Hellooooo everyone! Good to see y'all here this Thursday night surfin' the Progressive Blue!
(photo by El Fotopakismo)
Well now, it's Thursday, which means there's only one day 'til the weekend starts! Yay! And cuz it's Thursday, we present you with an Open Thread that's sometimes victorious, and sometimes notorious!
Just in case ya didn't know, this is an open thread where everyone is welcome to congregate and post links and/or other stuff as well as just chatter about whatever's on their mind.
So, I'll start: Well it looks like it's gonna be harder and harder for Congress to NOT pass a Public Option...
Glenn Beck is now pretending that all of the red letter scriptures in the New Testament that address taking care of the sick, looking out for the poor, etc., either don't actually exist or shouldn't be taken seriously. Just ignore Mathew Chapters 5 - 7, Mathew 19:20 - 24, Luke Chapters 3 - 4, Luke 6:20 - 24, Luke 12:33 - 44, Luke 14:12-14, Luke 16:19-25 and numerous other scriptures from the Gospels. Only the King Glenn Version is the real word of God!
Maybe Beck finally realized that having both the biblical Jesus and Ayn Rand as heroes is completely incompatible, so he's trying to invent his own right - wing Jesus who would feel welcome in GlennBeckistan. Maybe he thinks the fact that Jesus' words appear in red is proof of some ancient Commie plot.
Man for so many years in rural America we have heard that Democrats would take our guns, although no Democrat has taken a gun from a rural American that I know. Now, it appears as if the guns aren't all Obama and the rest of us in the "Socialist-Nazi-Communist" cabal that is trying to turn the Capital into Red Square want to seize from rural Americans. Yes, now the good ole boys had better brace for the next fight. Yes, Glenn Beck watchers now we want your fishing poles!!
If the hearing word bipartisan makes you want to commit senseless acts of violence, chances are that you are probably one of those pacifist liberals. Just like so many words in American politics, bipartisan no longer means what we think it means. It would also seem that "progressive action" has come to mean being in the constant state of erasing lines in the sand.
All this time so many Democratic supporters were thinking that Social Security and Medicare represented the backbone of the Party of FDR but in the spirit of bipartisanship our Democratic president recently appointed a Republican as the chairman of the euphemistically named National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. That way the former Republican Senator from Wyoming can "save" the United States from "insolvency" by hacking away at Social Security and Medicare.
Yesterday there was this story by James Ridgeway and he seems to have understood what to expect from the beginning. It really helps to redefine bipartisanship and understand where progress will be going under "bipartisan Democrats."
Since the Bennet letter began to pick up steam, I've argued that the effort could realistically produce 50 Senate votes for a public option. Now, for the first time since the Bennet letter surfaced, we have a clear path to 50 Senate votes.
Shortly after I re - started the "Going Public" series in mid - February, I broke Senate Democrats into three categories.
Every Reason To Join: Akaka, Bingaman, Cantwell, Cardin, Casey, Dodd, Dorgan, Durbin, Harkin, Kaufman, Klobuchar, Kohl, Murray, Rockefeller, Mark Udall, and Wyden.
Need Vocal Constituent Support To Join: Baucus, Begich, Carper, Conrad, Hagan, Johnson, McCaskill, Tester, Warner, and Webb.
Can't Imagine A Scenario In Which They Join: Bayh, Landrieu, Lincoln, Ben Nelson, and Pryor. I wrote that "Bill Nelson is most likely with them."
Since then, the efforts of grassroots Democrats have picked up everyone in the first group but Harkin, Kohl, and Rockefeller, two from the second group, and surprisingly, one from the third. We're at the tipping point.
To 45
CS = Constituent Support
PS = Previous Support
OS = Other Senator from their state is on board.
"Ideally, I think health reform should include some type of a public option."
Tom Carper (Delaware) - CS, OS
Faces overwhelming constituent support. He's a DLC champion who reversed himself on signing the Bennet letter in a bizarre way last month. But he's probably smart enough to know that this is not going away.
