VIDEO- Victory! Virginia Progressive Krystal Ball Beats Blue Dog in Primary

By GottaLaff



Via an e-mail:

VICTORY! Yesterday in Virginia's first congressional district, Blue Dog Democrat Scott Robinson conceded the primary to progressive champ Krystal Ball.

We've been working with Krystal for the past month, recently placed a talented field director on the ground, and officially endorsed Krystal last week. You were one of thousands of PCCC members who gave a $30,000 boost to her campaign (and our other endorsed candidate in New Hampshire).

In a caucus primary that required solid grassroots organizing, Krystal ran a people-powered campaign -- the Blue Dog did not. Krystal's progressive message inspired voters -- the Blue Dog did not.

There's an amazing video from a Democratic forum where the Blue Dog says a progressive can't win, and Krystal eloquently says why we can.

[...] Working together in 2010, PCCC members and our endorsed candidates will prove that a progressive message is the path to victory.

Thanks for being a bold progressive.

-- Stephanie Taylor, PCCC co-founder

P.S. Krystal faces a March 31 FEC fundraising deadline that people look at as a sign of a candidate's momentum. You can chip in another $4 to her campaign against right-wing Republican Rep. Rob Wittman here.

H/t: Ellen

Cartoon of the Day

Click to enlarge, via.

Reconciliation bill makes key improvements + who to watch

By GottaLaff

(click on image to enlarge)

Greg Sargent always has a great way of concisely recapping events:

Everyone is wondering whether any single bloc of House Dems — the Hispanic caucus, the progressives, the moderates — will be willing to sink the bill. Dems had come to fear that the Hispanic caucus might end up doing just that. But Gutierrez and ULAC seem to put that possibility to rest — and that this constituency is close to locked down.

* The Speaker’s office is circulating talking points among surrogates, telling them how to explain how the reconciliation fix has improved the bill. Check them out right here for a preview of what you’ll be hearing in the days ahead.

I screen grabbed a portion of the talking points above.

Meantime, CBS has their own list of Democrats they say we should watch. Generally, it includes the obvious suspects:

Vulnerable Democrats

Anti-abortion Democrats (as in guess who)

Blue Dogs

Congressional Hispanic Caucus members

Retirees

And... Republican Rep. Rep. Anh "Joseph" Cao

Here's who I watch: The GOP going bonkers trying to smear and scare, because they know that health care reform will happen. And when it does, or at least after awhile, the Dems will get kudos, President Obama will have himself a major victory, and the Rushpublics will look like the mean old negative whiners that they are.

3 Possible Replacements For Evan Bayh

By GottaLaff

Via Greg Sargent:

No replacement candidate is likely to be able to bring in the 4,500 signatures needed by this week’s deadline. That means that under party rules the state party has until June 30th to pick a replacement candidate.

The three leading contenders for national and state Dems, according to a Democratic source: Dem Reps Brad Ellsworth and Baron Hill, and Evansville mayor Jonathan Weinzapfel.

Ellsworth is a "moderate Blue Dog". From what I'm reading (has a conservative voting record and a history of breaking rank with the Dems on key votes), he wouldn't be my pick.

Hill seems to be more appealing (supports universal health care and green energy funding), but I don't know much more about him, either.

Here's the Wiki on Weinzapfel.

Paddy lives in Indiana, so I'd love her take. Paddy?

Blame the Republicans

By GottaLaff

First of all, allow me to rant about this headline that just popped up on MSNBC:

With 59 votes, Dems must seek Republican input

Excuse me, but I need to scream now. Stay where you are for just a second, if you wouldn't mind.

SFX: Fading footsteps....

GAAAAAAAA!!!

SFX: Crescendoing footsteps.

Thanks for waiting.

Dear MSNBC: A 60 Democrat super majority was never synonymous with 60 votes. Blue Dogs are not "real" Democrats. We always needed Republican "input" (translation: votes). Why is that so hard for so many to grasp?

So, yes, Dems need "input", but from both Democrats and Rushpublics. This has always been the case. Had it not been the case, we'd have passed health care reform by now, because all 60 Democrats would have been on board.

Clear? Clear.

Rant over.

The above tantrum, however, does not let the Party of Obstruction off the hook, and President Obama knows it:

"Over the past week, President Obama and his senior aides have repeatedly cited Republicans' filibuster threats as the primary reason for the lack of progress on big ticket legislative items, an early sign that Democrats will seek to use this bit of legislative arcana against the GOP in the coming midterm election," The Fix observes.

