Tweet
Wednesday, Washington belonged to hundreds of "mighty mighty nurses" rallying for single payer legislation, as well as other critical issues such as legislated nurse-patient ratios and solidarity with individual nurse unionization struggles.
They were marching and lobbying in conjunction with groups active on single payer, including Progressive Democrats of America, Healthcare-Now, and Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP). Plus me, just some guy.
Actor Mike Farrell, who recorded a set of PSAs supporting single payer, joined with some of the heroes of single-payer advocacy like Roseanne DeMoro, Exec Director of California Nurses Association, and Dr. Margaret Flowers of PNHP, who’d so eloquently laid out the issues on the Ed Schultz show a few days before. Bernie Sanders, who has a single-payer bill in the Senate (structurally distinct from John Conyers’ better known HR 676, but single payer nonetheless) spoke as well.
Dr. Flowers was one of the "Baucus Eight," arrested after standing up and protesting the absence of single payer advocates at last week’s Senate Finance Committee roundtable on health care. Five other activists from this week’s follow-up roundtable brought the arrest total up to 13.
On the march to the rally site, I was able to chat at some length with Katie Robbins of Healthcare-Now (NOT to be confused with its capitulatory doppelganger, Healthcare for America Now), who, I learned, was the protester from last week who prompted Finance Committee chairman Baucus to quip (at least for him it ranked as a quip), "We need more police." That quote was now emblazoned on the back of Katie’s T-shirt.
You’ve probably seen this already, but check out Baucus’s snide crack and even worse, the loud, approving laughter that ensued from the Senators, staff, and "stakeholders." (It’s around 1:40 on the video.) I can’t think of a more shameful display of inappropriate laughter since Dubya brought the house down a few years back at one of those correspondents dinners with a skit about missing WMDs.
As we discussed the challenges of overcoming Senatorial recalcitrance and the strategic failures of certain liberal coalitions, Katie had to interrupt me to smile and wave to the cop who’d arrested her the week before, who she said was extremely nice to her.
Cops need health care like everyone else. And while I wouldn’t bet anything beyond highly discretionary cash on the chances of single payer passing this year, I believe the extent of public comprehension and outrage about the bamboozlement now in progress is deeper and stronger than the snickering stakeholders and their legislative mouthpieces can remotely imagine.
20 Comments
An end to the war on drugs could free up money for health care. Money that is now spent on such things as privatized prisons.
***********
” The Obama administration’s new drug czar says he wants to banish the idea that the U.S. is fighting “a war on drugs,” a move that would underscore a shift favoring treatment over incarceration in trying to reduce illicit drug use.
In his first interview since being confirmed to head the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, Gil Kerlikowske said Wednesday the bellicose analogy was a barrier to dealing with the nation’s drug issues.
“Regardless of how you try to explain to people it’s a ‘war on drugs’ or a ‘war on a product,’ people see a war as a war on them,” he said. “We’re not at war with people in this country.” “
http://online.wsj.com/article/…..17397.html
That shift in policy is likely to still require years and it won’t come from D.C. It will have to continue to come from the people, as has same-sex marriage.
However, when that sort of movement happens the politicians will jump in front of the parade…as usual.
The situation will not change without public funding of elections. Baucus is the 4th highest recipient of HMO contributions. That might explain why single payer is not seated at his table. Insurance, health care, and pharmaceutical companies really like him.
***************
” Last Report: Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Top 5 Contributors, 2003-2008, Campaign Cmte
Contributor Total Indivs PACs
Schering-Plough Corp $72,200 $64,200 $8,000
New York Life Insurance $52,900 $43,900 $9,000
KKR & Co $50,500 $47,000 $3,500
Goldman Sachs $48,900 $48,900 $0
DaVita Inc $48,350 $39,600 $8,750
Top 5 Industries, 2003-2008, Campaign Cmte
Industry Total Indivs PACs
Securities & Investment $838,418 $686,200 $152,218
Lawyers/Law Firms $667,754 $454,312 $213,442
Insurance $592,185 $266,885 $325,300
Health Professionals $537,141 $139,141 $398,000
Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $524,813 $206,464 $318,349 “
http://www.opensecrets.org/pol…..cycle=2008
” Health Services/HMOs: Top Recipients
Rank Candidate Amount
1 Obama, Barack (D) $1,262,224
2 Clinton, Hillary (D-NY) $575,249
3 McCain, John (R) $412,918
4 Baucus, Max (D-MT) $213,500 “
http://www.opensecrets.org/ind…..ipdetail=M
I don’t think that campaign finance reform, with or without public funding, will ever do more than slow down and/or complicate this kind of corruption–and thus make it more expensive. While reform has to be done, it will nonetheless tend to further the concentration of power into fewer hands with more money–more money to hire the cleverer lawyers needed to find and exploit loopholes, more money to finance stealthier “independent” advocacy groups and astroturfing campaigns, more money to pay better lobbyists who can find new ways to maximize a candidate’s public and private take, and more money to just sweeten the pot and justify the risks of breaking tighter rules.
The problem is that campaign finance reform keeps the basic campaign finance paradigm intact, which in turn favors the players who have mastered this paradigm. It equates cash with free speech.
Grassroots, net-based funding has shown that it can work against these entrenched interests. It breaks with the paradigm, because it is impossible to identify the gatekeeper–public or private–that holds the keys to the big money. You cannot easily predict the behavior of indeterminate numbers of issues-driven donors. The individual amounts given are never large enough to rise to the level needed to sway public policy in ways that run counter to will of the people and amount to bribery.
