Mike and I had Niki Tsongas on LeftAhead yesterday and I thought it went very well. Tsongas was wonkier than I had expected, in a good way. For people who like a good, meaty podcast, filled with a broad spectrum of issues and some specifics to go along with it, I think you'll like it a lot.
You can listen or download it at the link above, on this site's right-hand sidebar, blogtalkradio.com/lefties or on Itunes, searching for LeftAhead amongst the podcasts.
Showing posts with label niki tsongas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label niki tsongas. Show all posts
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Thursday, October 11, 2007
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.
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.
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
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!
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
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.
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.
Friday, August 24, 2007
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.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
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.
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.
Monday, July 16, 2007
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.
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.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
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.
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.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
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.
Saturday, June 02, 2007
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.
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.
Monday, May 14, 2007
Niki Tsongas Going Nuts?
Because she's certainly sounding it.
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.
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.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
What the Hell is This All About? Health Care (and Niki Tsongas)
Businesses aren't even paying their paltry $295 to avoid getting their employees health insurance.
Umm... what was the enforcement on this law? Please tell me there was some kind of enforcement. Why didn't the Globe include that aspect in their story? There's something wrong here that businesses aren't even willing to pay the $295, when people having to buy the state insurance may be paying that much every month, on lousy salaries to boot.
Oh, by the by, this is the system Niki Tsongas thinks is so great it should be brought to the national stage. Gee, whiz... isn't that special?
The more I think about it, the more I think this "universal" coverage - that isn't universal at all - needs to be scrapped and completely redone. I just don't see how anything but a single-payer system modeled after a county that actually does it right can tame this Health Care beast.
Umm... what was the enforcement on this law? Please tell me there was some kind of enforcement. Why didn't the Globe include that aspect in their story? There's something wrong here that businesses aren't even willing to pay the $295, when people having to buy the state insurance may be paying that much every month, on lousy salaries to boot.
Oh, by the by, this is the system Niki Tsongas thinks is so great it should be brought to the national stage. Gee, whiz... isn't that special?
The more I think about it, the more I think this "universal" coverage - that isn't universal at all - needs to be scrapped and completely redone. I just don't see how anything but a single-payer system modeled after a county that actually does it right can tame this Health Care beast.
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
So Much for Not Giving an Endorsement...
MA-05 was just starting to get interesting, but today we learn that Congressmen Meehan's wife will be serving as candidate Tsongas's campaign manager. Now, Marty Meehan didn't say "I'm endorsing Niki Tsongas," but the fact that his wife will be her campaign manager is such a blatant blanket of support that Niki's voters are going to be warm at night knowing that she's his man - in the political arena, of course. The sad thing is I was actually starting to like Niki, but I confess myself disappointed here.
What happened to Congressman Meehan's pledge to not get involved? If he truly wanted to support someone to replace him, that is his perogative, but this isn't the underground railroad here. He doesn't need to leave secret signs of support. Meehan should have stayed out of it or have been open and honest to begin with.
Update: It's funny, I was talking with Lynne and Mike earlier today about next week's LeftAhead show, deciding what topics it would be on, when I said something like 'let's not talk about the MA-05 race, unless something big happens.' Of course, I figured, what big things could happen at this point in the campaign? Oops. On top of Meehan's quasi-endorsement, a second candidate just dropped out of the race.
What happened to Congressman Meehan's pledge to not get involved? If he truly wanted to support someone to replace him, that is his perogative, but this isn't the underground railroad here. He doesn't need to leave secret signs of support. Meehan should have stayed out of it or have been open and honest to begin with.
Update: It's funny, I was talking with Lynne and Mike earlier today about next week's LeftAhead show, deciding what topics it would be on, when I said something like 'let's not talk about the MA-05 race, unless something big happens.' Of course, I figured, what big things could happen at this point in the campaign? Oops. On top of Meehan's quasi-endorsement, a second candidate just dropped out of the race.
