Herald (!?!) Endorses Tsongas

I just got an email from Team Tsongas; the Boston Herald endorsed her campaign. This, on top of the Lowell Sun's endorsement, is pretty stunning. Even the conservative rags don't see Oganowski fit for congress. Ouch.

The Metrowest Daily also endorsed her campaign today, though I don't know much about that paper's leanings. Add that to the list. Given the endorsements, debates, SCHIP fallout and a few other factors, it's looking like I don't need to be worried about a Tsongas victory after all. Barring some unforeseen disaster, it's in the bank - thanks to the fact that Oganowski rivals Kerry Healey in being the Worst Candidate Ever.

Globe: It's Not He Said/She Said

No matter how a Batman episode was turning, be it Joker finding the Bat Cave or the Penguin up to his usual schemes, it would be resolved within the last five minutes - resoundingly so.

The Globe endorsed Niki Tsongas in today's edition, mainly for Tsongas's support of SCHIP. No surprises there. However, this is the distressing part. The emphasis is mine.

Ogonowski has said he wants to expand the program, but opposes the bill on the grounds that, by eliminating a federal requirement for identification, it could provide insurance to the children of undocumented immigrants. Tsongas says the bill's wording clearly indicates it would not do this.

Sure, Tsongas "says" it, but it's also the cold, hard truth. Look, I get that newspapers want to seem impartial, but the fact of the matter is they're supposed to deliver the truth. The SCHIP bill clearly laid out that identification is required to participate. Is it too much to ask for a major regional paper to say, "Oganowski says the program could provide insurance to the children of undocumented immigrants, but is in fact wrong. The bill specifically states that participants must have proper identification."

The Globe doesn't have to call Idon'tknowski a liar; they just have to do their jobs and inform the public he's wrong. Why? Because he is, dammit. The public can determine whether or not Idon'tknowski is a lying liar or is merely inane. I'm going with both - and enjoying the fireworks as his campaign implodes like a house of cards hit with a brick of truth. Wham!

Friday's Important Things

Here's a list of all the things you need to know before you go home this evening:

• Don't vote for Jim "Idon'tknowski." David has two great posts on how the wannabe Rep won't be Repping the truth on children's health care, the S-CHIP program. Idon'tknowski says he wants children to have health care, just not undocumented immigrant children. Um, considering the program requires a valid ID, I fail to see how that's a problem. (Though, as David notes, the Globe's still confused.)
• Now Idon'tknowski says he just wants to rewrite the bill, which would effectively kill it (though you won't get that from him). The program would expire and hundreds of thousands of kids would lose access to health care. What a swell guy. Meanwhile, this was a completely bipartisan bill: no re-dos, Mr. Idon'tknowski.
• Why was this guy within 10% last poll? Expect that margin to increase, by a lot - and work for it too. Obviously, the kids can't afford Oganowksi Idon'tknowski in Congress (never mind the troops in Iraq).
• Meanwhile, for all those who were just dying to tear me a new one for being pragmatic on ENDA, you never can tell what will happen.

"Although Bush said during his 2000 election campaign that he does not support ENDA, neither he nor the White House has said whether the president would veto that legislation."

Now, I wouldn't expect him to actually sign the bill, but as I've said all along: we could send the blandest, worst ENDA possible to his desk and it would only help us in the long run if he vetoed it. I doubt most rational human beings know that glbt people can be fired from their job, in most states, simply for being gay, bi, lesbian or transgendered. There's no better way to put that issue on the map than a Presidential, George-W.-Bush veto, especially when the media can go on and on about how bland the actual bill was. Unfortunately, though, it's a lost opportunity: it seems we'll have to wait for a Democratic President to even have a chance on issues like ENDA, all because certain (loud) folks don't know how to be pragmatic and won't stand for anything less than a Titanic bill.

MA-05 Getting Close?

That's what Mike says. Apparently, the polls have tightened to around 10%. While that's not a landslide, I don't know if I'd be willing to say this thing is close quite yet. We'll see if it gets even closer, or not.

Still though, as Mike's diatribe points out rather well, it's certainly frustrating Niki is trying to be an outsider candidate of change instead of playing to her strengths. Republican-lite isn't the best strategy anywhere, because more people will just want the real deal. Here's hoping Tsongas stops hitting the snooze button, turns off the alarm and goes on the attack - no more miss nice gal when there are men and women dying in the thousands in Iraq. Mr. Oganowski would just keep them there longer and that's not going to be a popular decision anywhere in Massachusetts, even in the conservative-ish 5th.

