baucus’ Bill is a SENATE BILL! And Tabacco is NOT “optimistic” because I don’t believe Obama wants any form of Public Option either! WAKE UP, FOLKS – DEMOCRATS HAVE SOLD US OUT ALREADY!

AMY GOODMAN: And what exactly do you think is going to accomplish this?

WENDELL POTTER: You know, I think it could happen in a number of different ways. The House legislation, I think, that is ultimately passed by the House will include a strong Public Option. And I know from talking to many members of Congress that there is very strong support in both the House and the Senate. And the bill that came out of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, which had been led by Senator Kennedy and now is being led by Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa, has a very strong public option.

This is the only committee, the Senate Finance Committee, that has rejected it at this point, and it’s the most conservative of the committees. I hope that Senator Baucus will come to realize that he is one of sixty Democrats who can get this bill through Congress and get it through the Senate and that he understands that his responsibility should be to persuade those other members of his party in the Senate that they should vote for this and the reasons why he gave, himself, why it’s important.

AMY GOODMAN: A new poll has come out by NPR, the Kaiser Family Foundation, the Harvard School of Public Health, that finds that, so far, the public feels profoundly shut out of the current overhaul debate. In fact, 71 percent told the Kaiser Family Foundation that Congress is paying too little attention to what people are saying. Relate that, people feeling shut out, with the Finance Committee vote against a Public Option.
Tabacco: See, even Democrats are NOT LISTENING! That’s because what you are saying they don’t want to hear. Even those, who look you in the eye and shake their heads in agreement, may just be paying us “head service”. “Money Talks; BS Walks!”

If you disobey the guy, who signs your check, you had best walk on tippytoes. Most of you think we the people are their employers. To those Optimists I say, “It’s folks like you, who make political demagoguery, deceit and malfeasance possible!” WAKE UP, NAÏVE PEOPLE!

WENDELL POTTER: You know, I think there’s a great correlation. I have been frustrated myself that there’s been very little attention, clearly, paid by Senator Baucus and other members of the committee to what the public really wants. There’s been a consistently strong support for the public option in every single poll that I’ve seen.

And you were mentioning earlier about the people on the senator’s staff who have either worked for previously, or currently, for WellPoint—speaks volumes, I think. I’ve been contacted by a lot of members of Congress, senators and members of the House, and I’ve had a chance to sit down and talk with them about some of the things that I know as a former insider, someone who’s worked twenty years in the industry. Not once have I heard from anyone on Senator Baucus’ team.

AMY GOODMAN: We’re talking to Wendell Potter. For twenty years he was an executive at CIGNA and Humana. Most importantly, in the years at CIGNA, he was their chief corporate spokesperson, but has left to blow the whistle on insurance companies. What about the role, Wendell Potter, of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners playing in the Baucus legislation?

WENDELL POTTER: Well, it’s an inappropriate role. I mean, the NAIC does good work. It comprises state insurance commissioners around the country, and it helps in setting rules. But it is proposing rules. State legislatures have to adopt the regulations that they follow. Giving them the inordinate authority that they have in the Baucus bill is just not appropriate. There needs to be much stronger state and federal regulation.

AMY GOODMAN: Talk about the role of these insurance companies in determining the legislation. You allude to the WellPoint execs working with Max Baucus, he himself getting millions of dollars from the health insurance industry. But exactly how it works? You were at CIGNA. What kind of control do these companies have over these men and women in Congress that they subsidize, that they bankroll?

WENDELL POTTER: You know, in many different ways. Through political action committees, part of my responsibilities—a person on my staff was responsible for administering the public—the political action committee, which doles out money that employees of companies contribute to be used by the company at its discretion to give to candidates and often to incumbents and candidates who have a history or promise to vote the way the company would want it to vote.

Through fundraisers, I, during my time in the industry, participated and paid for some of the members, actually, at luncheons, who are on the Senate Finance Committee, including some of the Democrats. That happens.

Relationships—hiring people who used to work for the senator as lobbyist or having people who have other close ties, including former members of the Congress, the Senate and the House, to do lobbying. It happens in many different ways.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to go back to yesterday’s debate in the Senate Finance Committee. Democratic Senator Charles Schumer, who introduced one of the public option amendments, questioned Republican Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa over his rejection of government-run health insurance option.

      SEN. CHARLES SCHUMER: I’d just like to know what you think of Medicare, a government-run program that’s far more government-run than what Senator Rockefeller has proposed? Do you think Medicare is a good program? Because most of the amendments on the other side have been aimed at preserving Medicare, a government-run program.

      SEN. CHUCK GRASSLEY: I think that Medicare is part of the social fabric of America, after forty years, just like Social Security is. And I don’t say that because it’s perfect. There’s a lot of things that need to be changed, and a lot of the things in this legislation are changing a lot of things that’s wrong with Medicare. And to say that I support it is not to say that it’s the best system that it can be.

      SEN. CHARLES SCHUMER: But it is a government-run plan, isn’t that right?

      SEN. CHUCK GRASSLEY: It is a government-run plan.

      SEN. CHARLES SCHUMER: Thank you.

      SEN. CHUCK GRASSLEY: And not—and the reason I say it’s part of the social fabric of America is there are private health insurance plans and retirement plans that are connected with Medicare and Social Security, and it’s not easy to undo a Medicare plan without also hurting a lot of private initiatives that are coupled with it. But that does not make it perfect. And I’ll bet, based upon fifty years of experience, if we had to do it over again, we’d do it other ways, even if it were a government-run plan.


The Medicare program is, as he said, part of the social fabric of this country and has been for many years. And it is a government-run plan that has meant a great deal of difference to a lot of people in this country, including certainly his constituents.

