Tweet
In the Massachusetts Senate race between Democrat Martha Coakley and Republican Scott Brown, there are several new ads, three by Coaklwy, the DNC and SEIU and others by Brown. They’re been running every few minutes here in MA.
Brown’s ads emphasize that he’d be the 41st Republican vote in the filibuster to stop the Senate from approving the final health reform bill, while Coakley’s ads reenforce the fact Brown is a Republican who would join the Republican obstructionism on various issues important to the public, including health reform.
Via TPM (h/t Eric Kleefeld), there’s now a video of Scott Brown trying to explain on Fox News why he voted for Massachusetts’ health reform, but opposed the US reform bill even though the basic structure is very similar. His excuse, that the MA structure is all just "free market private enterprise" while the federal proposal is "one size fits all" is a complete fabrication, except for the fact that the MA structure doesn’t permit competition from a public insurance option either.
Just like the federal Senate/House reform bills, Massachusetts’ structure that Scott Brown voted for has these common essential government features:
– a government mandate on employer and individuals, with penalties, that they purchase health insurance;
– a government-operated exchange (called the "Connector" in MA) from which people can choose from multiple plans;
– only private insurance plans are allowed to compete on the exchange/Connector; there’s no purely public option;
– government oversight of coverage and standardization of health plans available on the exchange/Connector;
– government subsidies to individuals and small businesses to help them meet the mandate to purchase health insurance
– new government intervention to encourage plans to implement cost-saving practices with providers; and so on.
Republican Scott Brown: He was for reforming health care through strong government intervention in the "market" before he was against it. And now he’s lying about it.
I’m shocked, shocked.
6 Comments
And then there’s the other Party machine’s candidate:
Didn’t Scott Brown actually help write the Massachusetts universal insurance plan, mandates included? Former Democrat, current Republican, whatever he is, I’ll say this much for Brown – he’s been a state legislator and thus is running for another, higher office in the same discipline, rather than just ‘another, higher office’ – which Coakley’s Executive Branch-departing move amounts to.
As long as the 60-vote myth lives, however (and I see no signs that it’s seriously threatened in the least), the Party propaganda will prevail, no doubt, and Coakley will safely coast into her sinecure, safely moated-in against future challengers with corporate cash, just as long as her Party machine can keep helpfully serving corporations at the expense of the people – who continue to fearfully avoid inflicting consequences on that machine to force long-term change, choosing instead short-term conformity, candidate by candidate, to the Party status quo.
If this is what someone with a “D” after their name has to do to win Teddy Kennedy’s Massachusetts Senate seat, the Obama coattails are pretty tattered.
because almost all our politicians in MA are dem (don’t think i’m represented by one R at the local or state level), it’s easier to see their problems (for example, the dem state legislature torpedoed our clean elections law). maybe that’s why every once in a while we vote in an R. not saying that will happen this time, just that it does occasionally happen.
don’t know about brown. but sadly our reform is NOT universal. still about 5% without insurance and many more underinsured. (i think it was about 10% uninsured prior to 2006 — but we had safetynet hospitals so the comparison is slightly more complicated. see the himmelstein interview if you are interested in the policy details.)
brown’s reasoning is bullshit (shocking, i know), but the MA reform is in almost all ways superior to both the house and senate bills.
btw, recommend this recent interview with david himmelstein of MA (on doug henwood’s left business observer radio program):
http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Radio.html#091231
himmelstein bio from pnhp:
also, first author with elizabeth warren on medical bankruptcy studies. other papers on: 45,000 deaths annually due to lack of health coverage, cost of administration overhead $300 billion in 1999, and lots more.
more on MA reform.
new article from trudy lieberman (one of the very best reporters on the hcr beat):
Regulating Health Care
Insurers and hospitals in Massachusetts snub the regulators
(and imo we have better regulators than most states)