"By making the filibuster a political issue, the White House may be hoping to turn the base's anger at the way things are being done in Washington away from an inward focus on the party's unwillingness to change the rules and toward Republicans for their legislative blocking."

I am Laffy and I approve that message.

VIDEO: "Some Democrats Are Thinking of Jumping Ship and Changing Parties"

By GottaLaff

Via Heather at Video Cafe.

So who's going to wave bye-bye? Heather, you, and I are thinking alike: Blue Dog ConservaDems and Joe Lieberman would give us housecleaning of the expected kind. But are we overlooking some less obvious defectors?

Blue Dog House Democrat Calls it Quits

By GottaLaff

John the Quitter:

Rep. John Tanner (D-TN), a leading Blue Dog Democrat, will retire at the end of his current term, sources tell Hotline On Call.

"Tanner has begun informing key House Dems of his decision -- one that will make his seat a prime pickup opportunity for GOPers."

Dennis Moore (D-KS) announced the same thing last week.

I'm not sure there's much difference between Blue Dogs and Republicans these days, so this may be a wash.

Leading Blue Dog suggests opening Medicare to uninsured

By GottaLaff

I am in the midst of a Scooby Doo "wha-a?" moment:

[Rep. Mike] Ross (D-Ark.), who had emerged as a leader among centrist Blue Dog Democrats opposing the public health insurance option, has suggested something his colleagues consider even more drastic – opening Medicare to those under 65 without insurance. [...]

"I — speaking only on behalf of myself — suggested one possible idea could be that instead of creating an entirely new government bureaucracy to administer a public option, Medicare could be offered as a choice," Ross said in a statement to The Hill.

A Blue Dog said that?

His statement went on to say that he does "not support a government-run public option" and he does "not endorse this idea" of opening up Medicare.

Um, okay. As for Henry Waxman, the Mustache of Justice:

"The idea of a public option was to provide competition, but opening up Medicare would be the precursor to single-payer," said House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.). "This may be an issue of semantics, but it would be very difficult to implement." [...]

Some colleagues suggested that the political heat may have pushed Ross to change position. But Ross said he hasn't changed his position, he is just proposing alternatives to keep the process moving.

Now back to the real story of the day: A kid named Falcon who didn't fall out of a balloon.

Pelosi: “I don't even want to talk about a trigger”

By GottaLaff

Ix-nay the igger-tray, says elosi-Pay:

Pelosi (D-Calif.) rejected the idea of a “trigger” for a public option. That means that the government-run healthcare plan would be a fallback option, enacted only if other reforms didn’t make healthcare more accessible. [...]

“I don't even want to talk about a trigger,” Pelosi said at her weekly press conference. She said the “attitude” of her fellow Democrats is that “a trigger is an excuse for not doing anything.”

By dismissing a trigger, she also risks further alienating Blue Dog Democrats, who are angry at Pelosi's handling of the bill, particularly her push to include a public option supported by the liberal wing of the caucus. Blue Dogs at times have threatened to block the bill.

I do hope she heard about that whole CBO thing about a public option tied to Medicare saving $110 billion.

Oh, and while we're on the subject, Pelosi also promised to post health care reform legislation online for 72 hours before a final vote on the bill.

CBO to Blue Dogs: Medicare-Based Public Option Will Save $110 BILLION

By GottaLaff

110 billion. Dollars. Medicare-based public option. Understand Blue Dogs?

The Congressional Budget Office just said that a public option based on Medicare reimbursement rates would save the government hundreds of millions dollars in comparison to a public option that would have to individually negotiate reimbursement rates with medical providers. This goes against the Blue Dogs's so-called fiscal conservatism in opposing a robust public option. Here's more from this story below:

The Congressional Budget Office dealt Blue Dogs a blow Thursday by notifying House Democrats that tethering a public option to Medicare reimbursement rates would save the government $110 billion more than a public option in which the government has to negotiate rates with doctors and other health care providers.

The initial projections showed the difference between the two was $65 billion. But this shows it would cost the government a lot more money to heed moderate demands.

House Democrats need to trim as much as $200 billion from a bill that most estimates peg at $1.1 trillion in order to meet President Obama's $900 billion target.

Who's listening?

