Why Is Max Baucus Smiling? You'll Never Guess!
By Susie Madrak Sunday Jun 28, 2009 9:00amIt's good that I'm not a reporter anymore. I had this unfortunate habit of telling politicians what I thought of their policies (I once asked one, "How do you look at yourself in the mirror?"), and we know that sort of behavior just wouldn't help me get ahead in the Beltway media bubble.
Instead, I get to tell the world what I think of Max Baucus: that he's an amoral ass, someone who's more interested in successful horse-trading over a bill than actually achieving the goal of insuring people who genuinely need help:
A group of key Senate negotiators has found a way to further reduce the price tag of the health care reform bill, bringing it in line with a $1 trillion target and moving the Senate Finance Committee closer to a deal, Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) said Thursday.
"We have options that would enable us to write a $1 trillion bill fully paid for," Baucus said.
But the bipartisan group of Senate negotiators issued a statement saying they were moving ahead. It was meant to signal that, despite the slow going and the many issues that have yet to be resolved, they intend to reach a compromise.
"As we have been for the last several weeks, we are committed to continuing our work toward a bipartisan bill that will lower costs and ensure quality, affordable care for every American," the group said.
Well, no. Not every American. But really, they figured out something that's so cool, you won't believe it!
[...] The cost became the top concern of Finance Committee senators after they received an estimate last week from the Congressional Budget Office claiming that an early version of the bill would top $1.6 trillion, or $600 billion more than expected.
The senators said they found $400 billion in savings earlier this week, largely by reducing the amount of subsidies for low-income individuals to buy insurance.
Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said they found much of the additional $200 billion in savings by further adjusting the level of subsidies. It is unclear, however, whether they would reduce the amount of each subsidy or lower the income level at which people become eligible.
Now, how clever is that? The way to solve the problem is to make sure that the poorest Americans have to cough up more money. In other words, the law will require them to be insured - but they won't be able to afford it. Problem solved!
"It is now a process of determining where does the support lie for which of these options that are chosen," Conrad said. "This is very substantial movement, very significant progress and very encouraging. Everybody who heard these numbers this morning had smiles on their faces, I can tell you that."
Must. Go. Bang. Head. On. Wall...
Login or Register to post comments.
I'm pretty sure that the voters of Montana didn't send this smug bastard to Washington to serve his own interests, but like so many in this country, they are uninformed about his activities. Is no one in our nation's capitol honest?
and has been one since day one. The good people of MT are apparently too naive to see through his BS. The day he gets sent back to his ranchette for good will be a great day in American politics.
is that you seem actually still to somehow believe that it would matter at all whom the good citizens of Montana sent to the Senate.
Just to get on the ballot, any candidate must always already have demonstrated fealty to the essential principles (corporatism, globalism, militarism, predatory capitalism, marketism, etc...) of the PoPP (Party of Privilege and Property). They don't even get to RUN if they haven't met certain benchmarks, or tested positive on certain litmus tests...
these days in the age of Twitter.
More transfer of wealth, from those that don't have it, to those that already do.
We have a predator state.
The future is not looking bright for America.
The future is not looking bright for humanity.
So, basically, this is an unfunded mandate--on the backs of the poor, already under-insured. Further, those who will have insurance will have a greater and greater percentage of their claims denied in the name of "cost-cutting."
I say bullshit. No member of Congress should have publicly-financed or -provided health care. As far as cost-cutting goes, my message to Congress is, "You first, assholes."
I guess this is why Obama didn't pick Dr. Howard Dean to be in charge of healthcare reform -- Dean might have actually gotten it DONE.
O-o-o-obama, you are betraying our trust.
You actually thought Obama was going to do things differently?
(presses both hands tightly over mouth) (muffled sob) (whispers) yes.....?
As Douglas Adams once said:
Anyone powerful enough to get themselves elected President is far to corrupt to be allowed to to the job.
I am proud to say that I did NOT vote for Obama.
So now Obama is responsible for the Legislative branch too?
Can we start blaming SCOTUS decisions on him after Sotomayor is seated?
The man is President, not King.
Since the election process is hostile to 3rd parties, I'm proud to say I *did* vote for Obama, since the alternative was McCain.