He has said that he didn’t think a public plan would be fair, compete fairly with insurance companies who—the private insurance industry. I’d like to ask him what is fair about the way that the insurance industries operate today, the companies that dump sick people when they need insurance most. What is fair about the way the insurance industry operates, Senator Grassley?

AMY GOODMAN: Forty-five million new customers, that’s what the private insurance companies can now look forward to, if a bill like what came out of the Senate Finance Committee moves forward with the mandate. Explain how they will make out and how important, how significant, how profitable this is for the for-profit companies.

WENDELL POTTER: Yeah, this is the first time that the insurance industry has really seen great opportunity in healthcare reform, with an individual mandate, which would require all of us to buy insurance if we are not eligible for a public, government-run program, which, fortunately, many people are. We would have to buy it in the private market from insurance companies, many of whom—many of which are for-profit companies. We would not have the option of buying or getting insurance through a government-run program like the public option would create.

So, not only would our premium dollars go into this—into the private insurance industry, but a lot of tax dollars would. Most people who don’t have insurance can’t afford it, and they wouldn’t be able to afford it after healthcare reform is passed without the government subsidizing their premiums. So billions and billions of taxpayers’ dollars will flow right into the treasuries of these big for-profit insurance companies. So we will be essentially paying a tax that will help support these insurance companies. It will be an enormous bailout of the health insurance industry.

AMY GOODMAN: Robert Reich, former secretary under Clinton, wrote, “The White House made a Faustian bargain with Big Pharma and Big Insurance, essentially scuttling both of these profit-squeezing mechanisms in return for [these] industries’ agreement not to oppose healthcare legislation with platoons of lobbyists and millions of dollars [of] TV ads, and Pharma’s willingness to cut drug prices by some $80 billion over the next ten years.” He says, “The White House promised these industries they’d come out way ahead—getting tens of millions of new customers who’d be buying private health insurance policies and thereby paying [for] an almost endless supply of new drugs. Healthcare reform would be, in short, a bonanza.”

Is that why, for example, your companies, Wendell Potter, and the other insurance companies have not launched the kind of massive campaign that they did against the ’93 and ’94 Clinton healthcare reform?

WENDELL POTTER: That’s right. And they have worked very closely with the White House. Some of the executives I know have been to the White House multiple times from the insurance industry. So they’ve been cutting their own deals, undoubtedly, or making their own assurances to the White House.

But the thing that the White House must not be taking into consideration is that while they will say things publicly, that they’re working as good faith partners for the—with the President and with Congress, behind the scenes they’re doing all that they can to cut the heart out of legislation, including the public option, and to preserve what would benefit them. That’s the way they operate. That’s what’s going on here.
Tabacco: I have NEWS for you – the Democrats are “doing all that they can to cut the heart out of legislation, including the public option, and to preserve what would benefit them”.

AMY GOODMAN: The importance of protest, Wendell Potter? You, as a former spokesperson for CIGNA, you working for the insurance companies—how they feel about folks who go out in the streets, like yesterday here in New York, seventeen people arrested at the New York offices of Aetna, the activists linking arms, chanting “people not profits, Medicare for all”? It’s the group Mobilization for Health Care. Let me play one of the clips from this protest. It’s Mark Milano, who spoke out after the seventeen arrests.

      MARK MILANO: We’re just here because of the many people we know who die because insurance companies put profits before people’s care. The myths about government death panels are a lie. The reality is that the deaths panels are the people who are paid every day to deny care to people. That’s their job. The more people they deny care to, the bigger bonuses they get. We are here to say that we will not rest until every person who needs care in America gets it, and the way to get that care for everyone is Medicare for all.


AMY GOODMAN: Medicare for all, Wendell Potter. Finally, lay out the course you see, after the Senate Finance Committee has just said no to a public option, of a public option, or perhaps—and I’d like your view on this—how you feel about single payer, Medicare for all?

WENDELL POTTER: I think next steps. It is necessary to get a bill out of the Senate Finance Committee, so that the Senate can ultimately vote on a bill. So will the House. And eventually there will be a bill that will go to a conference committee made up of Senate and House members, and they will come up with a bill that I hope will contain a public option, that will be approved by both the House and the Senate and on its way to the President, that will be a strong public option.

With regards to single payer, I think the President made a big blunder. I think he should have said, when he was inaugurated or soon—as soon as this debate began, that—you know, let’s look at what would be the best solution for this country. And why not consider a single-payer system? Let’s have that debate in Congress. It may not wind up that that is what this Congress enacts, but that debate should have happened. It will happen ultimately. And I think these protests are an important thing in our country. I think it will eventually take a social movement to get the kind of healthcare that we need in this country—healthcare reform.

AMY GOODMAN: Wendell Potter, thank you very much for being with us, former executive at CIGNA and Humana corporations. He was the chief corporate spokesperson for CIGNA. Now he’s a senior fellow on healthcare for the Center for Media and Democracy, joining us from Philadelphia. Thanks so much.

WENDELL POTTER: Thank you.

'The Rachel Maddow Show' for

Tuesday, September 29

updated 10:33 a.m. ET, Wed., Sept . 30, 2009

Guests: Sen. Charles Schumer, Howard Dean, Peter Dreier, Jeanne Devon, Kent Jones


RACHEL MADDOW, HOST:  Good evening, David.  Thanks very much for that.

DAVID SHUSTER, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT:  You‘re welcome.

MADDOW:  And thank you at home for staying with us for the next hour.

