Public Congress

Why all of a sudden a name change? Is it because they are afraid the Public Option is getting a bad rap that maybe a Consumer Option sounds a little better?

Good grief we don’t even have a Final Bill yet, and there are already parties in congress trying to cover up their real cost that it will effect on the American Public.

Just a change in "name" only trying to fool the public, like
they’ve made a change (you can believe in). Ha. Nope, same
ole, same ole. Consumer Option sounded better to them and
no one had spoken against it yet.

CNSNews.com
MoveOn.org is Trying to Mobilize Activists to Attend Town Hall Meetings to Push for ‘Public Option’ Health Care
Thursday, August 13, 2009
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer

A man holds a sign as President Obama’s motorcade heads to a town hall on health care reform, Wednesday, July 29, 2009, near a supermarket in Bristol, Va. (AP Photo/Haraz N. Ghanbari)(CNSNews.com) – While President Obama has focused attention on "special interests" that are mobilizing to try to defeat his health-care plan, the liberal group MoveOn.org is trying to mobilize people to attend congressional town hall meetings to push for the plan, and especially to push for a government-run “public option” insurance program.

MoveOn.org is even suggesting brief statements people can make in favor of a “public option” health care plan if they attend a town hall, and gives people the opportunity to download signs indicating their approval of the "public option" that they can print and carry into the meetings.

The lead article on MoveOn.org’s Web site yesterday and this morning is headlined, “It’s Getting Ugly.”

“Right-wing extremists are disrupting town hall meetings with attacks on President Obama’s plans for health care and clean energy,” it says. “But we’re showing Congress that ordinary Americans continue to support his agenda for change.”

If visitors to the site then click on a link labeled, “Get materials to attend a town hall near you,” they are directed to a list of three suggested statements and a question they can use at town hall meetings, as well as additional links to ready-made posters that can be downloaded and printed.

“I’m here to urge you to push for passage of a health care reform plan with a real public health insurance option as soon as you head back to Washington,” says the first of three suggested statements. “It’s critical for controlling skyrocketing costs and guaranteeing security for all of us.”

“Our health care system is broken–costs are skyrocketing and too many people can’t afford coverage,” says the second suggested statement. “President Obama’s health care plan–the public health insurance option–is the key to fixing those problems.”

“We need action now,” says the third suggested statement. “The cost of inaction is too high—every day that we delay, 14,000 Americans lose their insurance and nearly 2,500 file for bankruptcy because of medical costs. And costs continue to spiral out of control: average family premiums will hit $22,000 a year in the next decade.”

The one question MoveOn.org suggests people use is also prefaced with a statement.

“With a real public option, costs will start to go down and millions of individuals, families, and small businesses will have access to high-quality, affordable health insurance,” says the preface to this question. “And no matter what happens to our jobs or our health, a public option will always be there for us. Will you fight to make sure a real public health insurance option is included in health care reform this year?”

The three downloadable signs provided by the MoveOn.org Web site say: “Public Option = Affordable Health Care,” “Prescription: Public Option,” and “83 percent Support the Public Option.”

Moveon.org is ran by Evil Georgie Soro’s, Im not surprised for the further manipulations … Im sure Georgie is getting uptight he invested so much into Obama’s new world order and its not really working in his favor… Oh well- Georgy is getting really old anyway! We Americans won’t put up with this anymore! They manipulated their way into the White House- now we will get them OUT!

Government agencies, consumer groups, television broadcasters and other parts of the industry have invested more than $1 billion over the past several years to educate consumers about the shift to digital broadcasting. The message all along has been that analog signals would be shut off on Feb. 17. This aggressive campaign has pushed consumer awareness rates well above 90 percent, they have been working for almost three years to educate consumers that this is the day that will be the digital tv switch. How are they going to recreate that? It will also be costly — forcing the government and industry to pour more resources into additional public service announcements and outreach efforts. At this time, with the economy struggling like this, why do they need to worry about people being unprepared for a tv switch, there are radios and by now they should be well prepared. Shouldn’t the government be more concerned about more important issues? Opinion?

True to their nature, the government has just wasted millions of dollars because they fear that 4.5% of the population doesn’t have their digital converter. How do they know that anyway? I say tough. Switch it on the 17th and forget about it.

I mean if they are so against the stimulus they shouldn’t take the money right?

No, the governors were all for it, including Schwarzenegger!

Guess the Republicans in Congress would rather gamble with 2010 than help their people. Republicans have never been in the business of helping people, unless you are rich!

not doing anything for the American people?

How can all those Republicans who voted against the stimulus bill, with a straight face, take money for not doing their job?

It was their job to say yes to the bill?

If I am not mistaken its their job to vote for their conscious and for their constituits.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/18/gop-governors-consider-refusing-stimulus-money/

http://uk.reuters.com/article/usPoliticsNews/idUKTRE51L1QN20090223

In recent years, there have been two major criticisms of Congress and how it promotes the public good. Describe these two criticisms.
In recent years, there have been two major criticisms of Congress and how it promotes the public good. Describe these two in two paragraphs.

There have been so many criticisms of Congress over the years, it’s hard to just pick two "major" ones.