If we had instant-runoff voting, I would be more comfortable with voting for a 3rd party candidate. But, the entrenched oligarchy isn't about to give us that, so I'm proud to say I think I correctly identified the lesser of the two evils, and voted for him.
You're correct they are assholes first.
Neo-feudalism is the coming thing.
Maybe that should be "neo-fascist feudalism"?
I mean, in real feudalism, the rulers did have some obligations to the serfs...
.
Ain't nothing one well planned and humanely executed revolution can't fix.
achieving the goal of insuring people who genuinely need help
This is where you are wrong. This is your goal and the goal of progressives. Its NOT the goal of the politicians in Washington including Obama and certainly Baucus. For everyone else, including most democrats "healthcare reform" is the excuse - the excuse to hand another $trillion to big money interests while screwing the average American.
The healthcare "reform" boondoggle is TARP part deux. Its the greedy plutocrats finding another excuse to take the country's wealth and divvy it up among themselves. Same as the military budget. Same as economic stimulus. Same as everything they do. The average American has no representation in Washington at all.
Instead of tea, this time we should throw politicians into the Potomac. At least in effigy. Perhaps the "tea-baggers" had a point, even if they didn't know it.
We need reporters that aren't going to distort the facts. It's sad that very few of the news organizations will report the facts.
This means that if the production staff wants to dramatize or "spin" something they can take "creative license" something it's ok (well, legal), and they don't currently have to inform you they're doing it.
Having grown up reading cyberpunk fiction it's really scary to watch all this unfold...
We need reporters that aren't going to distort the facts. It's sad that very few of the news organizations will report the facts.
These are the signs of Liberal Bias in news reporting:
Context
Background / History
Undistorted reporting of Facts
Having any actual facts at all
Lack of Opinion of the Reporter
Not including outlandish and easily disproven 'theories'
Not presenting outlandish 'theories' as well as facts as if they were equivalencies
For more see Fox 'News'
Sure the poor will have a 'lifestyle' choice of marginally useful health insurance over food and a roof.
"If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."
The question I keep bringing up and Congressmen living in cloud coo coo-land seem unconcerned about is, "What happens to the people who honestly DON'T HAVE THE MONEY WHEN THE IRS CALLS FOR THIS FORCED INSURANCE?"
"Let them eat cake" was a motto one administration lost their heads over. What's similarly catchy today?
It's official.
Time for "healthcare reform" to die on the vine. Whatever is going to be left of the bill is going to be strictly for the benefit of the for profit insurers. I expect the only thing the middle/lower class will get is a mandate that you must buy for profit insurance.
Yippee!
Sounds normal to me:
Incredibly wealthy white men that live in a rarified stratum of society and never sully their minds with how the other 95% of America lives decide the economic fate of those other 95% without worry of the consequences.
I can not afford health insurance now for my family (me, wife, three children). If it costs more than 'Free' I will never afford it. These 'democrat' Senators' bill mandating I purchase a policy I can never afford is NOT an answer to America's health crisis.
Do not own any property, real, or personal, that has any value. Drive a clunker and rent your home from someone else. Keep no bank accounts. Own no stocks, no insurance policies, etc. Do not own or use credit cards. Make all transactions cash or money order. Keep your phone number unlisted. Do not participate in this sham. This makes you what is known as "judgment proof." Anyone you owe money to, can do nothing but sue you, win, and attach your wages, if you have a job, and then for only 10% of your "disposable wages (essentially living expenses, set by law)," which isn't very much.
You don't need most of the crap you buy on credit, and if you don't want it enough to pay cash for it, why buy it at all?
I'm a cash kinda guy. That way I know I'm paying for something, and can see just how much, right in my hand. The odd time I use my credit card, it seems like I got it free. I know I didn't, but it seems that way. (Just some numbers on my computer screen.)
I like to keep it all real. Stops me from buying useless crap I do not need.
Actually, each creditor can take 10 percent of your gross income, as long as they leave you with the equivalent of 32 hours per week at minimum wage.
If you think you can survive on $232 per week, go right ahead and try being "judgement proof".
Citation please? 10% of your gross? What are you talking about?
Not to mention the fact that your creditors have to get in line to collect their judgments and thus their 10%, one creditor at a time. Do you really think you would have to pay your creditors before you get to feed your family? If you do, then you do not know what you are talking about at all. The truth lately is bad enough without some one making shit up and holding it out as truth. I think you are also overlooking the fact that this advice was directed at people who do not have much money. Those who cannot afford to pay for mandatory private health insurance. Go here: http://law.justia.com/newyork/codes/civil-pra...