On Tuesday: Eldridge

I endorsed Jamie Eldridge in June, but tomorrow's the day that matters. For a reminder of why Congress needs Eldridge, it's all about leadership. It's one thing to say the right things, it's another to be bold enough to contribute to that goal. Eldridge has fought hard and accomplished much in his tenure at Beacon Hill and he ought to have a chance to fight for the same causes on the other Hill, the Capitol. Whether it's glbt rights or health care, Eldridge has fought the longest and hardest of all the candidates - he was a whip on the marriage equality vote in June and a college Dem fighting against Don't Ask, Don't Tell way before most people came to the realization that such a draconian policy is both bad for equal rights and bad for our military. On Iraq, Eldridge has been a cut above all the rest in his boldness on getting out - even if that means cutting military funding. On Health Care, he's the only sane candidate out there: this country needs Single Payer, where everyone has quality health care and it'd even cost less, and he'll fight the good fight to get us there.

We have an election tomorrow where the winner will almost certainly go on to win the general election; voters don't have to worry about questions such as "electability." All of the candidates vying for the Democratic Nomination can win. People of the Fifth should remember that and vote for the candidate who will do the most to ensure their children are out of Iraq, have adequate health care and have all of their civil rights intact. One candidate has a stronger record on all of those issues than his opponents. That candidate's name is Jamie Eldridge.

Friday's Musings: Ma-05, Ma-05, Ma-05

Here's some food for thought:

• Today is August 24th, the MA-05 primary is on September 4th. That means activists only have ten days to convince voters before the actual primary that their candidate deserves to win. Then, they don't have one day to rest - because that's when it's time to get out the vote.
• There are a lot of good candidates in the MA-05 race, but only one great one: Jamie Eldridge. He's the only one who stood up and declared he wouldn't vote to fund the war in Iraq. He's the only one who will boldly support Health Care for All. He's running the exact kind of campaign we want candidates to run, pandering not to corporate interests, but the people.
• BMG saw the light and has endorsed Jamie Eldridge. Now, the progressive netroots have overwhelmingly called for Jamie's victory.
• The most important aspect of this race is we have a golden chance here to actually elect a progressive. Whoever wins this primary will almost certainly win the general election - and serve for years to come. If we get a progressive in office, especially one like Jamie, who's proven to have the cajones to stand up to tough leaders within our own party before (Tom Finneran), we'll have a loud voice demanding action on Iraq and health care for all at the national level - not someone who will turn mute or give in, but will actually make demands and show true leadership.
• Even though Donoghue, Finegold and Tsongas aren't "bad" candidates or people, they won't be the change we want. We can't lose this golden opportunity because of a special surname. This election represents a chance to affect change in the entire country, Fifth Congressional District voters ought to feel as though its their duty to elect the type of person that would advocate for that kind change that could actually make America better.

Questions for Niki Tsongas

An anonymous commenter leveled the criticism that my podcast, LeftAhead, wasn't all that tough on Jamie Eldridge. I question if Anon actually listened in: we asked for far more detail on health care policy, for example, than the entire forum on health care. So, to show that my questions wouldn't be any different for Niki, Barry, Eileen or anyone else in this race, here's some questions I have for Niki Tsongas. I'll email them to her campaign as well, hoping for a response.

1. How does your experience, be it in life or on the job, make you a better candidate for Congress than your competitors?

2. Health Care seems to be one of the big issues in this campaign. You're a big proponent of market forces. How will market forces keep costs down when we've already been working under a free market system all these years?

3. Why is a free market system superior to a single payer system, or one akin to Germany's Health Care system where there's competition between the government and private companies?

4. Lynne Lupien over at LeftinLowell posted an interesting blog on your positions on a lack of detail on the Connector Plan. You said it isn't perfect: what's wrong with it and what would you do to fix it?

5. People elected to Congress can't be all to all people, but they can become powerful voices on particular issues if they stick to a few. Marty Meehan, the Congressman you'd be replacing, was a national voice on both campaign finance reform and on removing Don't Ask Don't Tell. If you had two or three big issues you'd try to become a national voice on, what would they be?

Over the next week or so, I'll also send questions to the other campaigns too.

Globe's MA-05 Article a Disgrace (!!!)

The article is almost entirely about one candidate and, when reporting financing figures on other candidates, they didn't even bother to call Jamie Eldridge - who, by the way, has raised more funds than at least three other candidates (Donoghue's 325,000 loan to herself doesn't count). Of course, the Globe article, an AP piece, was a Niki Tsongas love fest... and, of course, it was about the horse race instead of actual issues. I'm looking forward to one article in the Globe on the candidates' health care policies, Iraq war differences or environmental positions. Don't worry, I won't hold my breath.

By the way, my blog last night was - to put it mildly - prescient.

PS: I actually like Niki Tsongas, but it's really hard feeling that way when the media has shown a clear and enduring bias during this race. I don't mind pieces that focus on either particular candidates or horse-race issues, but they must be accompanied by even more substantive stories that give a fair look at the myriad candidates. It's not exactly hard to print something on any of their positions: any reporter could whip that up in a day. That's why today's Globe article is such a disgrace - if this is what they're going to print on MA-05, they may as well not print anything at all. After all, they have more serious news to print, like prudes in Vermont.