Some MA-05 Differences
On yesterday's episode of LeftAhead, the round e-table discussed a lot of things - but chief among them was the MA-05 race. As I said late last night, Lynne has some key insights. I suggest listening into the show to get a full sense of the race we've seen so far, but I thought I'd tackle a few quick ones right here.
Despite what a lot of people have said (including me), there are key policy differences. The race really does extend beyond picking between like minds. For example, Lynne talked about universal health care - not all of the candidates agree there. Niki Tsongas, for example, used to serve on the board of Fallon Healthcare - is she the kind of candidate that's going to support a true universal system? One that considers health a public (not private) good?
Another candidate, Jamie Eldridge, has really fashioned himself as the "progressive" candidate - something he's lived up to in a lot of ways, especially in terms of supporting the Governor's call to cut unfair corporate tax loopholes and campaign finance reform. However, he's also fundraising on a very high scale (among the highest in the race so far, but not on Tsongas's level) - and surely not all of that money is coming from small donations and regular folks.
Then there are other kinds of differences too - for example, differences in how much information candidates are putting out there. Touching on this subject, Lynne ranks the candidate websites. There are differences in political experience, as well as differences in private-world experience.
People also have to take Meehan's seniority - and power - into consideration. Meehan was one of the most powerful and effective congressmen out there, able to champion issues like campaign finance even when Republicans were in power. Constituents of his may decide they want someone who can rise in power just as quick as he did and be a leader. Even if Meehan's credibility faltered a bit when he hoarded all his money during last election, he was certainly right on most of the positions and solidly liberal (if not progressive). Not all the often-liberal congressmen in Massachusetts have been able to enjoy that kind of success in terms of leadership in the House. It was a point Mike made well yesterday on LeftAhead that certainly rings true. However, what isn't clear is who could best fill those shoes.
So, there's a lot to chew on - and not a lot of time to do it. Furthermore, with so many people in the race, 25% of the vote could win it. People may have to pick the lesser of two evils, instead of the candidate they really want, to avoid seeing someone they really don't want elected. Voting strategically may become paramount in this race. In the meantime, the Lowell Sun interviewed the candidates and Dick Howe is posting videos of all the candidates at their first forum.
Despite what a lot of people have said (including me), there are key policy differences. The race really does extend beyond picking between like minds. For example, Lynne talked about universal health care - not all of the candidates agree there. Niki Tsongas, for example, used to serve on the board of Fallon Healthcare - is she the kind of candidate that's going to support a true universal system? One that considers health a public (not private) good?
Another candidate, Jamie Eldridge, has really fashioned himself as the "progressive" candidate - something he's lived up to in a lot of ways, especially in terms of supporting the Governor's call to cut unfair corporate tax loopholes and campaign finance reform. However, he's also fundraising on a very high scale (among the highest in the race so far, but not on Tsongas's level) - and surely not all of that money is coming from small donations and regular folks.
Then there are other kinds of differences too - for example, differences in how much information candidates are putting out there. Touching on this subject, Lynne ranks the candidate websites. There are differences in political experience, as well as differences in private-world experience.
People also have to take Meehan's seniority - and power - into consideration. Meehan was one of the most powerful and effective congressmen out there, able to champion issues like campaign finance even when Republicans were in power. Constituents of his may decide they want someone who can rise in power just as quick as he did and be a leader. Even if Meehan's credibility faltered a bit when he hoarded all his money during last election, he was certainly right on most of the positions and solidly liberal (if not progressive). Not all the often-liberal congressmen in Massachusetts have been able to enjoy that kind of success in terms of leadership in the House. It was a point Mike made well yesterday on LeftAhead that certainly rings true. However, what isn't clear is who could best fill those shoes.
So, there's a lot to chew on - and not a lot of time to do it. Furthermore, with so many people in the race, 25% of the vote could win it. People may have to pick the lesser of two evils, instead of the candidate they really want, to avoid seeing someone they really don't want elected. Voting strategically may become paramount in this race. In the meantime, the Lowell Sun interviewed the candidates and Dick Howe is posting videos of all the candidates at their first forum.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments