Why don't the media ever talk about Ted Kennedy's HELP health care bill?
By John Amato Tuesday Aug 25, 2009 11:00am
As I've been following the health care reform debate, the media frame the three House bills as basically phony documents. It's like that branch of the government is a front group that pays for an apartment that nobody occupies and only lives to be bossed around by the House of Lords. And when it comes to the Senate, the media only bow down to the mighty Baucus Dogs. All I keep hearing is politicians wishing that Ted Kennedy was able to be involved in the health care reform process. Republicans are actually saying that -- guys like John McCain.
Well then, he should honor Kennedy's legacy and negotiate in good faith, but that will never happen:
Speaking to George Stephanopoulos on Sunday, John McCain argued that the real hindrance to health-care reform is the absence of Sen. Ted Kennedy. "It's huge that he's absent," McCain said, "not only because of my personal affection for him, but because I think the health-care reform might be in a very different place today."
This stuff just isn't plausible. Kennedy was around in 1994 and there was no deal. More to the point, Kennedy's committee, the HELP Committee, has passed health-care reform. Kennedy's staff, as you might expect, led their effort. But neither Kennedy nor his staff can make the deals for another committee. If Kennedy were in the Senate now, health care would be exactly where it is: Through Ted Kennedy's Committee and stuck in the morass of Max Baucus's Gang of Six.
Meanwhile, if John McCain wants to honor Ted Kennedy, he shouldn't just talk the guy up. He should play a constructive role in passing the legislation that Kennedy considered the cause of his life. McCain says that Kennedy "had a unique way of sitting down with the parties at a table and making the right concessions," but surely McCain can decide what concessions those should be and present them to Max Baucus — or the New York Times — in exchange for his vote.
McCain and the Republicans would be playing the same games with or without Ted having an active role right now, but his power would be in dealing with the American people. He'd be pounding the talk shows, town halls and radio airwaves with solid reasoning behind his health care reforms. And President Obama needs good surrogates to go out there and explain to Americans why we need health care reform.
I think we all miss Ted and wish he were knocking heads in Congress and in the media, but Chris Dodd has taken over his committee and they released a bill that was crafted by Kennedy's staff which I assume is one that he's in favor of. So we have four bills done and a fifth one that's in limbo but should be done soon. Why is it that the only bill that matters to the Villagers is the Baucus/Senate Finance Committee bill? Why is that the Holy Grail? Would some talking head at least explain to America what is contained in the HELP bill? Is that too frakkon' much to ask?
Login or Register to post comments.
If you have done 1/10,000th of the good for this country that Kennedy has done, then I'd give you some credibility to judge the man. Since you haven't, take a hike.
You forgot your political signature slogan. The one that goes he is bought and paid for by the corporations, as is every elected official in both parties.
since forever. Do you honestly think that he's been in Washington that long, because the people want him there? Of course. That explains all the lifelong Washington politicians and of course the fact that most of them are millionaires. Ted Kennedy would not still be in Washington if lobbyists and corporations didn't want him there.
I suggest you look at Kennedy's legislative history. Until then, give it a break.
they would have to do the work and not fall victim to the repub BS!
pretty fucked up to say about a guy with brain cancer. It's obviously an official photo, and done, possibly before the onset of said cancer.
Save your shitty 'jokes' for asshole Thugs. This guy has done his damnedest, which isn't something you can say about many of the layabouts in Congress.
Awesome photo I think ! Just sayin'
How can you be so cruel to a dedicated man who stands eons above YOU.
Especially when he is sick and unable to reply.
Shame on you.
Thank you Miss Kitty.
respond to me, but this guy has. And I was never his constituent.
My ex bf and I wrote to several congress people concerning the Wild and Scenic Areas Designation Act in 1976 or thereabouts. We wrote the President too. And in those days it was not easy for a couple of hippie river rats to get a nice looking letter together. First you had to find a typewriter.
So we got some formulaic answers from our WA and OR guys ("TY for writing as re the WASD Act, blah blah blah. Sincerely, mechanical signature")
The president's came back ("TY for writing about whichever piece of legislation you wrote about, blah blah blah, Sincerely, A. Intern").
Then one day we got a businessy looking thing in the mail with a Mass return addy.
We opened it up, and the reply from Kennedy was not only answering our concerns point by point, it was banged out on an old crappy typewriter, not EVEN a Selectric. And signed w/ a fountain pen.