Tom Harkin (Iowa) - CS, PS
Leading proponent of a public option.
Harkin is one of my "political heroes," an authentic progressive populist, and a Medicare for All supporter. So I naturally have an extremely hard time believing that he would vote against the public option. Judging by his most recent statements, Harkin doesn't think the votes are there on the House side.
Jay Rockefeller (West Virginia) - CS, PS
Also a leading proponent of a public option.
The Final 5
We would need five of the following eight.
Max Baucus (Montana)
If Baucus is the deciding vote against the public option, he would face the an incredibly intense backlash from MT Dems. Thanks to the Gang of Six fiasco, Baucus is rightfully on very thin ice.
Mark Warner (Virginia)
Not a big fan of a public option. Politically though, he would have no coherent rationale for being the deciding vote against one.
"There is no reason to believe that private insurers alone will meet the public purpose of ensuring coverage for all American at an affordable price for taxpayers," Webb and 15 other senators wrote in an April letter urging that a public option be approved.
Note: I'm not including West Virginia's Robert Byrd because of his health difficulties, though Byrd did support a non - trigger public option in the past.
The problem may very well be the House. But first things first. Because basic accountability is so important, Senators should be straightforward about how they would vote on the merits. To clear this up, the remaining Dem Senators should be asked a simple question, in isolation from what is going on in the House.
"If there is a vote on a public choice, how would you vote on the merits?"
If they say that the votes in the Senate aren't there, they should be asked how they would vote if 49 other Dems were voting yes. This is not a far - fetched scenario. "We don't have the votes in the Senate" is no longer a very convincing argument.
Over to you Tom Carper, Tom Harkin, Herb Kohl, Jay Rockefeller, Max Baucus, Mark Begich, Kent Conrad, Kay Hagan, Claire McCaskill, Mark Pryor, Mark Warner, and Jim Webb.
The Top Three Political Reasons Congressional Democrats Should Support Including A Public Option In Health Care Reform
- It's probably the only thing that can really close the enthuisasm gap. We're talking about the difference between a November that is rough, and a November that is a disaster.
- Without it, the individual mandate is politically indefensible.
- Many of those currently on the fence now have either already voted for a bill with a public option in it (on the floor or in committee), or voiced support for it. They're already going to get attacked for it by the right. Using reconciliation is going to make the Republican base freak out regardless of what is in the legislation. The public option has been consistently popular. If Dems are going to go this route, we might as well include important policy supported by a clear majority of the American people. Among voters who will or potentially would vote for Democrats, support for a public option is sky high. A significant number of the most active Dem voters consider it essential.
Whether it's a public option or a Medicare Expansion, including a public choice is the right thing to do... and the smart thing to do.
UPDATE: McJoan reports on Dick Durbin telling Senate Dems that they can't have a vote on the public option. Durbin is arguing that it will jeopardize the whole reconciliation process, and Tom Carper is backing him up. If this argument is revealed to be seriously flawed, this move will backfire big time.
It looks like the votes in the Senate are there, but for whatever reason, some leading Dems don't want the vote to take place. If they don't want a vote on a public choice, they should say why. But "we don't have the votes in the Senate" just isn't credible anymore.
UPDATE #2: Greg Sargent talks to Bernie Sanders, who says he is prepared to introduce a public option amendment.
UPDATE #3: Ryan Grim reports that Durbin will whip votes for whatever comes out of the House. Grim's headline says it best -- the public option is now "a matter of will, not votes."
Cross posted from Border Jumpers, Danielle Nierenberg and Bernard Pollack.
It's hard to believe that more than 90 percent of the workforce in Zimbabwe are part of the informal sector. These workers do everything from selling bananas and playing music to selling stone carvings and other crafts. Unfortunately because they are not considered part of the formal economy, they are often the most exploited-or ignored-by the government. As a result, in 2002, they formed the Zimbabwe Chamber of Informal Economy Associations (ZCIEA), an associate of the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), to help gain a voice for their members in government.