What's Wrong With the Fifth:

One of the interesting/appalling things about the Fifth Congressional Race - no matter what horse you back - is the fact that it's getting very little attention and coverage. So far, many of the people who actually know that there's even going to be a special election see Niki Tsongas as either impossible to defeat or doubt she's going to screw up on the job. These people know that she's not going to support the war or mess with social security, so what does anything else matter in the grand scheme of things anyway? Consequently, the average voter's quest for knowledge hasn't even gone as far as the distance to the nearest Dunkin Donuts. People don't know if they want a ice coffee with sugar or the Iced Caramel Swirl Latte. There's a big difference here, folks.

We're talking about a seat of particular national importance: not only will whoever wins the general election vote on issues that impact the entire nation, but Democratic Party members have a chance to elect from myriad choices representing a diversity of ideas and expertise. It's not like we're going to see a spirited race here after the primary. Want a social conservative? Vote Meceli. Want someone with tons of local experience? There's Donoghue. Want Fallon Health Care for All? Pick Tsongas. Want a true progressive? Turn the lever for Eldridge. However, for too many, ignorance is bliss.

Part of the reason few are in tune is because of the way things have changed. I recently watched an episode of Greater Boston on WGBH that featured Natalie Jacobson. She's on her way out as a local TV anchor and had some words that tangently related to the race. One of the things she complained about is how the media has changed and become obsessed with the celebrity - all age groups. It's easy, cheesy "news" where you get to see how the stars live (and screw up). Part soap opera, part vicariously living through others, people's eyes are transfixed on the quickly-moving images on the screen, just like our long-lost ancestors paid instant attention to the rustling of trees: it was to avoid lions, tigers and bears. Now, with media's new-found expertise into how minds work, it's to tune into Paris Hilton, K-Fed and Hillary's love life. Oh my. Genetically speaking (as Al Gore points out in his new book), we're fused to pay attention to quick-paced, meaningless stories - not important news that has more than one or two angles. So the Greater Boston media is skipping the race.

Obviously, this trend is bad for the country - and the Fifth Congressional District in particular. So, how do we combat this nonsense? The written media is mainly unhelpful. Some of the local papers have done a decent job, but generally the best coverage has come from the Bay State blogosphere - which maybe 1% of 5th Congressional District voters read to begin with. Bloggers and readers alike have questioned how to get relevant themes from blogs into the public sphere. Without the time and resources to create any new, sweeping tool to help in that quest, the best thing we can do is talk about the race. We must keep bringing it up to our friends, neighbors and (most importantly) people we know in the Fifth until they realize that this race is, in fact, even more interesting than Lindsay Lohan's rehab rest and potential sapphic tendencies.

So, people who care, keep on trucking. Write a Letter to the Editor. Go door to door. Talk to your co-workers. Complain to your local news desk. I don't have any better advice. Do what you can do to be, as many great people have said before me, the change we want. Issues like single-payer health care are of paramount importance to the nation. It's time people know about the candidates who either support or don't support what will impact our lives every day for the better. It's the only way this Democratic system works, especially in the Fifth Congressional District.

Podcasting with Jamie Eldridge

My cohosts Lynne, Mike and I had our weekly Podcast, LeftAhead, tonight - featuring Jamie Eldridge as our special guest. He comes in at 39 minutes and stays for the duration, which was plenty of time to get into specifics on all sorts of issues. Despite the fact that we've endorsed him, we ask him some pretty tough questions because we're pesky bloggers that want to put out good material.

We chat MA-05, figure out what exactly single-payer health care really is, marriage equality, Blogs of the Week, immigration and a whole boatload of issues. Mike says he'll edit the segment down into several issue-related spots, so go pester him on his website to make sure he does. Other than that, it was a great episode and I hope everyone will check it out!

Why Jamie Eldridge is Going to Win

It isn't any secret that I've become a fan of Jamie Eldridge - but I just don't like him, I also think he's going to win. I think I have a pretty good track record of picking races, too (Deval Patrick in March '06, for starters). Here's why Jamie Eldridge is going to win:

• He doesn't need tons of cash. If he can win on public financing, with an opponent, he can beat the well-funded Niki Tsongas & Company.
• Despite several good candidates, the blogosphere has largely recognized Jamie Eldridge as the best, progressive candidate. I've noticed that in races where the blogs are divided (i.e. John Bonifaz's campaign, up until the very end), we don't make much of a difference. However, when the blogs become a chorus of support, it's either useful for the campaign or is reflective of a larger political base of excitement that's seeped into the blogs. Either way, the blogs are singing the praise of Jamie Eldridge and it will make a difference.
• His race is exciting. At the health care forum, I truly witnessed it. Lynne told me it was the same at the Iraq forum. If the progressives and grassroots in the 5th district have lined up behind Eldridge, watch out.
• In a Democracy for America poll, Eldridge's campaign took 70% of the support from DFA's district members. That's 70% out of all five candidates. The great importance of that is he'll probably get their official endorsement and support, but it's definitely a good gauge of his support among progressives too.
• Even Tsongas supporters have conceded to me her support is soft. Just read this guy and wonder if she's going to be the next Tom Reilly (albeit a helluva lot more likable).
• With 5 candidates, if all the progressives in the district line up for Eldridge, he wins.
• Furthermore, while he isn't from one of the larger cities in the district, he's the only person from his entire area and the people in the large cities are going to divide their support (i.e. Donoghue and Tsongas in Lowell).
• Primaries have low turnout, especially those that take place in the summer. Special elections tend to be even lower turnout. I wonder how high the turnout is going to be the day after Labor Day? Because that's when this election is taking place. Who's going to show up at the ballots during a Labor Day Special Election Primary? The people genuinely excited about their candidate - or the people who would normally vote based on name recognition or even region?
• Eldridge may not be that far down in the polls today, with an entire summer to make up whatever the minute difference is. I've heard several rumors that in Tsongas's internals, he's pulling a close second.