Chuck Schumer and Howard Dean are both joining us live this hour.  Plus, we‘ve got a Jackie Chan patriotic cameo appearance.  And we have a new chapter for you in our ongoing investigation into the truth about the lies about the community group ACORN.

That is all coming up over the course of this hour.

But, we begin tonight in the middle of the health care fight.  In the Senate Finance Committee, where there is no more “gang of six.”  There‘s no more faith-based mythical kumbaya bipartisan compromise.  Finally, the whole committee, 13 Democrats and 10 Republicans were able to vote today on whether Americans—at least some of us—will get the option of buying the same kind of health care that people with Medicare currently enjoy.

On the table today were two different amendments to put a public option in the bill: one from Senator Chuck Schumer of New York; one from Senator Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER (D), WEST VIRGINIA:  Seventy percent of the American people want this.  I know supporters of the status quo are saying that it‘s simply, again, a government takeover.  But let me set the record straight once and forever, this will be optional.  Nobody has to do this.  But I feel so strongly about it because it makes so much sense.  The people that I represent need this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  That was Senator Rockefeller, of course.

From the Republican side?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. CHARLES GRASSLEY ®, IOWA:  So, if you support single-payer health care, if you support longer waits, crowded emergency rooms, lower quality of care—in other words, the rationing or the denial of care or the delay of care that you get in single-payer systems, do you want that for America?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  Rationing, denial of care?  That‘s what actually being proposed?  Surely Democrats are not going to let that sort of litany of negative descriptions fly, are they?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. CHARLES SCHUMER (D), NEW YORK:  The main knock you‘ve made on Senator Rockefeller‘s amendment, I presume on mine, is it‘s government run.

GRASSLEY:  Yes.

SCHUMER:  Medicare is government-run, and most people like it very much.

GRASSLEY:  OK.  But if it—and it will come to a single-payer, and that denies the American people choice.  What‘s good now about Medicare Advantage is people in my state have 44 choices to go to, and you—and what you would be leading us to would be a system where there isn‘t choice.  Now, I want to give senior citizens choice.

SEN. BILL NELSON (D), FLORIDA:  Would the senator yield?  Would Senator Grassley yield?  Now, you just made a statement that it will lead to a single-payer.  How in the world do you make that leap?

GRASSLEY:  Well, you know, there are health economists around here, and I can only quote two.  One is Heritage (Conservative Think Tank) says that 83 million people are going to be forced out of their plan, employer plans, into public option.  And Lewin Group (Owned by Ingenix, which is owned by UnitedHealth) says 120 million.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  Who—who—who‘s that?  Heritage Foundation, right-wing think tank, and the Lewin Group—those are the research firms he can remember that have been supplying congressional Republicans with their information about why health reform is such a bad idea.

Conveniently, the Lewin Group is the health insurance industry.  The Lewin Group is run by a wholly owned subsidiary of United Healthcare Group, which is the second largest health insurance company in the country.

On the statements of the senator from United Health then, any other major arguments against the public option today?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN ENSIGN ®, NEVADA:  If you went home in August and you heard from your constituents the way that most of us heard from our constituents, the people are really afraid of the, quote, “public option.”  I put it in quotes because many of us on this side believe that it will lead to a government-run system, that it will lead to a single-payer.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  People are really afraid, says Senator Ensign.  In fact, 65 percent of Americans are so afraid of the public option that they said in the last “New York Times”/CBS poll that they would please like a public option, 65 percent.

You know, the least surprising news of the day today was that not a single Republican would vote in accordance with that 65 percent of the American people.  Not a single Republican would vote for the public option.  But that doesn‘t really legislatively matter, right?  After all, the committee has a Democratic majority and surely, Democrats will vote for a public option, won‘t they?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MAX BAUCUS (D), CHAIRMAN, FINANCE COMMITTEE:  My job is to put together a bill that gets 60 votes.  Now, I can count.  And no one has been able to show me how they can count up to 60 votes with a public option in the bill.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  Democratic Chairman Max Baucus says it‘s not that he doesn‘t want a public option.  He does.  He just won‘t vote for it unless everyone does.  Huh, leadership.

In all on the first public option choice, Senator Rockefeller‘s amendment, there were five Democrats who voted no.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CLERK:  Mr. Conrad?

SEN. KENT CONRAD (D), NORTH DAKOTA:  No.

CLERK:  Mr. Conrad, no.

Mrs. Lincoln?

SEN. BLANCHE LINCOLN (D), ARKANSAS:  No.

CLERK:  Mrs. Lincoln, no.

Mr. Nelson?

NELSON:  No.

CLERK:  Mr. Nelson, no.

Mr. Carper?

SEN. TOM CARPER (D), DELAWARE:  No.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Mr. Carper, no.  Mr. Chairman?

BAUCUS:  No.

CLERK:  Mr. Chairman, no.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  Thus the Rockefeller amendment in a majority Democratic committee dies, with only eight senators in favor and 15 voting against.

Senator Schumer, your turn.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCHUMER:  There‘s no question that the public option would improve this good bill.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  So what say you, Democrats, to the second public option choice of the day?  The Chuck Schumer amendment.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NELSON:  I will vote for the Schumer amendment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  Senator Nelson of Florida switches sides.  He‘s on board now.

Anybody else?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CLERK:  Mr. Carper?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Aye by proxy.

CLERK:  Senator Carper, aye by proxy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  Senator Carper of Delaware switches sides, too.

Will the remaining three anti-Rockefeller amendment Democrats now follow suit?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CLERK:  Mr. Conrad?

CONRAD:  No.

CLERK:  Mr. Conrad, no.

Mrs. Lincoln?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  No by proxy.

CLERK:  Mrs. Lincoln, no by proxy.

Mr. Chairman?

BAUCUS:  No.

CLERK:  Mr. Chairman votes no.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  No, no, and no.

And let me guess, Mr. Chairman, Senator Baucus, you voted against the Democratic amendment for an option you say you support, again, why, because?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BAUCUS:  I don‘t see a bill out of this committee with public option getting 60 votes, so I‘m constrained to vote against the amendment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  That‘s at 3:50 p.m. Eastern Time in a 10-13 against vote.  The Charles Schumer public option amendment died, alongside its Rockefeller counterpart.
What does this mean?

Well, joining us from the Russell Rotunda on Capitol Hill is Senator Chuck Schumer.

Senator, thank you for taking the time on this busy day.

SCHUMER:  Good evening.

MADDOW:  You and I agreed on Thursday that if the public option could make it in the Senate Finance Committee, it looked pretty good that it could make it anywhere—maybe all the way into the final bill.  What does it mean that it didn‘t survive that committee today?

SCHUMER:  Well, look, it would have been better if it had passed.  And certainly, it didn‘t.  But we picked up votes we didn‘t expect, particularly on my amendment, Jay and I working as a team.

And, you know, the Senate Finance Committee is the toughest terrain here.  It‘s more conservative than the Senate as a whole, populated by a large number of rural senators.  And the Senate as a whole is less conservative—is more conservative than the House.

So, this is an uphill fight.  We knew it.  But, you know, a month ago, the public option was dead.  Now, we‘re alive and fighting.  Even two of the three senators who spoke out against it said they were interested in it, and we‘re going to keep working at it until we get this done.  It‘s too important to good health care not to have the public option.

And while I wouldn‘t say to you we‘re definitely—you know, we‘re certain of winning on the Senate floor, we‘re going to work hard at it, and I think we have a pretty good chance.

MADDOW:  There were five Democratic senators who voted no on Senator Rockefeller‘s amendment.  Only three of those senators voted no on your amendment.  Did you imagine that you could pick up potentially more Senate Democrats who voted no, some of those three might further change or you think they‘re qualitatively opposed?

SCHUMER:  No, I think they‘re open to change.  I mean, Senator Baucus, himself, as you showed on your show, said he was for it but wanted to see 60 votes.  He obviously cares very much and wants to pass a health care bill.

And I think—and I said this in the committee meeting—that by working hard, we‘ll be able to show him 60 votes.  It may not be exactly as I proposed or as Jay proposed, but it will be a good, strong public option.  I have spoken to just about every one of my moderate Democratic colleagues.  Not a single one has closed the door on the public option on the Senate floor.

So, to say that the bill is dead and this is over is wrong.  It‘s underestimating the strong support we have out in the country.  It‘s also underestimating the fight of those of us who care a lot about it.

Again, is this going to be easy?  No.  But, at the end of the day, as you go through the process, I think we have a darn good chance of getting a good public option in the bill.
Tabacco: Is Schumer being disingenuous and a liar with this “Locker-Room Pep-Talk” or is he truly stupid? What do you think? Do you believe Chuck Schumer is stupid? I don’t!

MADDOW:  Let me ask you about one thorny issue that I know has a lot -

·         a lot of political oomph to it, and that is the 60-vote threshold.  When you say that the public option doesn‘t necessarily have 60 votes now, it might ultimately have 60 votes.  When you assume that 60-vote threshold rather than 50 votes—are you saying that some Democrats would literally filibuster a Democratic reform bill just because the public option was in it?  Democrats will vote to filibuster?

           

SCHUMER:  Well, they can repose a filibuster on the specific amendment, not on the bill.  But that‘s one of the things we‘re looking at here, saying to some members, “Look, a vast majority of the caucus supports public option.  Vote yes on cloture to let us have the vote, and then vote your principles, conscience, whatever you will when we get to the 51.”

So, yes, that is—that is a real chance to do this.  Obviously, we‘re first trying for 60.  If we can‘t get to 60, some of us will argue that for the public option and some other things, we can go to the 51-vote margin.  Not so much on reconciliation, but getting Democrats to vote for cloture, even if they don‘t support the bill, giving your fellow Democrats a chance to have their voice.

MADDOW:  Do you have support from other members of the Democratic leadership and specifically from Senator Reid from an approach like that?

SCHUMER:  Well, Senator Reid has not unveiled his approach.  We‘ve been talking about it.  He‘s waiting until the finance committee finishes the bill.  But I know he is for a public.  Each member of the leadership, of the four in the Democratic leadership, are for a public option.  So, that gives me some cause for optimism here.

MADDOW:  Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, who tried hard but unsuccessful—ultimately unsuccessful trying to get the public option into the Senate Finance Committee‘s health reform bill.

SCHUMER:  The fight is not over, Rachel.  Fight is not over.

MADDOW:  Fight is not over.  And you‘re being able to tell what‘s going on as it‘s happening from Capitol Hill is invaluable.  Thank for your time, sir.

SCHUMER:  I will do my best.  Thanks.  Bye-bye.

MADDOW:  Governor Howard Dean will join us next in studio.  Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MADDOW:  Today, conservative Democrats on the Senate Finance Committee, the people who I‘ve called the conservadems, were forced to pick sides on health reform and pick sides they did when they joined the unanimous Republicans in voting against two versions of the public option, amendments that would provide one real alternative for Americans who were not served by the lousy, unaffordable, for-profit health insurance industry that we‘ve got now.