These workers, who traditionally competed against each other and with the formal sector -are now coordinated and working together to tackle pressing issues such as social security, disability benefits, improved infrastructure, working conditions, and many others.
Just in case ya didn't know, this is an open thread where everyone is welcome to congregate and post links and/or other stuff as well as just chatter about whatever's on their mind.
So, I'll start: Well somebody finally out-crazied the king of wackos Glenn Beck...
This post is a discussion - starter on the Tea Party Republicans. It's made up of a few relatively short takes. Feel free to weigh - in and add your thoughts to or take issue with any of the points I make.
Cross posted from Border Jumpers, Danielle Nierenberg and Bernard Pollack.
In Harare, on the way to our meeting with Wellington Chibebe, the secretary general of the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), even our driver was excited for us.
"He is a good, good man. I've only seen him on TV, but he's fights very hard for the people and to promote democracy!"
Since the early 1990s, ZCTU grew increasingly opposed to the government of Robert Mugabe and was the main force behind the formation of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC). In fact, MDC's leader and the current Prime Minister of Zimbabwe, Morgan Richard Tsvangirai held the same position with the ZCTU before Chibebe.
Chibebe is one of the most vocal-and effective-voices in civil society promoting respect for human rights and democracy. Despite being brutally beaten, tortured, and having his life threatened over the last two decades, Chibebe remains more positive than ever about the direction of his country. It was largely due to Zimbabwe's labor movement that in the 2008 presidential election Tsvangirai defeated Mugagbe. Yet despite MDC's victory, Mugabe, refuses to step down and the nation has a "power sharing" agreement.
When we met with Chibebe, he was cautiously optimistic about the power-sharing agreement and the future of democracy in Zimbabwe. "Our role as the labor movement is to fight for democracy and good governance, respect for people's basic rights, and also social and economic rights." He says that while the MDC plays a critical role in promoting democracy, the mission of the union movement will be to hold all political parties accountable to these principles. "We just can't afford to repeat the same mistake by treating any government or political party as angels from heaven," he says. While he described the beginning of the power-sharing agreement as "terrible," Chibebe felt strongly that "things are now getting better, we are able to make some positive changes happen."
Chibebe was born 300 miles south of Harare. His upbringing herding goats and farming built both a sense of responsibility and social consciousness, he says. "Rural kids grow up different from urban ones, you start fighting for your rights at a very early age. If you aren't aggressive, you'll get abused." He also described how in rural life he had no access to books or libraries, so everyone listened to their elders, learning about the importance of struggle and hearing passionate tales of resistance against the ruling government. Not even a teen when his mother passed away, Chibebe became passionately involved in political struggle for social and economic justice that has lasted his whole life.
Being at the helm of the Zimbabwe labor movement at this moment is no easy task. The country faces unemployment rates of more than 90 percent. The media is controlled by the government. Union leaders are routinely harassed and imprisoned. And the Mugabe government instituted draconian laws to thwart unions, such as arresting any meeting of more than four people. Yet the affiliates of the ZCTU, representing more than 30 unions and every sector of the economy, have remained united. "While it is very difficult at times with unemployment so high to convince people to be in unions, we are still able to recruit and grow."
Chibebe works tirelessly to bring attention to Zimbabwe's economic and human rights realities and to pressure the government to reform its ways. As workers struggle to survive inflation and low paying informal employment, Chibebe has expanded the work of the ZCTU to represent all workers in both formal and informal employment. ZCTU fights for economic and social justice not just for his members, but for the fundamental rights of all of Zimbabwe's workers.
In 2002, Chibebe and the ZCTU had the vision of helping informal sector workers-everyone from street vendors to musicians and artisans-form unions. The desire for social and economic change spread like wild fire when the Zimbabwe Chamber of Informal Associations (ZCIEA) started in 2002. Presently with more than 1.5 million paying members (out of 3.5 million members), the informal workers now have access to all the resources of the ZCTU such as their lobbyists, their research arm, and the strength and power of their affiliate unions.
