 |
 |
   Washingtons budget hawks want to decimate the federal workforce to shrink the deficit. It will have the opposite effect.
 There arent nearly enough counterterrorism experts to instruct all of Americas police. So we got these guys instead.
 Last year there wasn�t a single fatal airline accident in the developed world. So why is the U.S. health care system still accidently killing hundreds of thousands? The answer is a lack of transparency.
|
   |
|
|
October 15, 2010
ANOTHER DEM BUCKS THE TREND ON HEALTH CARE POLITICS.... Following up on an item from yesterday, it's actually pretty encouraging to see the recent shift in strategy for many congressional Democrats who aren't afraid of health care reform. All of a sudden, we're seeing a number of congressional Democrats run on, instead of away from, the benefits of the Affordable Care Act. The latest example is Rep. Allyson Schwartz's (D-Pa.) new ad, unveiled this week, touting her work on protecting children with pre-existing conditions from insurance discrimination -- a key and popular provision in the Affordable Care Act. And while this is a good ad with merit, the larger significance is the fact that a growing number of Dems have decided to stop hiding from one of their landmark achievements. Just in the last few weeks, we've seen ads with a pro-ACA message from Sens. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) and Harry Reid (D-Nev.), and among House incumbents, Reps. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.), Scott Murphy (D-N.Y.), Dan Malloy (D-Conn.), Earl Pomeroy (D-N.D.), and Dina Titus (D-Nev.). What's more, Brian Beutler noted this week that some candidates, including Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), and Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-Ind.), have touted at least parts of the Affordable Care Act during debate performances, and Reps. Steve Kagen (D-Wis.) and John Garamendi (D-Calif.) have published op-eds in their districts defending the law. The conventional wisdom -- the law is unpopular, so Dems don't want to talk about it -- certainly isn't true everywhere. —Steve Benen 10:05 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (6)
Comments
Interesting that Feingold has such an ad. I thought he voted against it. Posted by: JackD on October 15, 2010 at 10:23 AM | PERMALINKGood to hear. Of course, this comes after six months when the Dems dug themselves into a huge hole by not constantly touting it as a major accomplishment. But better late than never I guess. Posted by: Basilisc on October 15, 2010 at 10:30 AM | PERMALINKIf memory serves, health care reform *was* a big, important issue for many voters in the 2008 general election, so it beats me why it has become such a problem for said voters. I still can't figure out how the movie 'Sicko' could have struck such a chord in the populace, yet within a few short months of the 2008 general election the Republicans and Tea Baggers managed to convince people they really weren't desperately unsatisfied with this country's health care system. Can anyone explain this turn about to me? Other than many people in this country really don't know what the hell they want? Posted by: Varecia on October 15, 2010 at 10:52 AM | PERMALINKDan Malloy is running for governor in CT. Posted by: Joe Scordato on October 15, 2010 at 10:55 AM | PERMALINKLiberals in the party have been screaming that ACA was not a good bill; rather it was a handout to insurance and pharmaceutical companies. And the optics all support that view. As Varecia said, Democrats were elected to solve this problem. One of two things MUST be true: (1) Democrats solved the problem and the bill should be a political asset or (2) Democrats DIDN'T solve the problem and the bill is a political liability. Here's the problem that I have. What bill would Third-Way Democrats be enthusiastic about defending? Yes, liberals compromised. They wanted a bunch of stuff that they didn't get. But refresh my recollection. What did Third Way Democrats compromise on? THEY GOT WHAT THEY WANTED in this bill. If Third-Way Democrats got what they wanted in the legislation and aren't screaming from the rooftops about how wonderful it is then the only explanation is that they never believed that what they wanted was in the best interest of the public anyway. Posted by: square1 on October 15, 2010 at 11:22 AM | PERMALINKI'm very proud to say that Rep. Schwartz is a member of my synagogue, and that I've met + talked w/her several times. As a matter of fact, her son is getting married soon. A year or so back, she, Rep. Pat Murphy, + Arlen Specter came to speak to us. I was tickled when Rep. Murphy commented that he'd heard of me (by my real name, not 'Zorro') in Congress, through some political work I do. Highly cool, 
May 2011
April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 |
|
|
    |
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
||||||
buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly |
||||||