Democratic Senator Max Baucus explained his decision to vote against the public option with the adult equivalent of the “Everyone else is doing it too” excuse.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BAUCUS:  My job is to put together a bill that gets 60 votes.  Now, I can count.  And no one has been able to show me how they can count up to 60 votes with a public option in the bill.  I don‘t see a bill out of this committee with public option getting 60 votes, so I‘m constrained to vote against the amendment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  Leadership.  I like this idea, but why would I vote for something I like unless everyone else likes it, too?

Senator Baucus was not alone.  The most conservative of the conservadems, Ben Nelson of Nebraska told a home state crowd yesterday that any health reform bill would not need simply a majority of 51 votes or a simple majority of filibuster 60 votes, but according to Ben Nelson, Democrat, health reform should have 65 votes in the Senate, a super duper-duper majority.

Senator Nelson explained, quote, “Anything less than that would challenge its legitimacy.”

And so it was that legitimate majority came to mean 65 percent, up from its original definition of 60-plus-1.

So far, as Talking Points Memo points out today, you should also know that Senator Nelson won his first Senate term with 51 percent of the vote.  He won his second term by 64 percent of the vote.  So, by his own 65 percent super-duper-duper legitimate majority standard, Senator Nelson isn‘t really a senator.  Not a legitimate senator anyway.  Be careful what you wish for.

Joining us now is Howard Dean, former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, former governor of Vermont.

Governor Dean, it‘s great to have you here.  Thanks.

HOWARD DEAN, FMR. DNC CHAIRMAN:  Thanks for having me back.

MADDOW:  You just heard my interview with Senator Schumer.  And he said something that I haven‘t heard him articulate before, which is that Democratic leadership should be able to expect that even Democrats who are going to vote against health reform should vote for cloture, should vote to end the Republican filibuster, thereby making the threshold 51 votes instead of 60.  What‘s your reaction?

DEAN:  That‘s true.  Core procedure in almost every legislature I have ever had anything to do with, including the national legislature, is, you can vote however you want on a bill, that‘s a conscience matter, but you owe it to your leadership who gives you your chairmanship and to vote with the leadership on procedural votes.  And a filibuster is a procedural vote.

So, I would expect all of the people caucusing with the Democrats to allow a vote to go forward.

MADDOW:  And.

DEAN:  And so, you know, the chairman‘s argument is auspicious.  You don‘t need 60 votes for a public option, you need 51 -- under any circumstance, if the people who caucus with the Democratic Party and owe their chairs to the Democratic leadership are willing to do the right thing.

MADDOW:  You‘re not chairman anymore but have you worked with a lot of the key players, the upper echelons in the Democratic Party right now.  Do they have it in them, to insist on that?

DEAN:  I don‘t know.
MADDOW:  To insist that all Democrats vote for cloture?

DEAN:  We‘re going to—oh, yes, I think the leader would look terrible if he couldn‘t get the votes for cloture out of the Democratic Caucus, and I think they will support Harry.  He‘s been very good to them and he‘s a good leader.  But you need 51 votes.  The other thing about this, this is reconciliation, you need 51 votes.

MADDOW:  Explain what that is.  Reconciliation—it‘s rule.

DEAN:  There‘s a—yes.  The Senate has a filibuster rule.  Sixty people can grind—I mean, 40 people can grind the place to a halt.  You got to get over 41.  You got to get at least 60 to proceed if folks want to talk it to death.

But they also prohibit you from doing that in the budget.  For example, the Bush‘s tax cuts went into the budget so that he wouldn‘t need a 60-vote majority to pass it.

And this is a major piece of legislation.  It could be passed in the budget.  If you want to use Medicare to expand the public option and let people under 65 buy into Medicare—which is a really smart idea, because for the Democrats it means you can get the program up and running by 2010.  You could do that in the reconciliation bill with no problem at all because it doesn‘t require any new language and the budget‘s balanced.

MADDOW:  So, in terms, if we believe that the leadership is committed to a public option, it seems like option A is get 60 Democrats to vote for it.  Option B is insist Democrats vote procedurally with Democrats and then have you a 51-vote—you have a 51-vote threshold because you defeated the filibuster.

DEAN:  Right.

MADDOW:  Option C is, don‘t even try for that, just pass it under reconciliation rules.

DEAN:  They can do—and they can try option A and B.  And if that doesn‘t work, they can go to C.

MADDOW:  Right.

DEAN:  Look, it‘s a leadership—if the Democrats want this, they‘re going to get a public option.
MADDOW:  Do you think they want it?

DEAN:  I do—well, I think they do want it.  I think they‘re nervous about it.  But 65 percent of the American people want it.

Look, here‘s the problem with these guys, they‘re stuck.  In the more conservative states, there‘s a lot of venom against it, even though the majority of people want it.  And a lot of these guys have taken millions of dollars from the health insurance industry and they‘re stuck.  And that‘s a real problem.

And it‘s—if we don‘t pass this thing, we‘re going to lose a lot of seats.  And if we don‘t pass—everybody in America now knows that without a public option, this thing is a farce.  You‘re spending $60 billion of taxpayer money every year to the health insurance industry—who are ripping people off, kicking them off their insurance if they get sick, charging sick people two and three and four times as much as they charge healthy people.

What we need is an option so people can choose not to be in that system, and that‘s what the public option fight is about.  Who gets to choose?  Does Chairman Baucus get to choose for everybody in America or do you get to choose what kind of insurance is best for you and your family?

And we are arguing to give the American people the choice.  Let us reform health care.  We don‘t trust the politicians to reform health care.  Give us the opportunity to do that, and the best way to do that is to give us some choices, like the public option.