So there we go. Jamie Eldridge is going to win this thing - in this blogger's eyes. However, I will remind all primary voters to vote your heart. Whoever wins this primary will win this race, even if it's someone scary like Meceli (pro-life and anti-gay). So, like in almost any other primary in Massachusetts, I'm giving my annual reminder: don't vote based on any preconceived electability that may or may not be true, vote for the person you think will best serve the 5th Congressional District, Massachusetts and - most importantly of all - America.

Lynne Posts MA-05 Iraq War Forum!

They're over on her website, but on the way to it go to MyDD.com and hit recommend so we can get these videos seen by thousands. The kind of work Lynne just did to get this forum online is exactly the reason why the blogosphere is so great. There was no serious media coverage of the Iraq War forum by any of the large Boston papers; thanks to Lynne's hard work hundreds or even thousands of people will get to shine a light on the candidates' opinions and plans on the Iraq war and military in general.

Thanks Lynne!

My Fifth Congressional Endorsement

I just finished this week's LeftAhead podcast with Mike and Lynne, where we officially endorsed Jamie Eldridge for the Fifth Congressional Race. I pre-wrote my own reasons, which I'll post below, but I do want to say ahead of time that I will still report all facets of this race. Since the MSM isn't going to be covering this as it should, someone needs to.

Anyway, here's what I wrote.

Just like at the start of the Lt. Governor's primary race, I came out in initial favor of the 'anti-progressive' candidate. I liked Deb Goldberg for a long time then - and I liked Niki Tsongas for a long time now, too. Yet, I've never met a flirt I've ever been compatible with - and Niki Tsongas isn't going to be the first. I really like her, as a person. She certainly has a bit of a charm about her, but "charm" isn't what this race is about. It's about what's best for the Fifth Congressional District and the entire United States of America.

Barry Finegold, Donoghue and Meceli aren't the right choices either. All of them lack the clear and cohesive vision, backed by powerful, fearless - and progressive - leadership on the most important issues facing America. Will the country ever, for example, enact a true Universal Health System if candidates like Donoghue were elected throughout the country? She's already conceded defeat on a universal system, Republicans and DINOs have no reason to make a compromise look anything like reasonable if we've conceded everything from the start.

Don't get me wrong, this endorsement isn't a deduction: I haven't looked at each candidate and found them incompatible. Eldridge has come to be the clear choice of his own volition, proving to me in person just why voters in the fifth district ought to have him as their Representative. In fact, you can just look at his contrast with Donoghue to understand why. While Donoghue is talking about how we'll never get a Universal System and how we need to give in to the special interests to bring more coverage, Jamie Eldridge fought for a better system already. The resulting Mass Health Care bill isn't something that has come close to meeting his approval, but leadership like his helped bring us one giant leap forward to actual Universal coverage. He didn't go in there with a glass-half-full attitude and was able to bring about some sort of compromise that no one - at the time - thought possible. It's progress, something Eldridge has consistently strived for.

Matt Stoller of mydd.com had a post asking people who they thought was the best, most progressive, candidate in the Fifth Congressional District. Stoller is right in saying that this seems to be a golden opportunity to elect one of the few actual progressives in Congress. Jamie Eldridge is that person. He was first elected under the Massachusetts Clean Elections law, the only candidate to take advantage of that bill before Tom Finneran destroyed it. He's been a clear and strong leader on gay rights - including saying he'll be the man to replace Marty Meehan as a national voice for ending the horrible, discriminatory Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Most importantly, he believes in the progressive movement - as the vast majority of my readers do, as evident by his policies and actions. He'll never be the Democrat to toe the DLC line. He'll never be a DINO. He'll never be weak and back down, like so many Democrats across the country just did by re-authorizing Bush's blurnder in Iraq, without any time lines. If Jamie Eldridge can stand up to Tom Finneran, he can stand up to any member of the DLC. If Fifth Congressional voters are smart - and I suspect they are, as evident by the excitement generated by Eldridge's grassroots campaign - they'll vote for for the best choice, Jamie Eldridge.