Chibebe, and everyone we met with at ZCTU, speaks with great pride about the support they've been given by the American labor movement through the Solidarity Center, which maintains an office in the country. "Because of the Solidarity Center and the American worker, we've had incredible moral and material support," Chibebe said. Some of the examples he cites are the role the Solidarity Center plays in supporting their research institute, expanding distribution of their newspaper "the Worker," their ability to fund a lobbyist, create a paralegal program, training activists and leaders, and getting support from international governments and politicians through organizational delegations such as the visit from the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists (CBTU).
Once again the debate over a "soda tax" is going strong here in New York and throughout the entire nation. The pros and cons of this tax are complicated but something needs to be done. Except what is being floated around here and by many governments in a nation of drinkable disasters is really both a natural sweetener tax and a promotion of artificial sweeteners.
The embattled Governor David Paterson proposed it last year as an "Obesity Tax" before public outcry temporally crushed it. The outcry was over this tax being a regressive tax that poor people would be forced to pay with little thought about parents telling their children "No you cannot have 87¢ for a Coke but you can have 75¢ for a Diet Coke." When diet sodas are exempt, since budget conscious shoppers will find drinks with artificial sweeteners and other chemicals to be money saving choices, it translates to government preaching better living through chemicals.
This tax seemed dead until Michael Bloomberg began presenting it as what it really is, an income generator. Now with Bloomberg's endorsement this tax is getting the "full court press" again and Paterson is holding multiple meeting on taxing sugary drinks. Meanwhile there are dueling TV ads here now but little thought about what is being taxed to curtail empty calories through a straw. In this battle of interest groups is anyone actually thinking?
Just now on Countdown: Rep. Dennis Kucinich is a solid no. Compares a bill without a robust public option to "building on sand."
Greg Sargent has a useful roundup of other swing House votes.
On the Senate side, I still do think the votes for a public option through reconciliation are within grasp. We have 37 right now. Akaka, Carper, Dorgan, Harkin, Kohl, Rockefeller, Tester, Baucus, Conrad, Hagan, McCaskill, Webb, Warner, Byrd, and Begich would give us 52. That's home with a little room to spare. Blanche Lincoln, Mark Pryor, and Bill Nelson would be worth lobbying as well. I doubt any of them would back it unless the train were leaving the station. But Lincoln couldn't afford to be the one vote to kill it, unless she wants small donors to flock to Bill Halter like nothing ever seen before.
The grassroots is not urging elected Dems to do something that doesn't make sense. We're urging them to include a popular element that is good policy, makes the individual mandate politically defensible, and is probably the only thing that can really energize the Democratic base in time for November.
Drew Westen weighs in. The entire post is worth reading. Westen reinforces why a Medicare Choice Buy - In would be a winner.
Great coverage of all things reconciliation at Congress Matters.
Mitt Romney is apparently running for president on an "I Heart Insurance Companies" platform
President Obama at his best.
Some much - needed comic relief: Jonathan Chait mocks Mike Allen's reconciliation FAIL.
Hello there everyone! Good to see you here tonight surfin' the Progressive Blue! Welcome to the Monday Night Twilight!
(photo by LaEscapee)
Hey everyone! Well, it's another new week to get through. Hope the first day of the workweek was good for everyone! So let's start the evening week well!
Just in case ya didn't know, this is an open thread where everyone is welcome to congregate and post links and/or other stuff as well as just chatter about whatever's on their mind.
So, I'll start: Ok, today I have a small beef with the usage of our language...
It's hard to believe that more than 90 percent of the workforce in Zimbabwe are part of the informal sector. These workers do everything from selling bananas and playing music to selling stone carvings and other crafts. Unfortunately because they are not considered part of the formal economy, they are often the most exploited-or ignored-by the government. As a result, in 2002, they formed the Zimbabwe Chamber of Informal Economy Associations (ZCIEA), an associate of the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), to help gain a voice for their members in government.
In Harare, on the way to our meeting with Wellington Chibebe, the secretary general of the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), even our driver was excited for us.