.. but not a peep about the $400 BILLION that could be saved EVERY YEAR if we had the real solution - universal single payer.
The US wastes $400 BILLION EVERY YEAR by giving it to the Insurance Companies.
Administrative costs for Single Payer would cost less than one tenth of that - and remove the Insurance Companies as the main obstacle between the doctor and patient.
be paid. Second, "our representatives" must have enough money to ensure their reelection, or their very comfortable retirement on the money left in their campaign chests when they're turfed out. You and I don't matter except our vote, and they're working hard to hand that over to the corporations too.
They just have not figured out how to eliminate us completely yet.
The sham of US elections: a choice of plutocrats all only interested in their own interests and that of the plutocracy, is completely useful to them for it gives the whole charade the appearance of legitimacy.
Oama was the best thing to happen to the plutocrats because a) he was a plutocrat wannabe (now he's one of them), b) most asshat liberals progressives believe the phony words he keeps shoveling them failing to see that his actions are completely contrary to their interests, and c) he creates a great foil for the republicans/conservatives: someone to rail against as extreme liberal when in fact he's center-right. The whole thing is an ingenuous set-up to keep the rich stealing the average and disadvantaged Americans blind, raping the nation of its wealth to feed their insatiable greed.
There must be a psychological term for people who have no sense of shame -- I guess "amoral" is good. It's like Gov. Sanford; I read this morning that he "considered resigning, but decided not to." I could see myself maybe falling in love with someone other than my spouse, but if such a thing were made public, with newspeople reading my romantic e-mails aloud in sardonic, horrified tones all over the civilized world, I would be so ashamed that I'd become a hermit for, like, EVER!
And abandoning his family for his mistress on Father's Day!? Using government funds to go see her?
Yet now he just goes about his daily business, doesn't seem embarrassed ... it's just beyond my comprehension.
The term is hypocrite.
politics, as do psychopaths like Cheney and Bush.
Kate,
You are obviously not a Republican!
The GOP leadership has proclaimed that Sanford can still be President in 2012 IF he can con his wife into taking him back.
Sanford did nothing wrong BECAUSE he's a pro-life, Traditional Family Values, anti-progress Republican. Now if he were a Democrat, he'd already be in jail.
In the old days, it was called Sociopathy. I see Trittydi has posted while I'm writing this. I'll bet tritty's furnished you with a link.
On edit: Guess not
Profile of the Sociopath
Today it's called 'Antisocial personality disorder'
Same thing though. No sense of shame, along with a host of other personality defects.
I'm going to be doing some more reading on this, but what I've seen in the last few minutes, doing a web search, is that "sociopathy" is probably a good term, because these people lack the "social context." They're not really part of, nor do they respond to, the same things that would make a "normal," socially connected person feel shame.
Those things include betrayal (he betrayed his wife, his sons on Father's Day, the voters who elected him, his staff, and all the state's citizens), insult (same cast of characters), and others' pain.
I wish we could make candidates for office pass a battery of psychological tests, but of course that would just lead to cheating and abuse of the system because that's what those people do best.
Wow, this is perfect! Go read it, everyone -- it's Gov. Sanford (and, doubtless, hundreds of other politicians) to a T.
Thank you for posting that, Miss Kitty; I've made it a Favorite and will study it more.
Not a mental illness, but a character defect. "The world and everyone in it is less important than me." That's the thinking.
evil?
UNFUNDED MANDATE
If you are too poor to pay taxes you will get a tax credit to help you buy the insurance you can't afford.
If you make enough enough to pay taxes but can't afford health insurance you will get penalized if you don't buy health insurance.
And there is still no mention of single payer or a public option. If there is a public option, how much do you want to bet that it will be provided by private insurers?
Is this a great country or what?
And C&L will put up a small bitch without actually pushing for the damned solution.
Go. Bang. Your. Head. On. Wall. (Then come back afterwards, when maybe some sense has been gained, and help me fight, tooth and freaking nail, for Single Payer, Not-for-profit healthcare for all.
Nothing Less.
What is wrong with you "progressives" that can only suck up to the Dem party?
Stand for what is right (for a change) and get take off that stinking D behind the Crooks and Liars logo.
I'm with you.
The Dems quickly offered the "compromise" (public option) without FIRST fighting the battle for Single Payer.
You don't compromise until you've done everything you can to champion what is right.
And then you compromise as little as possible.
DO NOT LEAD WITH YOUR WEAKEST COMPROMISE POSITION AND THEN WATCH IT GET WATERED DOWN.
Obama specifically opposed single-payer health care and won the primary. Kucinich favored single-payer, which is why I supported him.
So, it's kinda hard to expect a person, whose largest corporate donors was from the financial industry, to now support single payer. Instead, it's the Demoplan, and we'll see whether the so-called "public option" is anything more than a dumping ground for chronically ill patients, providing a further windfall for insurance companies.
I was under no illusions when voting for Obama. I fully understood I was voting for the lesser of two evils, and he was clearly the lesser, but I fully understood that this government would remain a government of the corporation, by the corporation, and for the corporation, replete with influence peddling and
lobbyingcorporate bribery.Are you therefore an enabler?
Don't really know what you mean by an "enabler". I fully understood that if McCain won, we could kiss off the Supreme Court. I think we're one vote away from having the "unitary executive" concept embraced in law. Assuming no other differences between Obama and McCain, that alone was enough to get me running to get in line to vote against McCain. Kucinich had been marginalized, and had dropped out by the time primary voting ensued in my state.
While the Republicans have their own problems with their sanctimonious hypocrites, we have our own problems, as evidenced by the insurance lobby. A glaring symptom emerged when impeachment of Bush was "off the table".
I don't think a third party is the answer. We need to take over the Democratic party. We have to get rid of influence peddlers and get more people like Kucinich. But, like they say, a half a loaf is better than none, and with Obama and the dems, we'll probably get between a quarter to a half loaf, whereas, with McCain, we would get none.
So for the election there only two names on your ballot?
There was only two names who had a chance of winning. As it turned out in my state, McCain won. The polls were saying that, and the only name available to stop it was Obama.
Even in the primary, there was two names, Clinton and Obama. I voted for Obama (against Clinton) for foreign policy reasons, namely the war in Iraq. Funny how it is Clinton tapped to lead foreign policy. Kucinich had dropped out by the time the primary occurred.
There was only one candidate I supported enthusiastically and that was Kucinich. I had watched the Travis Smiley and AFL-CIO debates, and Kucinich views were similar to mine on health care, the environment, free trade and so forth. I think he still has the best ideas.
Baucus is on my list of people I'd like to see fall down a long flight of stairs...into a pit of hungry dogs. Do these people honestly believe that we're this stupid? Or have they become so arrogant that they don't even care? I'm sure that they are also banking on the revenue generated by slapping fines on those who fail to purchase insurance.
My gods, living under the Antichrist would be better than this!
They have the money, guns, and the state monopoly on violence.
He had people representing the 'single-payer' option arrested.
He would have had them shot, if he could. It crossed his mind.
They don't have to care. No one will stop them or even alter their plans one degree. Who the hell are we, the constituents, to tell them how to take bribes and enrich the already obscenely wealthy?
Republican Operatives like Baucus don't get re-elected because they help their constituents, they get the votes because they take their bribe money and do exactly what their GOP masters order them to do.
and that it is the "GOP" which is 'in charge.'
The GOP and the Dims are but (unequal) wings of the party of property and privilege (PoPP. Party politics in the US is best described in comparison with sibling rivalries. The Bosses like the GOP best, but tolerate and sometimes placate the Dims, too.
SO Baucus, et al, are not operatives of the GOP. They are paid lackeys in the service of the PoPP....
is to divide and conquer. It is clearly not real. I am shocked that Bush didn't put off the election because of the "war." He could have, and I'll bet that is the real reason that Bush and Cheney are pissed at each other now.
that can be spun--by the best State/Corporatist propagandists that maqney and power can buy--to make it LOOK like there's going to be "CHANGE" without actually changing anything that profits the elites.
Why would ANYONE ever beieve it would happens any other way???
Are you ALL fucking naifs?
WTF?
Is this "the change that we can believe in"?
Come on, Mr President! Step in and stop the usual Congressional bullshit!