MADDOW:  If some—part of the reason that—part of the thing that‘s blocking political progress on this is that the health insurance industry and the medical industry, the people who profit from the system being broken the way it is now, have essentially lined the pockets of a lot of member of Congress and senators.

DEAN:  That‘s true.

MADDOW:  If that is the problem, how do you beat that problem?  You can‘t outspend them retroactively now.

(CROSSTALK)

DEAN:  Well, the people—the public—the public doesn‘t like it, and that‘s—some of that‘s going on, some of the left-wing groups are—or I shouldn‘t say left wing, because, you know, when 65 percent of the American people want something, it‘s not exactly.

MADDOW:  That‘s a big wing.

DEAN:  It‘s pretty—what I call the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.

MADDOW:  Right.

DEAN:  . which is bigger than the Democratic Party itself.  But, you know, the more progressive groups are really upset about this.  And I don‘t blame them, because this is not health care reform.  What Chairman Baucus wants to do is not health care reform.

And, you know, I thank—I‘m very grateful for Senator Rockefeller and Senator Schumer for their bills.  I take great hope in the fact that Senator Carper and Senator Nelson switched their votes because that means some form of a public option, however weak, will get out of the Senate and if that happens, we‘ll have a public option.

But this is not because we want a single-payer.  This is so the American people have something they can choose between the private sector and the public sector.  What they want to do is choose to buy into Medicare.  That‘s essentially what this is.  And most -- 65 percent of the American people—would like that choice.

MADDOW:  Howard Dean, former Democratic National Committee chairman, former Vermont governor, of course, a medical doctor himself—thank you, sir.  It‘s great to have you here in studio.

DEAN:  Thank you.  My pleasure.

MADDOW:  Thanks a lot.


Thank you all for watching tonight as well.  We will see you again tomorrow night.  Until then, you can E-mail us and we read your E-mails - rachel@msnbc.com.  Our podcast is at iTunes or at Rachel.MSNBC.com.  Look, I‘m in the iPod.  You can also hear my radio show coast to coast on Air America Radio.

“COUNTDOWN” starts right now.  Have a great night.  

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33089403/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/
 


'The Rachel Maddow Show' for

Monday, September 28

updated 11:16 a.m. ET, Tues., Sept . 29, 2009

Guests: David Iglesias, Sen. Bernie Sanders,

Madeleine Albright
         

RACHEL MADDOW, HOST:  Good evening, Lawrence.  Thanks very much.

And thank you at home for staying with us for the next hour.

MADDOW:  Ever since the heyday of Ronald Reagan, Republicans have waged a rhetorical war to try to defund, discredit and generally demolish if they could the institution known as Medicare.  So now look who‘s claiming they will save that highly popular government-run health care program.  Since when did irony become a strategy?  Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders joins us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(MUSIC)

MADDOW:  The Republican Party still mired in the political wilderness.  We now present the first ever RACHEL MADDOW SHOW “Where Are They Now” segment.

Our honorary first subject is Samuel Wurzelbacher, also known as Joe the Plumber despite not being named Joe or being a plumber.  His gig as Joe the McCain campaign prop ended in early November, but undaunted, he then enjoyed a stunt as Joe the war correspondent for Pajama TV, a conservative Web site that sent Mr. Joe to cover the Israeli incursion into Gaza in January.  He then got a hitch as Joe the Web site pitch man, which found him hawking IRSVote.com, an organization that invited concerned Americans to pay 99 cents to click, call, or text their votes to abolish the IRS.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SAMUEL WURZELBACHER, JOE THE PLUMBER:  Leaving in fear of the IRS, vote today.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  Also, it will only cost you 99 cents.  That was April.  The IRS survived.  I know.

What‘s happened to Joe since?  Well, he has surfaced.  He‘s surfaced at the How to Take Back America Conference, a slightly further off the kook end version of the recent value voters summit in Washington that we‘ll be discussing later on in the show.  “The Washington Independent‘s” Dave Weigel spent the weekend in St. Louis at that conference, and there he caught up with Joe the Plumber.

JTP now says he regrets the IRSVote.com thing.  He says those people were just in it for the money and the promise of really big publicity never materialized.  But Mr. Plumber also revealed that he is still in the game and he has just endorsed a new comic strip.  It‘s conservative, and it‘s called “Microman USA”.

Don‘t judge it on the basis of the fact that very few men choose “micro” as their preferred adjective.  Judge it on its substance.

Now presenting the RACHEL MADDOW SHOW “Right-Wing Comic Strip Voice-over Theater”.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  What‘s the soup today, Shirley?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  It‘s cream of bailout broccoli soup.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Isn‘t that unusual?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  Not really, Microman.  Anytime you see “bailout,” it means you should expect to get creamed.

(LAUGHTER)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  We put in the laugh track where we thought the laughs were supposed to go.  Here‘s another one.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  What does politically incorrect mean?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  It means to say things in a way that offends a group.  An example would be to say, “Nancy Pelosi is a stupid, leftist woman.”

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  How would you say that correctly?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Nancy Pelosi is an idiot.

(LAUGHTER)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  It‘s endorsed by Joe the Plumber.  That doesn‘t make concerned idiots of America any less outraged and offended however.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MADDOW:  Belated salvo in the scare the bejesus out of elderly voters so they‘ll put you back in power regardless of whether you‘re telling the truth war is an editorial in the conservative newspaper, “The Washington Times,” and it screams “Death Panels by Proxy”—ostensibly argues that the so-called Baucus bill on health reform encourages doctors to withhold health care from Medicare patients.  Health care reform is a secret plot to kill people on Medicare.