Closing Statements on MA-05 Health Care Debate

Here are the closing statements, all of them very good. One of the things that strikes me about this race is that all of the candidates are personable, likeable and wouldn't be bad choices. Do I have my preferences? Of course. Will I make an endorsement? This Tuesday, on LeftAhead, but I'll still cover the race giving people all the facts. Just because I have opinions doesn't mean facts go out the window.

Miceli: lots of experience in mental health and in district he's been in. Holds office hours every month in both of his towns. Town meetings in each town once a year. His phone number's in the book. He's available and effective, especially for hospital in district. He "knows what it's all about... and can hit the ground running." Active legislator, built a business, watns your support.

Eldrige: Lots of great proposals today, but at the end of the day the only proposal that will gaurantee insurance for all is a national health care system. He's the only candidate that supports it. Reduce cost 3 bil a year. Workers will have adaquate health care coverage and be properly taken care of - benefit for all of society. Who will fight hardest to make it happen? It's not about political reality, it's about political leadership. He's going to fight to make health care a right.

Attacked some of the candidates; doesn't care about health insurnace profits and thinks marketplace has been a part of the problem, not the solution. His first vote was against Finneran as Speaker of the House - he's going to have that kind of leadership. Huge applause.

Tsongas: Time for change in our country and no where is that more evident than in the discussion on health care. Wants affordable access to every American: employer, gov't and people have to do their part. She's benefited from good health care. Protect local hospitals and health centers. Costs must be put under control, but can't get there unless we first provide coverage. Address nursing shortage. Good applause.

Barry Finegold: Would add a district office in Hudson, so there's more representation in district. Links himself to Jamie on universal health care. Wants legislation to prohibit discrimination, regardless of preexisting conditions. Drug advertising represents major problem - let's ban it. Doesn't want HMOs making decisions, wants Doctors with patients making decisions. Good applause.

Donoghue: Single-payer is the route to go in the ideal word - that's not to say she wouldn't fight for it. Leadership is more than standing on principal, it's about results. Clear push-back on Eldridge. ASAP coverage, while we strive for single-payer system. Cover all children, working poor, expand medicare, coverage manditory on employers and employees. Good applause.

Some quick thoughts:

Donoghue's biggest problem, in my eyes, seems to be one of rhetoric, but she needs those skills to make an effective congressperson. If someone goes into the US Congress saying "support for Universal coverage just isn't there," then why would any compromise look remotely like universal coverage? She's just not going to be a force for universal health care with her opinions and strategies. She says it she's not being a defeatest, but I think that's the exact message she's sending. Furthermore, her statements saying that she's not trying to be a defeatest and is just being a realist seems to be directed toward Eldridge - it's sort of the antithesis of what he's saying. However, I view his actions in the state house as the exact kind that leads to progress. He's unequivocally supported single-payer health care, but that didn't prevent him for voting for the Massachusetts health bill. So, in effect, he's voted for the incremental steps in the past, but he's not giving in on the rhetoric, which is important. It gives him a larger voice on the issue, one that's clearly defined and could be very effective.

I also really like the gist of Finegold's plan, which reminds me of Germany. Basically, he wants to open up medicare to everyone in the country and allow them the choice of private versus public insurance. It would be true compromise and really could be the market-based price control Niki was pretending the current system is. Since Medicare is so much more efficient, private insurances would either get in shape or die out. Notice, in Germany, more than 90% of the population has chosen their public insurance. Gee whiz, I wonder why? Still, though, since medicare is that much more effective, we may as well use it to cover everyone. Private insurance companies, if they want to stick around, can do what they do in places like France - where they cover optional, additional insurances, but the base insurance is covered by the Government.

I'll have actual coherent thoughts on this shortly. I hope this wasn't all that mind-numbing and people could make some good use of this play-by-play. If there was a winner today, it was probably Eldridge. I'm not trying to be biased when I say this, but he did clearly get the biggest applause. I was a little surprised, when I drove in, to see no "Eldridge" signs - when there were plenty of Tsongas, Finegold and Donoghue signs. I guess his supporters just wanted to watch a debate, because either they were there in force or I guess people just really loved what he had to say. Ultimately, that's up for all of you to decide.

Live Blogging Round 2

Round 2 questions. Everyone was on time, moderator gave kudos.

Now people only get 30 seconds to answer questions, basically yes or no with a little elaboration. I don't like this format. I'll reorganize this later, just trying to keep up.

Q: fast tracking drugs sounded like good idea, is it worth cost?

Tsongas: not with this FDA, they've failed. There's always a need for people who need expiramental treatments, need to look into that.

Finegold: need to streamline fda, but not at risk of not testing drugs properly. Red tape can be concern, but still needs to be safe.

Donoghue: Doesn't support it. Vioxx caused lots of sufferring, etc. Safety concerns outweights benefits.

Miceli: hasn't worked. An emphatic no. Expiramental drugs should be available if there's no other remedy.

Eldridge: under current FDA, a definate no. Need fed gov't supporting bulk drugs, to make it cheaper. Kinda unrelated, but did somehow, sort of relate it... don't ask me to explain =p

Q: Is fed gov't doing enough for avain flu

Finegold: no and no w/state. Is serious epidemic.