"We'll Rent For A Year And Then Sell When The Market Comes Back"
http://www.businessinsider.com/henry-blodget-...
(Just one of the many hallucinations)
Names. I need names.
Names would be good.
*
.
I WANT CONGRESS-CARE!
.
Amoral Bastards. Every one of them.
They get gold-plated, diamond encrusted health care.
And Americans get nothing.
Bastards.
*
the greatest theft in U.S. History just occurred this past 8 years?
n/t
1 2 3! Will the circle be unbrokennnnnnnnnnnn!
Right sure
I think it's wrong to blame Baucus. The blame lies with the voters who consistently send him there...mostly Dems at that. These are the same class of Dems who will certainly send Lieberman back to the Senate.
Our Senate becomes more the the UK's House of Lords every day. Perhaps a better comparison would be to the Senate of ancient Rome, and we all know how that ended.
oh
As I say, neo-feudalism is the coming thing.
This time, the planet's ecology will be wrecked, the fossil fuels will be exhausted and the population will be 6 billion plus, though falling fast.
All empires fall.
Rome fell into the sea and lands of virgin forests.
This one falls into a cesspool of toxic waste.
Our Senate becomes more the the UK's House of Lords every day.
Good comparison.
Perhaps a better comparison would be to the Senate of ancient Rome, and we all know how that ended.
We're getting there.
don't blame the victim. The senator and the media lead these people to believe that they were voting for someone that had their best interest in mind. Remember, senators have 6 year terms to keep fooling their constituents.
I disagree just a bit. Seems to me voters aren't really victims, they're more like accomplices.
What's missing in all of this is a true sense of altruism, and the ability to think about the future. That's why Lieberman will win his next election. Conn. Democrats will look around and ask themselves, "What's better for me TODAY?" And the answer will be six more years of Joe. I'd bet my house on it.
And so it goes with most incumbents. It's like a Merry-go-Round that never stops and nobody can ever get off.
Do some people have to be hit in the head with a voting machine to get this fact?
They should just do as the Iranian government just did -- don't even bother to count.
I was thinking the other day as I read Khamenei's statement that it was all "God's will" -- so why do they even let the people vote at all, if "God" has already decided who should be president?
Scary parallels to our own country...
If you can't vote at all for who should be the top dog in Iran, then they're not a democracy. Basically, they had an election to decide who should be the Supreme
LeaderDictator's lapdog.The parallel is the control of information. We have a corporate media that refuses to conduct a corporate/non-corporate dichotomy, instead substituting a Democrat/Republican dichotomy. In Iran's case, it's full blown censorship. But, in both cases, it's an attempt to control what people see and hear, in order to control what they think and say.
Qualifications are: Must be stupid, supremely arrogant, and not self-aware.
.
2.0
Baucus is smiling because he has public health care, while the rest of us have to scramble for it. He's smiling because he doesn't give a damn about anyone but himself and his political contributors.
Pretending to do good work. Pfffttt!
A symptom of things gone awry is our health care system, where we pay much more than our allies for comparable health care, while 16% of the population goes uncovered. The prime movers for "reform" is the insurance companies, who have a fiduciary duty to enhance shareholder value.
While most people favor the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall which prevented depository banks from merging with investment banks, the result of the financial collapse is to continue with the "too big to fail" financial corporation.
We have a defense budget that's way out of whack, where we spend 50% of world's spending on defense, with 25% of the world's GDP. Since we're aligned with most of the richest countries, there's no need to underwrite such expenditures.
These are all symptoms. The underlying root cause is a government teeming with influence peddlers, and corporations only to eager to
lobbypay bribes. Unless, and until the people prioritize this influence peddling/lobbyist issue, and render politicians who engage in these activities unelectable, this problem is going to continue.And when the borrowing bubble bursts, these costs, currently hidden from us by the borrowing, are going to come directly out of our standard of living.
that shall remain nameless (sounds like Firect Nerchants) decided that even bad credit risks needed credit cards. So they issued them to just about anyone who answered their solicitations. They then calculated their company's worth on how much the bad credit risks owed, including exorbitant fees (over the limit, late, etc.) and sky high interest rates, such fees and interest sometimes totaling 45% of any balance due. This made them look like they were worth something. Their stock went up, the brains in the company cashed out, and everyone else got fucked over. Multiple this many, many times, and viola, current situation.
not mine, theirs!