This is now become an ongoing strategic conundrum.  How do you plan to win an argument with opponents who are undeterred by being disproven?  Undeterred by the facts, when you don‘t even believe that they believe what they‘re arguing anymore?

It‘s not even just the “death panels” nonsense now.  Take Medicare itself, a program Republicans have railed against since before President Johnson signed it into law in 1965.  They railed against it since then until—well, until now.

Now, in the Senate Finance Committee, Republicans are trying to portray themselves as the champions of Medicare.  They‘re fighting hard to kill any bill that contains any cuts in Medicare, even though people who support Medicare like, say, the AARP, say those cuts won‘t affect care.

Republicans defending Medicare.  What would Ronald Reagan say?  These guys do remember Ronald Reagan, don‘t they?

Here‘s what he did say about Medicare when it was just a twinkle in some socialist, fascist, freedom-hating, community-organizing Democrat‘s eye.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

RONALD REAGAN, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT:  We can write to our congressmen and to our senators.  We can say right now that we want no further encroachment on these individual liberties and freedoms.  And that the moment, the key issue is, we do not want socialized medicine.  Write those letters now, call your friends and tell them to write them.

If you don‘t, this program, I promise you, will pass just as surely as the sun will come up tomorrow, and behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country.  Until, one day, as Norman Thomas said, we will awake to find that we have socialism.  And if you don‘t do this and if I don‘t do it, one of these days, you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children‘s children what it once was like in America when men were free.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

MADDOW:  That was Ronald Reagan, 1961, on a record sent out by the American Medical Association when they really opposed it.  Republicans have been echoing that anti-Medicare sentiment ever since.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NEWT GINGRICH ®, FMR. SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE:  The Medicare is a massive government bureaucracy that wastes at least 40 percent of its money, has no effective controls, doesn‘t give senior citizens choice, and rips off doctors.
Tabacco: Whoa, Newt! I think you are referring to the PRIVATE INSURANCE SECTOR! Government administration of Medicare – yes, Deathers, Medicare is government operated – costs about 3.5% for administrative costs, not 40%! “Saying it’s so does not make it so!”

FMR. SEN. FRED THOMPSON ®, TENNESSEE:  Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid are the ones that we‘re really going to have to reform if we‘re going to make any headway into spending.

REP. ROY BLUNT ®, MISSOURI:  The government never should have gotten into the health care business.

TOM DELAY ®, FMR. HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER:  I want Medicare to be privatized.  It shouldn‘t be a government program.
Tabacco: Then Private Insurers could deny old folks' claims the way they do everybody else with PRIVATE INSURANCE!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  Yet now, the Republican Party expects voters to believe that as of this week, the last half-century never happened.

Earlier this year, 137 members of the House voted for an alternative budget plan which called for abolishing Medicare for every American who‘s under age 55, and it would force all of those people who would otherwise expect to become eligible for Medicare instead onto the private insurance market.  That was this year.

But now, Republicans want to portray themselves as the champions of Medicare, the people you can trust to preserve it against those evil Democrats.  Yes.  Forget all that stuff that happened in the past.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL STEELE, RNC CHAIRMAN:  Let‘s agree in both parties that Congress should only consider health reform proposals that protect senior citizens.  For starters, no cuts to Medicare to pay for another program—zero.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MADDOW:  Thanks, Republicans.  Great idea.

Joining us now is Senator Bernie Sanders, independent of Vermont, a member of Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

Senator Sanders, thanks very much for joining us tonight.

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I), VERMONT:  Good to be with you, Rachel.

MADDOW:  The Republicans have decided that they would like to portray health care reform now as an attack on Medicare.  What‘s your overall response to that allegation?

SANDERS:  Well, my overall response is that in Washington, D.C., where hypocrisy levels are pretty high, this one is actually quite extreme.  It really bounces off the charts.  Here you have people whose whole mantra, whose reason for living is to tell us that government can‘t do anything, that government health care is the worst thing imaginable.  They want to privatize almost every form of government activity, and now, because they think they can get a few votes, they‘re suddenly champions of Medicare.

I mean, it is totally absurd, and I think the American people and especially seniors who know the Republican record on Medicare will see right through this hypocrisy.

MADDOW:  I went back today and looked at some of the contemporaneous coverage from the time that those 137 Republicans voted earlier this year that they wanted to abolish Medicare, they wanted to get rid of Medicare for everybody under age 55, and instead, force them into the private market.  And at that time, they were willing to tell reporters that they were worried that vote was going to come back and hurt them.  That it was going to look like an anti-seniors vote.

As yet, it doesn‘t seem to be coming back to hurt them.  I wonder if you think that it will.

SANDERS:  Well, I think it will.  I think the more we make the point that here you have people today who are vigorously opposed—we don‘t have one Republican vote for a Medicare-type public option, all right, which would give people under 65 a Medicare-type program in opposition to private health insurance.  I think very few people will believe that these people who are not supporting a public option, who historically have wanted to voucherize or privatize Medicare, are suddenly now strong supporters.

Clearly, this is 100 percent political, and I think the American people, and especially seniors, will see right through it.

MADDOW:  You‘ve been a guest here over the last few months, frequently talking about progress on health care about not only the procedural battles but the principles at stake.  At this point, looking ahead at this week and coming weeks with these crucial battles that are being fought now, how do you feel about the public option and the other important components of health reform that people have fought so hard for?

SANDERS:  Well, you know, Rachel, there was just a poll in “The New York Times” where I think the numbers were 65 percent of the people wanted a public option to give them a choice as opposed to private health insurance.  It is hard for me to believe that the Democrats are not going to respond to those numbers.