Just BECAUSE he's a Kennedy, doesn't mean he's riding the gravy train. I have always assumed that through it all, he's a guy who has worked hard for everyone, including his constituents.
a John McCain will go: to use a "friends" tragic illness as an excuse for his own personal responsiblity. Gives pondscum a bad name.
I may be wrong on this, but I think the HELP plan is not getting much emphasis even by the Dems to date because of two interrelated things:
1. The Finance Committee is the only committee that can write legislation containing policy related to actually funding a Bill.
2. The CBO score of HELP didn't look good in terms of overall cost.
Cost wouldn't even be a consideration if the for-profit insurance companies were dissolved. Their 30+% profit and overhead would be more than enough to cover EVERYONE.
Add in the extraneous costs imposed on care providers to deal with insurance companies ($30+ billion), eliminate incentives for unnecessary care, institute a real FDA that protects citizens instead of corporations and eliminate frivolous lawsuits by making the loser pay all court and the winner's legal costs and the quality of health care will double while the cost falls dramatically.
Guess what, CrooksAndLiars. You ARE the media. Everything else is just entertainment.
Jon Stewart is the media.
"In a recent poll done by Times Magazine, 44% of a total 9,409 people polled said that comedian Jon Stewart is America's most trusted newscaster now that Walter Cronkite has passed on- beating out veteran news anchors such as Brian Williams, Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric."
Lies have consequences. The lying media personalities have spent their credibility. It was entertaining while they had some left, but these days, when people want the straight goods they don't listen to them any more. They listen to the media personalities that were not lying. I do anyway.
The networks are spending their credibility every day they entertain the lying media personalities.
i spit on the shoes of any man who uses the word "had" to describe an absent, dying colleague. That ain't cool, Mac
I just heard on msnbc that Baucus now says he supports the public option and the Denver Post today endorsed the public option as well.
McCain is a user just like Palin. If he thinks someone will think more of him he'll use anything including Sen Kennedy's name. He, McCain, is still full of bullshit, he just tries to sugar coat it.
Insurance interests total 1/4 of Baucus' fundraising
"In the past six years, nearly one-fourth of every dime raised by Baucus, D-Mont., and his political-action committee has come from groups and individuals associated with drug companies, insurers, hospitals, medical-supply firms, health-service companies and other health professionals.
These donations total about $3.4 million, or $1,500 a day, every day, from January 2003 through 2008.
Baucus, who chairs the Senate Finance Committee that is drafting a major health-care reform bill this month, insists this cavalcade of money is not unduly influencing his work."
http://www.mtstandard.com/articles/2009/06/14...
unduly adv. excessively
Not unduly influencing his work but duly influencing his work. I think we get it Mr. Baucus.
IF baucus ends up "supporting" a public option it is only b/c the snake decided that that was more important for his political survival than the checks he was receiving from the medical profiteers.
Baucus' office confirmed that the senator participated in the conference call with Democratic leaders last week, but did not comment on whether Baucus made any promises regarding a public option.
Baucus has said he remains committed to crafting a bill that will receive 60 votes in the Senate, but he hasn't said whether the proposal will include a public option.
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/article/2009...
In that same report on msnbc just a few minutes ago they said his approval ratings in his state were just about dismal.
Amato makes a good point, but the problem also involves moving past both partisanship and labels. Enough has been said about the partisanship (including the GOP's refusal to make any real or meaningful effort to move toward truly bipartisan legislation), but the other problem is the use of labels to obscure the real debate (e.g., death panels, etc.)
One particular concern is the use of the term "public option." The concept is that buyers of health insurance should have real choice in selecting a policy. The alternative of allowing people to buy-into medicare is one good example, but there are others. The consumer coop idea could actually be a good alternative if it was tied to a nationwide coop or reinsurance that would allow small coops both the expertise and the buying power necessary to making them a significant choice.
My point is that by picking a label as being either "good" or "bad" real discussion is cutoff, and we are left with talking about "death panels" and other phony, non-starter issues.
Somewhere, John Kerry gets the feeling of deja vu all over again.
and the rest of us get that old feeling of Deja Fu again ...
(the feeling that one has been screwed before)
A woman stood up at the McCain town hall a little while ago and said to McCain, If this new health care reform isn't good enough for you Sen. McCain, then it's not good enough for us. The highly McCain supportive crowd stood up and cheered. McCain smiled and went along with the crowd. I guess that lady has been too busy to listen to anyone but that little bee in her bonnet for the last five months.