Now, how clever is that? The way to solve the problem is to make sure that the poorest Americans have to cough up more money. In other words, the law will require them to be insured - but they won't be able to afford it. Problem solved!
---------------------
It is not that it is clever, it is that the math doesn't work.
A $1 Trillion a year give away of tax payer money to the insurance companies AND forcing the 25+ Million uninsured to pay an average of $180 Billion more in new business whether they can afford it or not.
Wouldn't socialized medical French style be cheaper?
That's what they're waiting for.
Baucus the turd should be flushed from the Senate as soon as possible. He's proven to have his own self interest in mind and could care less about the people. Flush the bastard!
..that the only way out of this morass of corrupt politicins is for the Justice department to prosecute them to the maximum extent of the law for bribery and influence peddling. This guy and his buddies on the finance committee are rotten to the core. A jury of braindead monkeys would find for quid pro quo bribery when shown how much they've taken from the bribers versus how clearly they are going against the unambiguously demonstrated desires of the overwhelming majority of Americans. It is clear that they have been influenced to make a knowing decision not to do their jobs of representing the people.
Can voters of Montana recall this slimebag on grounds that he is refusing to do his job?
Patrick Fitzgerald cannot do it all alone. BTW, DOJ does not answer to the voters.
I almost forgot, lobbying is legal, thanks to the laws made by...you guessed it. Those taking the bribes, I mean accepting campaign contributions, etc.
Bribery is now "Lobbying"
Loansharking is now "Payday loans", at the same interest rate as usury restrictions are abolished.
And lets not forget the principle cause of the financial meltdown, which is that the rating agencies graded mortgage backed securities "AAA" so that the securities could be sold for more than they were worth, defrauding the purchasers. That's what cause the situation to scale. Where's the prosecutions? We used to call that "conspiracy to defraud investors".
... by telling those who have been paying top premiums (I've heard $18,000/annum) to pay half of what they pay now into the system.
If that $18,000 paid for healthcare, investor dividends, outrageous executive salaries, salaries for all superfluous employees, then $9,000 should be enough to pay for public healthcare alone.
Health Care Reform as planned will result in a revolution. When the choice is either pay into private insurance or be penalized if you don't, people will opt out of the tax system.
Voting is useless. Change can only be achieved with behavior i.e. voting with your pocketbook. Opt out now.
Here is a list of elected people taking payoffs to cheat the American people and the amounts of bribes being taken. This is just from health care and insurance.
It is mind boggling to think how much these people are taking from others!
Arlen Specter (R-D- PA- $4,026,933)
Max Baucus (DLC- MT- $2,833,731)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY- $2,758,468)
And when you just go right to Big Insurance, the non-presidential candidates who got the biggest legalized bribes were the 7 senators who have been tasked with the job of killing single-payer:
Ben Nelson (DLC-NE- $1,196,799)
Max Baucus (DLC- MT- $1,184,113)
Joe Lieberman (DLC- CT- $1,036,302)
Arlen Specter (R-D- PA- $1,035,530)
Chuck Schumer (D-NY- $981,400)
Mitch McConnell (R-KY- $929,207)
Chuck Grassley (R-IA- $884,724)
We need to investigate and prosecute these criminals now. Severe jail terms are in order for these criminals!
republicanism is a mental illness!
It's good that I'm not a reporter anymore. I had this unfortunate habit of telling politicians what I thought of their policies (I once asked one, "How do you look at yourself in the mirror?"...
I have this same problem in the workplace. Oh well. I never change. Good thing I'm a hard worker, I guess.
If being "non-partisan" is such a great idea would these same politicians advocate God should be as well?
Just a stupid thought
If we had a single payer system there would be no need to talk about how do we pay for it. Under a single payer everyone would pay what they are paying in premiums to the government run insurance plan. This would be done in the form of a payroll tax. Some people would pay more, some the same, but most would pay less than they do now.
If would spend the exact same amount of money we spend now on health care, but spend it through the government run system, we will be save admin costs and profits. With those savings we will be able to cover everyone.
The public option is gong to cost more money and not cover everyone properly. The public option is a sham. I say not to the public option.
Login or Register to post comments.