Pelosi re: Deal with Blue Dogs on healthcare: Not so much

By GottaLaff

Deal or No Deal? Two out of three Howie Mandels agree that the Blue (read: yeller) Dogs declared "no deal" some time ago:

Speaker Nancy Pelosi is nixing a deal she cut with centrists to advance healthcare legislation, said a source familiar with negotiations.

Pelosi’s decision to abandon the agreement that was made with a group of Blue Dogs to get the bill out of committee would steer health reform back to the left as she prepares for a floor vote.

Yes, yes! Left GOOD! Left very good!

Pelosi is planning to include a government-run "public option" in the House version of the healthcare bill. She wants to model it on Medicare, with providers getting reimbursed on a scale pegged to Medicare rates."The speaker is full-steam ahead," said a senior Democratic aide.

Blue Dog Democrats, many of whom represent rural districts where Medicare reimbursement rates are low, vehemently oppose tying the public option to Medicare.

Pelosi is now effectively withdrawing her support. In leadership meetings last week, she said the public option in the House bill should be linked to Medicare.

Pelosi has also told her fellow leaders she still wants an income surtax on the wealthy, rather than a tax on "Cadillac" health plans, as a means to help pay the $1 trillion cost of the bill. The rest is to be made up with savings in Medicare by eliminating wasteful spending.

That will worry many members who led the charge against the surtax when it was rolled out. [...]

"The Speaker is committed to having a strong public option in the House bill because it is the best way to promote competition, control cost and keep the insurance companies honest," said Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami. "The caucus continues to meet to discuss the legislation and its provisions."

Clear?

Already, 23 Dems have said they will vote ‘no’ on healthcare reform

Yep, my own POS Donnelly is one of the wafflers.

At least 23 House Democrats already have told constituents or hometown media that they oppose the massive healthcare overhaul touted by President Barack Obama.

If Republicans offer the blanket opposition they’ve promised, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) can afford to lose only 38 members of her 256-member caucus and still pass the bill.

Most Democrats opposed to healthcare reform argue it costs too much, imposes a new tax and fines businesses that don’t provide insurance to employees. Some fear that the bill would subsidize abortion.

Many other Democratic members, including those berated by protesters at raucous town hall meetings in August, are still undecided.

A lot could change before the vote, expected late this month.

Hoyer opens door to dropping public option

By GottaLaff

UPDATE: I just called, and I got right through. The guy who answered was wonderful.

1705 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone - (202) 225-4131
Fax - (202) 225-4300
E-mail Congressman Hoyer

H/t: Dr. President

Dems, it's time you learn how to unite and get what you want... for once. GodI'mdisgusted:

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on Friday left the door open to moving a health reform package without a public insurance option prized by liberals.

Hoyer’s remarks were in contrast to statements Thursday by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who told a San Francisco audience that a public option must be included to win the votes necessary to pass healthcare reform in the House.

Hoyer (D-Md.) emphasized his support for a public option in a teleconference call with reporters, but also said he wants to ensure Congress sends a bill to the president.

A meaningless bill?

Hoyer has long been seen as a voice for centrist Blue Dog Democrats, who have reservations about the public option. [...]

But not including the option could provide problems for Democratic leaders in the House. Sixty members of the party’s liberal wing have signed a letter stating that they won’t support a bill that does not include a public option, and some Democrats have said that underestimates opposition from the left. [...]

Hoyer was cool to suggestions that a healthcare bill be scaled down to improve its chances of passage, a suggested floated by Republicans and a third member of the Democratic House leadership, Majority Whip James Clyburn (S.C.). [...]

But he said if a bill is broke into segments, there’s a risk that key ingredients to drive down costs would be left aside. “If you leave behind reforms that are going to bring down costs, you haven’t dealt with the problem,” he said.

VIDEO- AFL-CIO's Trumka: Which Side Are Democrats On?

By GottaLaff

Per reader Hippie_Cyndi, labor unions are pulling donations for Democrats, especially Blue Dogs, until health care reform is passed. The National Journal is subscription only, so this is all I could get:

Labor unions are showing their increasing displeasure over financing proposals that target their healthcare benefits by launching attack ads against key lawmakers, causing the Senate's leading advocate of taxing such benefits to seek ...

From the YouTube page:

Signalling a shift within the labor movement, the AFL-CIO's Richard Trumka praises Democrats in Washington those who have stood by working people.

He goes on to warn those who have wavered on labor and health care reform about the consequences of stabbing working people in the back and vows labor will not forget their actions.

Oof! "We need to send them a special message... Don't you dare ask for our support next year whenever you're running." Ouchies:

Here you go:

Rahm Emanuel on Dems attacking Dems: “F–king Stupid”

By GottaLaff

There was this private meeting, see, between leaders of liberal groups and Rahm Emanuel. And in this meeting, Rahm said that the Dems shouldn't run health care ads attacking the Blue Dogs any more, see. But Greg Sargent was told that...

[...] Emanuel went quite a bit further than this.

Sources at the meeting tell me that Emanuel really teed off on the Dem-versus-Dem attacks, calling them “f–king stupid.” This was a direct attack on some of the attendees in the room, who are running ads against Dems right now.

Tellingly, Rahm raised the specter of a loss on health care, sources at the meeting say — which suggests that the White House may be less certain about victory than officials allow publicly.

Ruh-roh.

“He started out with, `We’re 13 and 0 going into health care,’” one source at the meeting said, meaning that Rahm was touting the White House’s string of pre-health care legislative victories.

“This momentum is necessary to do all these other things. We have a lot of momentum right now, and any loss spoils that momentum that we’ve built up,” was how the source described the gist of what Rahm said.

We have so much logic, common sense, and great ideas on our side, yet we're not getting the message out. So much energy has been spent on the Rushpublimobs that we've lost our through-line.

As Randi Rhodes said on her radio show a few minutes ago, the media hasn't spent any time explaining the meat of the health care plan at all. It's always about the horse race, or in this case, the horse's asses, but rarely about what people need to know, process, and understand.

Trust us, corporate media, Americans can understand health care reform, if anyone would bother to explain it to them.

The Idiot’s Guide to Health-Care Reform

By GottaLaff

Here's a link to the who's who and the what's what of health care reform:

Peter Keating offers a guide to the major players in health-care reform and looks at their goals, strategies, and odds of success.

A few excerpts, but please go read the "what they've done", "what they'll do next", and "what they'll get". This is literally just a smattering of :

Who: President Barack Obama
What He Wants: Substantively, to dramatically expand coverage while reducing long-term costs. Politically, to deliver a national health plan, succeeding where all other presidents going back to Teddy Roosevelt have failed. That’s all. [...]

Who: House and Senate Liberals
What They Want: The reforms now on the table in Congress. Current bills would extend coverage to nearly all Americans, requiring individuals (with hardship exemptions) to buy insurance and employers (above certain size and income levels) to provide it; expand Medicaid for the lowest-income households and provide subsidies for people substantially beyond the poverty line; require insurance companies to cover anyone, regardless of preexisting conditions; and create a public insurance option. They would also cost from $1 trillion to $1.2 trillion over the next ten years. [...]

Who: The Blue Dogs
What They Want: This group of about 50 House Democrats is dedicated to lowering federal deficits and creating greater health-care cost controls (though not necessarily reducing spending in their districts). [...]

Who: The Senate Finance Committee
What They Want: Nobody knows. [...]

Who: Republicans
What They Want: Whatever Grassley, Snowe, and Enzi settle on, the rest of their party is following a brutal strategy: Tag reform as budget-busting socialized medicine, kill it, and hang its carcass around Obama’s neck.

VIDEO: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment calling out Congress on health care reform

By GottaLaff

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Note: Video added, blog title changed to reflect.

Earlier I posted a preview of Keith Olbermann's Special Comment on Countdown. As he spoke, and it was a thing of beauty, I took a few more notes.

This will have to hold you until I can get my hands on the video:

To Republican Ginny Brown-Waite: "Those are terrorizing words"... Yes, he made the Rushpublic/terrorist connection.

To Blanche Lincoln: "How do you actually FEEL... every time you see Sen. Kennedy?"

To the Blue Dog Democrats, or as he referred to them, simply the Dogs: "You were not elected to serve the corporations, You were elected to serve the people... The wrath of the people will come down on your heads. You will lose your jobs."

Obama's Field Team Targets Blue Dogs' Districts Over Health Care

By GottaLaff

Kill them Blue Dawgs with kindness, community organizers:

As members of Congress head home for an August recess, Barack Obama's former campaign arm, Organizing for America (OFA), is gearing up to target Blue Dog districts with old-fashioned, on-the-ground operations.

This is what we've been waiting to hear. Paddy and I were just talking about OFA, and I thought I'd remembered they were out there, but this is the Big One we wanted to see.

