calling for civil discussion among progressives

by: los anjalis

Mon Dec 28, 2009 at 08:00:00 AM PST

This week has seen intense discussion among progressives over whether to support and fix the health insurance reform bill or whether to kill it. Such debate began after the Senate version of the health insurance reform bill was stripped of its hugely popular "public option" and then further stripped of a possible "Medicare buy-in" by Senators who essentially held the US Senate hostage.

This debate has been important, and it is healthy for progressives to have differing opinions on a piece of legislation, but recently there has been some disappointing yelling across the aisles and name-calling. On both sides.

[Of note, there are some folks who from the start have called everything "less" than single-payer (100% government-funded and privately/publicly delivered healthcare) a compromise and vowed not to support anything but single-payer. Those folks have a right to their opinion but I'm not referring to them, they haven't been fighting together with other progressives for improving this bill all along. I'm talking about progressives who have tried to make this process workable from what was put on the table.]

(more after the jump...)

Finally! Effective television ads.

by: los anjalis

Sat Aug 29, 2009 at 15:23:52 PM PDT

The first is from Courage Campaign:

The second is from the AARP:

biting satire

by: los anjalis

Sat Aug 22, 2009 at 21:57:40 PM PDT

"Both parties understand that the current system is broken," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters Monday. "But what we can't seem to agree upon is how to best keep it broken, while still ensuring that no elected official takes any political risk whatsoever. It's a very complicated issue."

"Ultimately, though, it's our responsibility as lawmakers to put these differences aside and focus on refusing Americans the health care they deserve," Pelosi added...

"People should know that every day we are working without their best interests in mind," [D-NV Senator] Reid said. "But the goal here is not to push through some watered-down bill that only denies health care to a few Americans here and a few Americans there. The goal is to recognize that all Americans have a God-given right to proper medical attention and then make sure there's no chance in hell that ever happens."

"No matter what we come up with," Reid continued, "rest assured that millions of citizens will remain dangerously uninsured, and the inflated health care industry will continue to bankrupt the country for decades."

media tips: jane hamsher on the public option

by: los anjalis

Sat Aug 22, 2009 at 20:36:10 PM PDT

But check out this that Andrea Mitchell conducted with her. There are numerous lessons for us to learn from how Hamsher framed the debate, how she was gently on the offensive during the whole interview, and how she would NOT let Mitchell's presentation of what had been told to the media be the END all for the discussion (see her "why not?" about Evan Bayh).  Too often, the media tells people its interviewing that so and so said this and the "this" goes unchallenged.  I applaud jane hamsher for her work in this interview.

Here's the video, and I transcribed some of the interview below it. (click on "thre's more" for the transcript).

what are your thoughts?

Senator Kennedy To Stand With Us On The Public Option

by: slinkerwink

Thu May 21, 2009 at 21:29:31 PM PDT

Feds Ask, "Did You Have Butt Sex 100 Times?"

by: TheFatLadySings

Mon Mar 30, 2009 at 19:55:48 PM PDT

At that time, GPRA was the new set of assessment tools required by the feds to measure the impact of all programs. The GPRA tool we used measured improvement in substance-abuse related behaviors.

"I was doing an assessment on a big guy named Jesus!" John shouted. "He had a crucifix tattooed on his bicep. He was in for aggravated battery. I was supposed to ask him, 'Have you had unprotected anal intercourse more than one hundred times this month?'"

"Are you trying to get me killed?!"

If you want to know why the feds demanded that John ask inmates about their sexual habits, and why the OMB's failure to report the results is endangering health care reform today, you will have to read my diary.

Neighbors for Peace and Justice

by: lindarella

Sun Aug 19, 2007 at 21:50:01 PM PDT

I also want to share an experience I had last week.  Several of us who contribute to this website also belong to a group called 'Doctors for Peace', which began in 2003 at the beginning of the Iraq war.  That day, our mentors Dr. Granados and Dr. Puvvula went to an anti-war rally in their scrubs and white coats with signs that said "Doctors for Peace" and thus our group was born! Since that time, we continue to advocate for justice, fairness and human rights, and to educate ourselves and others on the health impacts of war, violence, and poverty.

Last Friday (8/17), we were invited to speak at the San Pedro Neighbors for Peace and Justice meeting.  Our topic was "The war in Iraq and its effects on the healthcare system in the U.S."  Essentially, the connection is very simple- the U.S. spends billions of dollars on the war in Iraq, and in the meantime many Americans feel there is not enough money for universal access to health care or other kinds of health care reform.  The money is there!  We must choose to spend it differently.  That means telling our current legislators that we want to prioritize healthcare reform above the occupation and destruction of Iraq.  And we must vote for legislators who are not afraid to change the status quo.  We also need to educate ourselves and others on the bills currently under consideration for health care reform. 

We spent the majority of our time on reviewing current legislature.  There are three big ones. The governor's bill for mandatory health insurance is similar to the one already passed in Massachusetts, and states "everyone must pay equally", thus a 'mandate' to obtain health insurance.  If passed everyone would be required to have health insurance.  The quality of that insurance for those with little money would likely be very poor, and would be unlikely to have an impact on the real difficulties of the system.  The second bill proposed by Speaker Nunez is, I think, a step in the right direction, and would insure approx 75% of those currently uninsured in California.  It would do this by expanding Medi-cal and other state programs, as well as creating a 'high-risk' pool for those who are too sick to get affordable insurance under our current system.  Finally, there is SB 840, which would radically change our current system of health care in California to a single payer universal access system.  Under this system, every person in CA would have comprehensive health insurance, and according to economic models, it is also cost-saving when compared to our current system.  It has already been vetoed once by Gov Schwarzenegger. 

I would like to encourage anyone reading this to stay informed, and to talk to your friends, family, and coworkers about their thoughts on health care reform.  There are no easy answers- if there were, I would not be 'blogging' for the first time in my life trying to frame the issue and its myriad complications!  We collectively need to start thinking about how this change is going to happen...