Archive for October, 2009

Support for Public Option on the Rise

Posted on: October 19th, 2009 by Kyle. | No Comments

A newly published poll from the Washington Post and ABC News shows that support for the public option is on the rise. “On the issue that has been a flash point in the national debate, 57 percent of all Americans now favor a public insurance option, while 40 percent are opposed. Support has risen since mid-August, when a bare majority, 52 percent, said they favored it,” the poll found. That’s a very comfortable majority that Democrats enjoy, including among independents.

The poll also found more good news for Democrats that favor a public option. A majority of the public supports passing a public option even if it lacks any Republican votes at all:

Faced with a basic strategic choice that soon may confront the administration and Democratic congressional leaders, a slim majority of Americans, 51 percent, would prefer a reform plan that included some form of government insurance for people who cannot get affordable private coverage even if it had no GOP support in Congress. Thirty-seven percent would rather have a bipartisan plan without such a choice. Republicans and Democrats are on opposite sides of this question, with independents preferring legislation with a public option and without Republican support by 52 to 35 percent.

It’s clear where the public stands. Now Democrats needs to listen to those that elected them to change the system. Republicans will oppose any healthcare reform bill, whether it has a public option or not. We should put forward the strongest possible plan and that would be one that includes a competitor to private insurers. That is the only way costs will be driven down while protecting consumers.

New Jersey GOP Candidate Bills Government for Lavish Hotels

Posted on: October 13th, 2009 by Kyle. | No Comments

The Republican candidate for governor of New Jersey is in hot water as a new report reveals that he frequently abused travel privileges as a U.S. Attorney. Recent polls put him in a tight race with incumbent Democrat Jon Corzine. The Republican candidate, Chris Christie, claims that he stayed in more expensive hotels only when cheaper ones weren’t available.

That’s not the case, according to a report from the Associated Press. “Records turned over so far show Christie exceeded the government lodging allowance on 23 of 30 business trips taken between 2004 and 2008.” Christie has built his candidacy on putting corrupt politicians in jail, “on a platform of ethical integrity and cutting government waste.”

Among the hotels that Christie stayed at are a Washington D.C. resort known as the Four Seasons. As they describe themselves on their website: “Four Seasons is dedicated to perfecting the travel experience through continual innovation and the highest standards of hospitality. From elegant surroundings of the finest quality, to caring, highly personalised 24-hour service, Four Seasons embodies a true home away from home for those who know and appreciate the best. The deeply instilled Four Seasons culture is personified by its employees – people who share a single focus and are inspired to offer great service.” The government paid $475 for a single night.

Cutting government waste? Not exactly.

Progressive Democrats Signal Public Option a Must

Posted on: October 6th, 2009 by Kyle. | No Comments

Leaders of the Congressional Progressive Caucus are signaling to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that healthcare reform must include a strong public option. The Progressive Caucus held a poll amongst its members to see exactly what support would be for a bill without a public option. According to Congressman Raul Grijalva’s tally, who co-chairs the Progressive Caucus, there would be “significant” opposition to such a bill. Grijalva went on to state that members of the Progressive Caucus want a public option with rates that are tied to five percent above Medicare.

The goal of Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky is to contain costs. “I feel confident that the White House will weigh in on a bill that makes health care affordable for the middle class,” she said. “That’s the Speaker’s litmus test, I think that’ll be his litmus test, and he will weigh in.” She has been a strong supporter of the public option, saying that competition with private insurers would bring down costs.

Republicans Have an Olympic Sized Bad Attitude

Posted on: October 2nd, 2009 by Kyle. | No Comments

This week saw a flurry of public condemnations make their way towards President Obama from Republican politicians for his trip to Copenhagen to promote the United States’ bid to host the Olympic Games. It seems that nothing can deter Republicans from opposing this president, including the prospect of having the premier sporting event for the first time in twenty years (by the time 2016 rolls around). The Olympics would have brought with it construction jobs, tourists and an opportunity for America to display a more positive image to the world. The Chinese, despite a horrible human rights record, managed to do this during the 2008 Beijing games.

For whatever reason, undoubtedly political, Republicans are proving to be a self-destructive force in their opposition to the president. In some countries, such as Great Britain, the opposition party is known as the “Loyal Opposition”. We have no such opposition party in this country. If President Obama is for getting the Olympics, Republicans are opposed to it. The reaction from Republican politicians is laughable and childish, but has proven to be true throughout President Obama’s short tenure.

“Listen I think it’s a great idea to promote Chicago but he’s the president of the United States, not the mayor of Chicago,” Minority Leader John Boehner said. “And the problems we have here at home affect all Americans and that’s where his attention ought to be.”

Where, Mr. Boehner, was your opposition when President Bush visited Beijing for a week last year as our economy was crashing? What purpose did his presence serve other than to spend more vacation time as president? President Obama actually tries to do something positive, winning the Olympic Games for his country, and all you have to say is that he should be at the White House 24/7 as Republicans in Congress oppose everything that he puts forward anyway. It is truly mind boggling how Mr. Boehner is in a leadership position.

Speaking of Republican “leaders”, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is among the Republicans rooting against America. Gingrich posted a duo of Tweets bashing President Obama for his efforts:

President Eisenhower had a rule that Presidents of the United States went to the meetings after success had been assured

Somehow charm and oratory dont (sic) seem to work in foreign affirs (sic) but historians have warned that foreign policy is different than campaigning

Using Gingrich’s logic, one should never compete in something unless they are guaranteed to win. There was no conceivable way that the White House could have known the outcome of the vote. They figured that the benefits of winning would outweigh the political risk of losing. Clearly the Republican leadership was more interested in sabotaging the President and country for political gain than they were bringing the Olympics home. I might remind people that Democrats did not act this way in 2005 when New York was rejected by the IOC.

Which brings me to my final thought. If Republicans want something to complain about, it should be the IOC. The IOC is not a representative body. There are two members from the United States out of nearly 100 total. They weren’t even allowed to vote since we had a city in contention. The Europeans, meanwhile, have roughly 50 members (depending on your definition of “European country”). That is a 50 to 2 disadvantage that we faced when you compare the number of European members vs. American. This unbalanced approach needs to be addressed before the United States even considers putting up a city again. North America has roughly the same population as Europe. This formula is equivalent to giving Texas 50 electoral votes and New York only 2 when the states are fairly close in population. Only the IOC could come up with a system that is worse than the Electoral College.