Donoghue: not doing enough, fed gov't hasn't funded. Need stockpiles of beds, med needs, etc. Hospitals cannot sustain surge avain flu outbreak or other things.. or even natural disasters.

Miceli: no. Katrina - no transparency of responsibility. No leadership. Same thing with here.

Eldrige: Gov't needs to do more. Stockpile drugs, etc. USDA must hire more to go out to where poultry is produced, that's where the problem starts. Mass used to have best health infrastructure in country, but it's failed as of yet. Supports gov't patrick's plans to add to services.

Tsongas: It's going to come, we don't know when, but we need to plan for it. Shared responsibility. Middlesex Community College, where she works, discussed how they'd respond.

This was a silly question.

Q: Position on tort reform on medical malpractice.

Donoghue: increases in costs has little to do with malpractice. 100,000 deaths in country due to avoidable medical error. Depends on details, but skeptical. Applause.

Miceli: Doctors practicing defensive medicine, look at case and worry about malpractice. Doesn't want to shut people out, but needs to look at situation. He obviously supports tort reform, but was being polite about it. Some sort of a schedual to hold doctor harmless in certain respects. Weird? I want to know more about that.

Eldrige: Tort reform is in the republican playbook. Universal healthcare would be best system to prevent against a lot of these costs, would reinburse doctors.

Tsongas: only would favor it in developing systems approach, developing culture of safety, etc. Doesn't single out doctor, but allows them to be part of the team (the system approach). Until then, reform isn't appropriate. Just as weird as Mecelli.

Finegold: stop frivilous practices. Insurnace rates are too high - why are they going up. It is a major concern, esp gynocologists. Small applause.

This should have been a 1-2 minute question.

Q: Expand on what, if any, part of problem of cost lies at the doorstep of positions:

Miceli: way they're practicing medicine. Defensive medicine.
Eldridge; Not doctors fault, the problem is the system (makes them practice defensive medicine) and too much administrative costs.

Tsongas: Less tests when not needed. Lower costs forms of treatment. Cost containment.

Finegold: Admires what doctors do... I guess he doesn't find them at fault for costs. Needs more funding.

Donoghue: doesn't blame doctors either. Trustee of community hospital (should have mentioned that earlier). Often hospital has to eat time not covered by gaps in system.

Q: What types of restrictions favored on abortion:

Eldridge: Fully supports roe v. wade. 100% NARAL record. Extremely concerned about SCOTUS. Blames nat'l Dems. Needs Dem President to reverse SCOTUS. Huge applause.

Tsongas: Supports roe v. wade. Emily's list endorsement. Blamed suprreme court. Be 'ever vigilent"

Finegold: Gov't stay out of our bedroom and stay out of our rights.

Donoghue: "Ditto" she agrees with everyone else.

Miceli: He's pro-life. Voted for stem cell research, but would support abortion if mother's life at risk.

Round 3:

15 Second Questions. Ewww. This was almost a 2 hour debate. Why?

Q Do you support medical marajuana: no, but not criminalization either.

Finegold: yes, needs good dist. system. Some concerns (oxyconton, etc.)

Donoghue: at present, no. Legality, quality, control problems. Sympathizes, but says there are other drugs. "That's where I'm at right now."

Miceli: I don't know how you'd contorl it. No.

Eldridge: Yes, he would. Doctors can provide oxyconton, but not marajuana? Big applause.

Personal note on all of them: Control problems? We can't control it now, so throw that out the window.

Q: Bush's Stem Cell position:

None of them support it, including Micelli. Needs more research, not less.

Q: Needle exchange programs, do you support?

Donoghue: HIV rate high in lowell. Looking into it, don't need perscription program if it doesn't support it.

Meceli: no.

Eldridge: Yes, proud to support over the counter. Science is there, reduces disease being spread. Don't ignore the science. Big applause. The crowd likes him.

Tsongas: Needle exchange program has been effective, bringing addicts into system. Hasn't increased crime, etc. Would expand pilot programs. Good applause.

Finegold: Yes.

This was an interesting question and could have used more time.

Q: Importation of drugs from Canada

All yes, except for Finegold. He says we need to cut down on our own prices, good applause (no ads). Tsongas says they need to make sure they're safe. They do come from America, so I'd suggest to her they are.

Q: Health spending accounts, support?

Eldrige: Republican talking point: no. Need nat'l system.

Tsongas: no, supports edward's plan.

Finegold: can't be used for substitute for health care. Tentative yes, doesn't like republican plans for them.

Donoghue: no. How do you know when you're going to get sick and how much it's going to get cost.

Miceli: absolutely not. Mentioned "golden rule" - a company that would have been disaster.

Round 4: End of quicky answers. Audience questions now.

Q: Why is political debate focused on the market, when the're not helping things (Kind of missed some of this question).

Tsongas: we have to contend with political realities. Past has shown it won't work. Massachusetts's success = emerging consensus (it's not going to work though, IMHO).

