Chronicles of capitalism

From today's (11/18) Democracy Now:

(1) Insurers Gave Chamber Over $86M to Defeat Healthcare Reform

Newly disclosed figures show the nation’s largest health insurance corporations funneled some $86.2 million to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to oppose healthcare reform last year. Companies including UnitedHealth and CIGNA provided the money through their main lobbying group, America’s Health Insurance Plans. The spending exceeded the group’s entire budget from the year before and accounted for 40 percent of the Chamber’s 2009 budget. The money was used to fund ads, polling and public events to stir opposition to the healthcare overhaul. An anonymous source confirmed to Bloomberg News that the money came from insurers because federal tax laws don’t require identification of donors. In a statement, the Center for Responsive Politics said, "Perhaps this key debate would have progressed differently if the true source of the chamber’s spending had been known at the time."

(2) Study: Lawmakers’ Personal Wealth Increased 16% in 2008

A new study shows members of Congress saw a boost in personal wealth as the U.S. economy suffered the worst of the economic recession. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, lawmakers’ personal wealth increased an average 16 percent between 2008 and 2009. The number of millionaires rose to 261, nearly half the total members of Congress. The median wealth of a House member topped $765,000, while the average for a senator was more than $2.3 million.

(3) GOP Blocks Paycheck Fairness Act in Senate

Republican senators have blocked a measure to fight wage discrimination against female workers. The Paycheck Fairness Act would increase enforcement of laws requiring equal pay for men and women. But on Wednesday, all Republican senators voted to prevent the bill from coming to a vote.

[Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson was the only Democrat who voted with the Republicans.]

(4) FBI Meets with Google, Facebook in Wiretap Push

The Obama administration is intensifying a push to expand government wiretapping of online communications, including emails, Facebook postings and internet phone calls. The administration wants Congress to require immediate compliance with wiretap orders seeking government monitoring of encrypted messages sent over the internet. The New York Times reports FBI Director Robert Mueller met with top executives at several major Silicon Valley firms, including Google and Facebook, earlier this week. The White House proposals include a requirement that any services based overseas be routed communications through a U.S. server where they could be wiretapped.

Did someone say something about democracy?

No public option: A trial balloon on health-care reform?

Yesterday I posted a brief e-mail that I sent to Sens. Schumer and Gillibrand and House member Nadler. In that letter I suggested that the administration's TV talk about "abandonment" of the public option may be simply a trial balloon to see what blowback they will get from the liberal members of Congress and their progressive allies. This possibility seems even stronger today as key Democratic Party figures speak up. According to The Huffington Post (which John Nally posted on Facebook):

Richard Trumka, the secretary-treasurer and likely next president of the AFL-CIO, said his federation is drawing a line in the sand when it comes to a public option in the health care bill. Lawmakers who don't support the provision, he said, shouldn't take anything for granted.

'We'll look at every one of their votes,' Trumka said after his speech at the Netroots Nation convention. 'If they're against the Employee Free Choice Act, if they're against health care for that reason, I think it'll be tough for them to get support from working people.'

This os also echoed by 60 members of Congress who sent a message to the White House that they wouldn't support a bill without a public option.

It is important that we keep the heat on wavering congress members and the administration. Write, call or e-mail your representatives, senators and the President telling them that the public option is not an option, if they want our votes.

Congress choice on healthcare: It's simple: Us or them

Let's be very clear the vote in Congress on any healthcare bill is very simply a choice between the people and the healthcare insurance companies. This is the way Howard Dean put it last Friday (7/17) on Democracy Now:

Well, I am going to address it, not specifically to Chairman [Max] Baucus [D-Montana], but let me just be very clear about this. This has been cast in the media, and probably seen by Republican consultants, as a Republican versus Democrat issue or conservative versus liberal issue. It’s not. When 72 percent of the American people, including more than 50 percent of Republicans, believe that they ought to have the choice between a public or a private system, this is not a liberal-conservative thing. This is whether you’re going to vote with the health insurance companies or whether you’re going to vote for what 72 percent of your constituencies want. That is what this vote is about.

The Ed Show on Blue Dog Dems and the public option in healthcare reform

Here's an excerpt from last night's (Friday) Ed Schultz Show on MSNBC. Schultz talks about the Blue Dog Democrats and the public option in the healthcare reform package (not single payer, which we should have, but perhaps a step in the right direction). Schultz also interviews Rep. Keith Elison (D-MN), a real progressive Democrat and two fast-talking Blue Dogs. You know the type, "Yes I'm in favor of a public option, But." And, in the end, that "but" will eviscerate the healthcare reform legislation. All progressive people need to make sure that their representatives in the House and Senate know they will not get our votes if they vote against a public healthcare option (even if they believe their real constituents are the moneychangers.) (If your reading this on FaceBook, please go to http://contestedterrain.blogspot.com/in order to view video.)

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

Democrats opposed to meaningful healthcare reform

Here are the names of the nine Democratic senators who are opposed to a public healthcare option:

Kay Hagan (NC)
Bill Nelson (FL)
Max Baucus (MT)
Kent Conrad (ND)
Mary Landrieu (LA)
Ron Wyden (OR)
Blanche Lincoln (ARK)
Tom Carper (DE)
Maria Cantwell (WA)

These nine senators may very well be the difference between meaningful (even if not perfect) healthcare reform and the bogus Republican-preferred version.

According to Alexander Bolton on the Bill Press show:

A coalition of liberal groups has launched a $1.1 million television ad campaign to ratchet up pressure on senators who have not embraced the creation of a broad government-run health insurance plan.

The ads begin airing on Friday and will run for 10 straight days.

The ad is running in the home states of eight members of the Finance panel: Sens. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine).

Of those senators, Lincoln, Wyden and Grassley are up for reelection in 2010.

The liberal coalition is also targeting Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), who has voiced opposition to the so-called public health insurance option, and Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.). Hagan has voiced support for an alternative to the public option: health insurance co-ops, a plan pushed by Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.).

Obviously the more pressure we can put on these nine senators now, the greater chance we of moving them in a progressive direction. American's healthcare and democracy are at stake.