And what I can tell you, we are working very, very hard—a number of senators are working hard for two reasons.  Number one, we think it‘s right that people have that choice.  And, number two, if you are serious about cost containment, if we are serious about addressing the fact that we have almost a million people in this country this year who are going to go bankrupt because of soaring health care costs and medically-related bills, you have got to give competition to the private health insurance companies.

We are now spending almost twice as much per person on health care as any other major country, and yet our outcomes in many cases are not as good.  So, clearly, we need to wring the waste out of this current system, the bureaucratic waste that exists, and provide quality care without kind of—spending the kind of money we currently are.

MADDOW:  Senator Bernie Sanders, independent of Vermont, thanks very much for your time tonight, sir.  Good to see you.

SANDERS:  Good to be with you, Rachel.

MADDOW:  Thank you.

Thank you all for watching tonight as well.  We will see you again tomorrow night.  Until then, you can E-mail us and we read your E-mails - rachel@msnbc.com.  Our podcast is at iTunes or at Rachel.MSNBC.com.  Look, I‘m in the iPod.  You can also hear my radio show coast to coast on Air America Radio.

“COUNTDOWN” starts right now.  Have a great night.  

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33072294/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/

Tabacco: With relentless reinforcement from the Mainstream Media, politicians are always credited with “voting their consciences”. Nothing could be further from the Truth! Politicians always vote their constituencies and their own pocketbooks!

For Republicans that means voting the corporate position on Economic issues. On Social issues, GOPers pander to the Religious Extremists.

For Democrats that means voting the corporate position on Economic issues. On Social issues, Democrats can redeem their corporate pandering by voting the populist position.

We the People must judge Democrats as we do Republicans – on ECONOMIC ISSUES! Social issues are the gravy, not the main course! The main function of all elected government is the distribution and redistribution of wealth – assertions to the contrary notwithstanding.

However, Democrats must be more clever than Republicans – they must perpetuate the MYTH of representing the common folk, install roadblocks for themselves to justify passing Corporate Socialism or denying Social Reform for We the People.

When Obama passed, promoted, and signed the 2nd half of the WALL STREET BAILOUT, after Bush passed the 1st half, Democrats betrayed us to Corporate America with Corporate Socialism just as Republicans had.

When Nancy Pelosi, under the auspices of the DCCC (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee) went to the home of Steve Elmendorf, Lobbyist for United Healthcare, on September 24th @2301 Connecticut Avenue, Apt. 7B, NW, Washington, DC, Pelosi and the DCCC betrayed both the PUBLIC OPTION and WE THE PEOPLE.

When Max Baucus tells us he “supports the Public Option”, then votes against both Amendments (Rockefeller’s & Schumer’s) to his Senate Finance Public Optionless Bill, Baucus betrayed us to Corporate America with Corporate Socialism and feathered his own nest, repaying the Insurance Lobby for those 4 million Play-to-Pay Dollar$ he received from them.

How did he justify it?

MAX BAUCUS, “But my first job is to get this bill across the finish line. There’s a lot in this bill that will reform the insurance market. There’s a lot in this bill that will control costs. And there’s a lot in this bill that would expand coverage to millions of Americans. Those things have to be my priority, and thus I’ll have to vote no today on this amendment.***

Baucus claims he must defeat the PUBLIC OPTION to PASS HEALTH CARE REFORM. Analyze that EXCUSE! That is a disingenuous, self-serving Excuse that defies Logic, Common Sense and all historical precedents. Had Lincoln sacrificed “Negro” slaves as Baucus sacrifices the Public Option, there would NEVER HAVE BEEN A CIVIL WAR!

Yes, Lincoln told falsehoods too when he claimed that SAVING THE UNION was his primary concern and that if he could do that without freeing a single slave, he would. Then, to prevent a Southern “Flip-Flop”, he signed the Emancipation Proclamation to guarantee a FIGHT TO THE FINISH!

Incidentally, Lincoln facilitated the Civil War, not to FREE THE SLAVES, but to pander to his Northern constituency, which was unable to compete with a SOUTH AND ITS FREE WORK FORCE OF BLACK SLAVES! Let’s get the motivation correctly!

If Baucus wanted merely to ensure something – anything – with the title of “Health Care Reform”, why vote against the Public Option, which he claims to support, in committee? Why not wait until the entire Senate could be caucused on his bill, with and without Public Option, then determine if Public Option would affect the vote negatively! It would not, and Baucus knows it would not!

Ronald Reagan said, “Trust, but verify!”

Tabacco would add the aphorism of Johnny Cochran, “If the glove doesn’t fit, then you must acquit!” – However, in this instance, “If the excuse doesn’t fit, then you must CONVICT!

WARNING!

 

Tabacco: I consider myself both a funnel and a filter. I funnel information, not readily available on the Mass Media, which is ignored and/or suppressed. I filter out the irrelevancies and trivialities to save both the time and effort of my Readers and bring consternation to the enemies of Truth & Fairness! When you read Tabacco, if you don’t learn something NEW, I’ve wasted your time.

Tabacco is not a blogger, who thinks; I am a Thinker, who blogs.

In 1981's 'Body Heat', Kathleen Turner said, "Knowledge is power".

 

T.A.B.A.C.C.O.  (Truth About Business And Congressional Crimes Organization) – Think Tank For Other 95% Of World: WTP = We The People

tags: knowledge is power  takebackamerica  business  politics  bush  obama  disaster capitalism  warpeace  halftruths  hypocrisy  sophistry  class war  political ping pong  smoke and mirrors  socialism4richcapitalism4poor  compromise  iippea  healthcare reform