Another approach would be to provide free broadcast air time rather than free public money. Air time would only be useful for the legitimate campaign purpose of communicating with (I won’t say “informing”) voters, so it would give the political insiders less flexibility than cash, public or otherwise. The airwaves are public property, so enacting the requirement should simply be a matter of amending the licensing process. Time could be provided equally to all candidates, so that a Kucinich and a Paul could be heard alongside an Obama and a McCain. Free air time would undercut the arguments that equate cash contributions with speech and would thereby make it easier to distinguish bribery from advocacy. Since broadcast media, particularly TV, are the major reason why cash is at present so valuable politically, the proposal would greatly reduce the legitimate demand for it. Large donations would automatically raise questions.
Thanks for this great diary!
We have to have universal health care.
Baucus is showing what an ass he is, making a crack about someone who knows a hell of a lot more than he does about the subject.
what an awesome diary! thanks!
wish i could recommend it twice.
Seconded.
Thank you for the post.
Excellent! Thanks for mucking in and getting the story. This is an example of actual news collecting as opposed to lifting other people’s work in the print world. Well done!
That’s kind of you, but my little dispatch didn’t remotely do justice to the nurses’ efforts, because I’m not familiar with their national organizations and leaders, and I didn’t want to inadvertently flub or snub.
But you were reporting on the scene, just the same. You made an original contribution. That’s the main bit. Perhaps you’ll be inducted into the FDL brigade of stringers as a charter member, if such a thing ever comes into being.
Every time I watch this clip I get angrier! The part with Baucus pretending to dialog with the Eighth Protester as he has dragged from the chamber is particularly farcical. “I have deep respect for your viewpoint!” That’s apparent from the fact that he didn’t even feel that we deserve a place at the table, not one of 45 available places! Pay to Play Senate is exactly correct.
The “deal is a deal” Senate-except on Credit Cards, Military Enlistments, and Social Security. The Arlen Specter is now a Democrat Senate, Arlen, the man who introduced a Bill after Jeffords defection attempting to ban mis-term Party changes. These people have demonstrated to my complete satisfaction from the denunciation of Moveon.org last year to cramdown, that they stand for nothing other than themselves. Fuck them all!
The need for a Third Party has never been more glaring apparent. I cannot support these people any longer, I will give to PDA candidates only in the future. I will give to local Democrats, only because Texas Republicans are certifiable. I will never, under any circumstances, again give a nickle to a Bluedog-I would just as soon as a bona fide Republican, at least you know what you have with them.
Thanks for being there and bringing us this report. The tables in Washington must be shrinking…
When I called Sen. Kerry (D-MA and Fin. Comm. member)’s office on Tuesday and they hung up on me as soon as they heard the word “single Payer” come out of my mouth, they did transfer my call to the person who answers for the SFC itself.
I said that Baucus was corrupt and unrepresentative, and the staffer wanted to get me into an argument “do you have any evidence that Sen. Baucus has broken the law, everything that Sen. Baucus has done is perfectly legal.”
Well no, I don’t have any _specific_ evidence that Baucus has broken the law, I have 2 jobs and a family and I’m not spending my time pouring over B’s contribution records and the history of his legislative efforts to reward those contributors. Yet hopefully some of you in Montana do have the time and inclination to be doing that.
And even if you aren’t maybe it’s time for a wave of phone calls to the FBI’s offices in Billings and Butte speaking about your _suspicions_ that Baucus is legally corrupt and asking for an investigation.
And as I did argue with the staffer, even if Baucus is technically within the law, he is certainly morally and ethi8cally corrupt, as is the system he resides in. That moral and ethical corruption label also applies to Kerry and Schumer and my own Sen. Wyden and all the rest of them who allow this corrupt, unrepresentative system to go on.
Please, firepups, make those calls, get your friends to make those calls, let cowardly Sen. Kerry and the rest of these sold-out, compromised Dem. Senators know that we consider them morally and ethically corrupt, tell their staffers that over and over in no uncertain terms. I also like the line of argument about Dem. Senators sabotaging Obama’s ideals. The messages will get through if enough of us do it, and slowly, tentatively, and fitfully, it will eventually make a difference (probably after Mercury stops going retrograde on May 31).
Two addenda: The key organization(s) responsible for this week of activity is the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee. Their website has some info on yesterday’s events and ongoing activism this week that goes beyond the details in my post.
Also, d’Oh!, I neglected to mention that a video crew from Bill Moyers Journal was on hand yesterday. I have no info on whether/when any of their coverage will run.
Max Baucus (and by extension Obama) has no idea who he’s messing with.
Never … ever … underestimate the CNA, just ask Arnold
A report from Bill Moyers Journal about a year ago on the CNA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPPuvEEUC9A
that’s a great story – thanks. gotta love the CNA!
Thanks for those links, John! They are indeed the “mighty mighty nurses.” The Moyers clip mentions the SEIU/CNA tensions, about which I’m not totally conversant. I know they’ve reached some manner of truce, although on the issue of single payer, the SEIU has signed on with the HCAN “public option” coalition, while CNA stands firm for HR 676 (John Conyers’s single-payer bill).
One of the pleasures yesterday for me was meeting and talking with so many people who fully understand the difference between single payer and public option. At the rally, one of the speakers was a very cool and inspiring physician (whose name I forget), who also sits on the SEIU board. The crowd was totally with her, but at one moment she slipped and used the phrase “public option.” It was the only time I heard those words all day, and although I may be projecting, I could swear I felt people’s hair collectively stand on end.
Thank you Ralphbon
Single Payer at the table NOW