[T]heir strategy has changed dramatically during the last couple of weeks, becoming more pointed: they are organizing canvassing drives and phone banks that specifically target the districts of the Blue Dog Democrats who have been reluctant to support Obama's health care reform. Volunteers are organizing and manning phone banks to call Blue Dogs in other districts or states, and some volunteers are even driving into Blue Dog districts to lend a hand. [...]

OFA volunteers are not calling to complain about the Blue Dogs, though. They're asking constituents to pick up the phone and call the Blue Dogs that represent them and tell them they support Obama's health care reform initiative. They're targeting constituents of Blue Dogs who have supported Obama in the past or indicated that they support health care reform, and they are asking them to mobilize.

Shasta McManus of Tucson, Arizona has been canvassing and phone banking for OFA in Rep. Gabriel Giffords's (D-AZ) district and plans to continue throughout the Congressional recess. McManus says the focus of OFA efforts in Giffords' district is entirely positive, "Gabby is awesome, we love her. But the other side is not going to stop, so we can't either. This is about gathering support, not opposition." [...]

[M]ost Blue Dogs seemed to prefer not having a bill. They want the voters in their districts to see that the process is deliberative, not rushed. Meanwhile, OFA volunteers across the country say it is their job to make sure every Democratic member of Congress has the support they need at home to say yes to health care reform.

So how's it going?

The GOPs' Free Our Health Care Now petition is running almost neck-and-neck with OFA's Health Care Pledge. Both have reportedly topped 1 million signatories.

OFA is not just relying on volunteers. They have staffers in all 50 states, focusing heavily on states like Arizona, Virginia, Texas, and North Carolina that performed surprisingly well in 2008. Efforts in some states, like North Carolina, are reaching a fever pitch as groups on both sides ramp up operations in ways that resemble the battleground state election campaigns from eight months ago.

OFA is even picking up new volunteers who did not get involved during the election but are passionate about health care reform. [...]

On-the-ground organizing may also have more far-reaching effects than just strengthening the President's position on health care. Every person OFA reaches on the phone today is a potential supporter in 2010 and 2012. Every door knocked or volunteer recruited today is a potential recruit in 2010 or 2012. Old-fashioned machine politics may be over, but in a time when the election cycle never sleeps, yearlong organizing in the election off-season is looking like the political mechanics of the future.

If only we could be spared the ads. Enough with the ads.

H/t: Ellen

Liberals strike healthcare deal with Blue Dogs

By GottaLaff

FYI:

Liberals on the House Energy and Commerce Committee have struck a deal with Blue Dogs that will restore some cuts by finding savings in other places, such as letting the government negotiate drug prices.

The deal would allow the federal government to negotiate drug prices and use the savings to lower insurance premiums in the exchanges that would be established in the bill, according to a copy of the agreement obtained by The Hill.

Another amendment calls for finding additional savings through other methods by simplifying Medicare and Medicare administrative costs.

The cuts sought by the Blue Dogs would remain in place unless the drug negotiation and other initiatives yield savings. But any savings would be used to lower premiums.

The deal is to be structured in three amendments: the Blue Dog amendment and two "unity amendments." [...]

The deal also cut funding to subsidize people who want to join the public plan. That angered more liberal members of the committee, who sought to restore the subsidies. They joined Waxman and the Blue Dogs in announcing an agreement this morning. [...]

Waxman’s committee is the third and final House committee to complete work on a sweeping health reform bill moving through Congress. Both Ways and Means and Education and Labor have passed similar bills.

Why Republicans Oppose Public Option: They Can't Afford America to Succeed

By GottaLaff

Your Daily Dose of BuzzFlash, via my pal Mark Karlin:

As some perceptive economists have pointed out, the stagnant and disappearing wages of the American worker have been replaced with staggering debt. And on this debt, we pay interest that goes to Wall Street -- where they gamble it away -- after buying off enough senators and representatives to ensure that they, in the words of Assistant Majority Leader Senator Dick Durbin, control Capitol Hill.

Therefore, if everybody is insured for healthcare, that means there will be billions of dollars in less debt for banks to charge usurious interest rates on.

Are you beginning to get the picture? [...]

Republicans and the Blue Dog RepubliCrats need Americans to fail in order to ensure that Wall Street can continue its lavish, reckless lifestyle. And ensuring that means that the campaign contributions keep flowing into the coffers of Max Baucus and company.

It's one heck of a racket, a legalized fleecing scheme.

Bingo.

You can read the whole piece here.