McCain wouldn't dare give up his government health care plan for the crappy one that citizens are going to get. And he wouldn't dare give us access to the premium care that he has either.
McCain defines rich: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mP-0pedQeGw
private, for-profit health insurance?
Is so, it's no improvement.
Does it make health care avaiable to anyone who needs it?
If not, it's not an improvement.
Teddie's pleasure at collaborating with the Busheviks on NCLB chilled considerable of my admiration for him. He's just another corporate tool.
the problem also involves moving past both partisanship and labels.
That IS politics in the USofA. Of course, it's only semi-partisanship, because there is only one party, the two, unequal wings of which perform an elaborate kabuki to delude the rubes into believing popular, but easily disposable myths of democracy...
If, heaven forbid, this goes on much longer, it's quite likely that either Kennedy will die, or will be so physically incapacitated that it will be impossible for him to go to Washington to vote.
Then I wonder what the people who love to say "Dems have 60 Votes" will be able say when the truth is "Dems have 59 votes"! (Assuming they would ever get there in reality)
Hey, that would mean that a defeat would in fact be the fault of Republicans!
I'm so happy that McCain, with his stupid pig with lipstick, lost because we don't want a prez who is a bald faced liar and uncaring asshole.
Because these same old Reslugs have ALWAYS voted against Kennedy's health care bills over many years.
Are nothing but selfish, greedy bastards!
The reason that no one is talking about the HELP bill is because the Finance Committee bill is the "bipartisan" and "centrist" one being crafted by the "serious" senators. And "bipartisanism" and "centrism" are the top values in Village discourse. Whether the bill actually solves the problem or not is only of concern to those DFHs who actually exalt coverage over insurance company profits.
Ted's bill is a mirror of HR3200. When they stand up at TH meetings and hold up something with 600 pages, they're holding the HELP bill. With minor differences, they're the same piece of legislation.
McCain says that Kennedy "had a unique way of sitting down with the parties at a table and making the right concessions". this should be the focal point of this blog post. Mccain wants someone on our side to make concessions and he is using ted kennedy as a way to say to all the other congresspeople, "come on someone, step up like Teddy would and bend over and take the public option up the behind". I am not saying ted would do something like this. mccain is just using a person crippled with health problems as a scapegoat.
Senator Kennedy died tonight at the age of 77.
First and foremost, Teddy believed in the handout before a hand up (MJ, for instance), and never stopped reminding direct and indirect constituents where his largess with taxpayers' funds originated - him and the dems. Second, teddy never compromised on any bill; his only compromise was with truth, ethics, etc. Third, there are no moderates; there are conservatives and liberals (fascist social welfare collectivists). Those conservatives that are considered moderate are those that compromise their principles with liberals so they ensure their place within the social circle of the DC crowd. Notice that liberals do not compromise, and supposed conservatives do as a matter of 'getting along to get things done' as they sell the country down the river as has been done with social security, taking over of financial institutions (starting way back when), entitlement programs (due to feeling guilty over something their forefathers did over which they have no control) including AFDC etc. Medicare/Medicaid, etc.; and more recently TARP, Cash for Clunkers (soon to have Cash for Appliances) etc. Yes, they are willing to turn over even more power to a centralized fascist government to have dominion over our lives; provide financial info on all participants to any government entity that sees fit to retrieve it; abortion on demand - BHO says it is basic healthcare, which is covered by HR 3200; and on and on. On abortion, a lot of women say they want say over their bodies; OK. What about the medical panels (patterned after the Oregon model, which was institute with the sole purpose of saving money; where, it was just reported that a woman was denied medication for her cancer; but was offered a prescription to end her life - nice, eh) that are to be instituted in DC that are to decide the validity of any and all treatment - now, do you have control over your bodies (or lives)? Medicare/Medicaid (Teddy's pride and joys) aren't working with over 1/3 the costs being fraudulent; and people are willing to put more fiscal responsibility into the government. Reform Medicare/Medicaid and social security first; then, maybe, we'll see about the other. And, no, there are not 46 million without insurance; at best, maybe 6 million. Yes, that is a lot, but work on that issue for those without healthcare insurance before destroying the system the other 300+ Americans (not illegals) enjoy.
-------------------------------------------------
I was a liberal until I learned to read, got a job and was mugged by weak-willed tax and spend politicians and their naive, Kool-Aid (tm) drinking acolytes.
Login or Register to post comments.