Cost of insurance tied to cost of care. (I'd like to see them lower costs. I won't hold my breath, even if costs go down.)

Finegold: Health Markets will offer choice between public or private system. IN the end, most efficient system will win out. AMount of time to spend to find best plan is difficult and costly, confusing, etc. Large buying pools is good too, lowers costs all around.

Donoghue: Medicare, VA, etc. efficient systems. If the political will were there, she'd support it. Will fight for it, if elected, but in mean time will go toward efficient access.

Meceli: Public versus private, everything has to be on the table. Still a lot of questions and would keep everything in the mix.

Eldridge: going down to Capitol Hill to show political leadership. Medicare is universal health care. Recognizes mass helath law did little to reduce costs and already a lot of people are being exempted because costs are too high. Applause.

Q: Would anyone not support a change in medicare part d, to negotiate costs as an entire medicare system.

Unanamous no.

Q: Same-sex couples are single according to medicare. No protection for joint income. What would you do in congress to protect it.

Finegold: strong supporter of gay rights, would support any type of leg to help gay people out to get everyone the care they deserve.

Donoghue: expand federal rights to massachusetts same-sex couples.

Miceli: wouldn't support it.

Eldridge: leader in HoR in standing for gay rights. Huge applause. 4th whip in ConCon. Still couples in Massachusetts that aren't allowed to receive benefits - the federal employees. Marty Meehan has shown leadership, DADT, he'll be "the lead sponsir in congress." Kudos. Big applause.

Tsongas: supports marriage equality and all the rights that go with it. Would work against DADT, DOMA. Good applause.

Q: Mentally ill, post-dramatic stress disorder, including of reporting troops. Big question, so she gave the card to the candidates.

Donoghue: needs more beds, treatment, in-patient treatment doesn't exist. First act in congress would be updated GI bill of rights. Good applause. Education, unemployment, health care, etc.

Finegold: 26.6% of adults have mental illnesses. We need to destigmatize it, like we did with cancer. Applauded Senator who came out about his mental problems. Insurance must cover all mental illness ailments. Ditto Donohue on veterans.

Tsongas: agrees. Bush adminstration = caused a tragedy in their treatment of returning veterans. Good applause.

Eldridge: Proud to be a mass resident/legislator. Mental health parity law, requiring care from HMOs. Universal health care will provide mental health coverage. Untreated mental illnesses - lead to prison, high expenses, etc.

Miceli: Walter Reed Hospital was bad... etc. He has one of the largest mental health facilities in his district, he's strongly advocated for it. Not happy with what's been done on nat'l level, owe returning veterans better.

Live Blogging the MA-05 Health Care Forum!

I've driven long and far, through empty fields that reminded me of non-coastal California, and arrived in Ryan-Time - which is to say 10 minutes late. It's a good thing Ryan-Time just happens to be quicker than politician-time, because I actually made it before they started the forum.

It's packed. Literallly, well over a hundred people on a Saturday morning far, far away from the well-populated areas of the fifth. It was tough to find, but a beatiful location - with free wifi to boot.

Pictures will follow the event, I forgot to bring my cord.

(Charley and Lynne are here too).

Delores Mitchell is moderating the debate. I don't know much about her, other than she does something with health care. I was too busy typing all the above to miss her resume. But, I did dig up this - behold, the power of google. Time to pay more attention. Questions are about to start.

Q1: We know many of the uninsured are actually working, which didn't get much play, has become one of the most important issues. It's effecting the middle class. With that in mind, if elected, which strat do you suggest to secure all Americans have health insurance?

Donoghue: enormous problem. Pres candidates not in agreement. How do we deal with it? Have to change how we think of health care in this country. Need reform, of course. Health care is a right. Must recognize where we are today, people have struggled. Clintons tried to approach reforms earlier, ranks have only grown and costs have skyrocketed. We've all seen it. 44 million uninsurned (that seems low to me).

Let's start first with the children. Universal healthcare "access" as quickly as possible. Supporting S-Chip program, including every child in this country. "Look at other individuals" - providing preventative health care instead of sickness. 75% of costs swallowed up on heart, diabetes and obesity.

Stopping there. Lots of good points, but "recognizing what we're paying now" isn't going to help us pay in the future. Ran out of time without saying much.

Finegold: Health care crisis. Recognized Jamie and himself for voting for health care as constitutional right. Health markets: gov't programs in competition with private (gaurantees programs, offers choice, can opt-in to medicare model... sounds a lot like Germany.. which sounds GOOD). Real comp will drive down cost.

(Kudos for some real ideas)

Personal story about his wife: good care on his wife, his grandfather died and didn't get good care. "everyone" should have access, no matter income, where your from, etc. Voting to make this a constitutional right shows his committment.

Tsongas: Her family has benefited from great coverage. Family/businesses have lost control. Supports accessible/affordable/etc. choice in plans, etc.

Talked about Truman's first introduced national health care... but she doesn't support a public system. Weird.