Will Rogers once said: "With Congress, every time they make a joke it’s a law, and every time they make a law it’s a joke."

Over the years, Congress watchers (like Charlie Cook from National Journal) have repeatedly bemoaned the "partisanship" that has gotten worse over the last two or three decades. Part of that is true, there are many more partisan votes than in the 60’s and 70’s, and fewer bipartisan deals made.

This "polarization" is due in part with the increase in membership in the House of Representatives of the Republican Party. Prior to 1994, the Democrats dominated the House for 40 years. In that year, many conservative and moderate Democrats lost or retired and were replaced by relatively conservative Republicans.

Now after 12 years, the Democrats are back in control and not in any mood to do a lot of bipartisan legislation (the old saying: "Bipartisanship means saying ‘you vote for my bill.’"

Part of the reason for polarization is typically assigned to redistricting — i.e. gerrymandering. With new computer technology and information, districts can be drawn so that the Congressman representing it often has a solid majority vote he can count on, and so may be more ideological in his outlook. This happens in both parties, acting to preserve incumbents.

The other main complain I’ve heard is "they can’t get anything done." What that means depends on who you ask — get what done? Certainly right now it could mean the basic reponsibilities of Congress — getting the basic spending bills written and signed into law; right now only 1 of the 12 bills for 2008 has been enacted (for Defense).

Another criticism has been on corruption (Jim Trafficant, Duke Cunningham and Bob Ney got put in jail for some of their deals, and the less said about Mark Foley the better).

One other criticism is plainly that they spend too much money. Of course, that’s a general criticism, ask any given person about a specific spending program (student loans, farm subsidies, food stamps, Medicare, etc.) and whether it should be cut or eliminated, you might get a very different answer.

Another Will Rogers quote just to wrap it all up: "The only difference between death and taxes is that death doesn’t get worse every time Congress meets."

Bash, if it is so great then why don’t they let us have it? You know why? It is because it would be impossible to provide a public option of that level of first-class Health Care without bankrupting the country twelve times over.

"Indeed, let us act sensibly. And let us act now–in 1974–to assure all Americans financial access to high quality medical care….."

Richard Nixon in an address to Congress 2/6/1974. Here is a portion of his plan:

COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH INSURANCE PLAN (CHIP)

Early last year, I directed the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare to prepare a new and improved plan for comprehensive health insurance. That plan, as I indicated in my State of the Union message, has been developed and I am presenting it to the Congress today. I urge its enactment as soon as possible.

The plan is organized around seven principles:

First, it offers every American an opportunity to obtain a balanced, comprehensive range of health insurance benefits;

Second, it will cost no American more than he can afford to pay;
Third, it builds on the strength and diversity of our existing public and private systems of health financing and harmonizes them into an overall system;

Fourth, it uses public funds only where needed and requires no new Federal taxes;

Fifth, it would maintain freedom of choice by patients and ensure that doctors work for their patient, not for the Federal Government.

Sixth, it encourages more effective use of our health care resources;

And finally, it is organized so that all parties would have a direct stake in making the system work–consumer, provider, insurer, State governments and the Federal Government.

ENTIRE SPEECH:
http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Stories/2009/September/03/nixon-proposal.aspx
Response – um …. I’m not a Democrat or a Republican and I’m not pushing Nixon as a role model…..I think it is interesting from a historical perspective of both a leader of the GOP and the fact of just how long this issue has been an issue.
Response #2 – wow….it is pretty interesting that a simple post of interest requires insults from respondents….."ding dong" ….another one of those slippery slopes that just ….well….aren’t slippery & there’s no slope.

I am truly coming to believe that Y/A Politics section is just prohibitive for the honorable.
Response #3 – Matthew – you make me so sad….please refer to added response #1 & #2. Tx……

ay, yi, yi……what is this world coming to?

They don’t make republicans like Eisenhower, Nixon and Ford anymore. Back in the 50’s they had guys like Gerald L.K. Smith, Dan Smoot and George Lincoln Rockwell trash talking anyone who wasn’t a real right wing lunatic. Not many people paid attention. After Reagan and the end of the Fairness Doctrine and the takeover of America’s public airways by guys LIKE Smith, Smoot and Rockwell the ‘wingers got a lot more traction. Behind a barrage of right wing propaganda and disinformation via the right wing radio dummies and FOX ‘News’, the GOP changed from a middle of the road granny and gran’ pa party to a posse of semi-fascsiti right wing crazies. There’s no reaching across the aisle to these guys. The democrats are going to have to move forward in a total war, take no prisoners manner to get some kind of solid ground under the American wage-earner. Our war cry should be, "We won, you lost, so to hell with you!" My radical opinion!

Recently, our congress voted down a bill to raise the minimum wage and then, yes, they
voted in a raise for themselves.

NOBODY should ever be allowed to set their own wages. That would be a conflict of interest in the business world. Especially where the government is concerned, the system is a system of checks and balances…whose checking to see that Congress is being responsible when "setting their salaries"?

I think it stinks!

I know that’s not the term they used, but that’s basically what it was. The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 was essentially a government takeover of prescription drug benefits for 24 million Americans. How come these small-government folks didn’t complain about that?

it is because the seniors needed the prescription drugs.