Talked about Massachusetts - shared responsibility on govt, employers and employees... but they employers pay $250 a year... not really all that shared to me.

Not perfect, but good start.

Supports John Edwards plan for health care plan. Seems kind of like the Massachusetts plan, but I'll look into it more later.

Time for change in tone in gov't.

Eldrige: Only solution to gauranteing health care is universal health care, single-payer system. Expanding medicare to all americans. "It's a moral outrage... that there are 46 million without health care" and another 50 underinsurned. Burden on businesses, America has high mortality rates. National health care system gaining momentum. It's not unrealistic, just look at FDR's social security.

Nat'l Dems aren't standing up for the people, we need health care. Attacked Niki Tsongas for seeing market place for expanding health care... won't work, only universal will. (The crowd had a big applause).

Good answer, he was certainly fiesty... I kind of like Finegold's plan based on his quicky answer better, but both were good.

Miceli: private companies have most experience, blah, blah, blah. Really looking forward to this guy for the rest of the day... Needs a public/private partnership.

Q2: Identify 3 biggest problems with health care system.

Miceli:

1. Portability: people should be able to keep same coverage when they change jobs, etc.

2. Businesses should be able to buy into GIC-like pools, take advantage of mass-purchase of health insurance. Somewhat available in mass, not available nationally. Single-payer option should be looked into. I guess he's more open than I thought =p

He only gave 2 that I noticed.

Eldridge: if you want portability, you want single-payer.

People without coverage filing bankruptcy (personal experience with city residents).

Cost problem - new mass law doesn't do enough to reduce costs. 15% of GDP provides for health care worse than others.

Profits have *no place* in health care. (Huge applause). ATtacked Tsongas again for being concerned about private health care profits - and for her connection to falon. Health care could use what are profits to shifting it toward better coverage, new treatments, etc.

Tsongas: Clearly we have a problemf or 47 mil uninsured.

Cost of care/insurance too big, increasing too fast. Won't be able to address problem until we bring everyone into the system to provide preventive care, wellness programs, etc. Impliment system now, not tomorrow. Attacked Eldrdige for time-table of Conyers plan, which eldridge supports (would take 15 years, she says). If cost of care comes down, so will insurance. (I'm very speculative about that.)

Last one is nursing shortage.

Finegold: Uninsured is biggest problem. We're one of the richest countries in the world, that's not acceptable.

Cost of perscription drugs too high, esp with fixed income seniors. Drug companies spending too much advertising - purple pill, anyone? - we're only one of 2 countries that allows ads. For every 1 dollar spent advertising, $2 in sales. He'd rather cost in R&D.

Preventive care, not emergency room care. (fairly good applause).

Donoghue: Preventative care, everyone needs coverage ASAP (no timetable). We have great health care in this country, just not universal access. If single-payer plan came up for vote, she'd vote for it, but in the meantime, wants to work other areas (getting more employers to cover, etc.)

People gaming system to make money is problem. Canadian drugs, etc. Non-profits earning profits - using those profits to insure the uninsured.

Today's LeftAhead: Sco, MA-05, Casinos and My Crazy Adventure

Even without Lynne, we had a good show. Sco jumps in at the halfway mark to talk Ma-05.

Niki Tsongas Going Nuts?

Because she's certainly sounding it.

I applaud Pelosi and the Democratic Congress for forcing the issue. The military deals with the world as it is and it is up to politicians to create the world how it should be. A member of Congress can really make a difference; it is very important that we have a strong Democratic candidate.

I think this quote could be turned into a great button. Meanwhile, it's up to voters to remind her that it isn't the place of politicians to "create the world how it should be." As far as I've ever been aware of, the United States Government was in charge of the United State. We may be given great deference to foreign policy by many other countries, but that check isn't a blank one - and is increasingly bouncing on all corners of the world.

Add this warped sense of view to her HMO-love fest and I think I'm officially passing up for her in terms of any endorsement. Is it too much to ask for a politician that gets there's too much to focus on in this country than to be galloping across the world 'dealing' with it and 'creating' it. There are almost 50 million people without health insurance - there's a place to start.

Yo, MA-05 Candidates, What Gives?

President Bush vetoes the Iraq funding bill, which sets a timetable to get the heck out of dodge, and no one issues a big statement? Or has a press conference? And if any of you did, it sure isn't an effect PR machine.

Isn't anyone trying to win an election here? With the country up in arms over Iraq - and with a seat to replace a congressmen who is a leader in the fight to get out of Iraq and on other military issues - I'd think at least one of the candidates would come out with a big statement on the issue. I guess that would be too easy...

Yesterday's Podcast

Sadly, we didn't have Lynne yesterday, but Mike and I soldiered on and had a good show anyway. We talked about the DiMasi/Patrick fiasco and all those recent developments, as well as some on the 5th Congressional Race. Look for a special guest next week for that race. Furthermore, we spent a great deal of time talking about whether or not it was time to make gun control an issue again in America (and enthusiastically say yes, it is).