Today’s Blog Roundup is on the flip. Let me know what I missed.

To subscribe by email, click
here and do what comes naturally.

Dianne Feinstein: Simply
Spineless, or Actively Anti-Fourth-Amendment?

• Live: From San Diego, CA.: My response to my Senator’s
  response.
  http://michaelav.blogspot.com/2007/10/my-response-to-my-senators-response.html
• The Left Coaster: Intelligence Committee Dems: Cash Is King
  http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/011203.php
• Bear Republic Action Group: Give Feinstein ‘The
  Word’ on FISA, No Immunity!
  http://takeaction.wordpress.com/2007/10/19/give-feinstein-the-word-on-fisa-no-immunity/
• Erik Love @ Courage Campaign | No More Caving: Sen.
  Feinstein, it’s time to stand up
  http://www.couragecampaign.org/page/community/post/eriklove/BJy

Other Commentary on our
Federal Representation

• The California Majority Report // The Democratic Congress,
  Not Schwarzenegger, is the Real “Collectinator”
  http://www.camajorityreport.com/index.php?module=articles&func=display&ptid=9&aid=2360
• Bear Republic Action Group: My Letter to the DCCC upon
  getting a request for help from ‘Miss Nancy’.
  http://takeaction.wordpress.com/2007/10/18/my-letter-to-the-dccc-upon-getting-a-request-for-help-from-miss-nancy/
• MISS WILD THING: We love Linda!
  http://misswildthing.blogspot.com/2007/10/we-love-linda.html
• The Generik Brand: More Like This, Please
  http://generik.blogspot.com/2007/10/more-like-this-please.html
• Burbank Democratic Club: Standing Up to the Wrong – What I
  sent to Pete Stark, CA – 13th
  http://burbankdemocraticclub.blogspot.com/2007/10/what-i-sent-to-pete-stark-ca-13th.html
• D-Day: We Are So Screwed
  http://d-day.blogspot.com/2007/10/we-are-so-screwed.html

Health Care

• California Progress Report – Campaign Contributions and
  Healthcare Legislation in California: What the Data Shows
  http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/10/campaign_contri.html
• The California Majority Report // As Californians Hold
  Candlelight Vigils for Health Care, Republicans in Washington Kill
  Health Insurance for Children
  http://www.camajorityreport.com/index.php?module=articles&func=display&ptid=9&aid=2357
• Working Californians | Arnold’s Unaffordable Plan
  http://workingcalifornians.com/blog/julia_rosen/2007/10/18/arnolds_unaffordable_plan
• The Bayne of Blog: McNerney disappointed by failure to
  override Bush’s SCHIP veto
  http://blog.bayneweb.com/2007/10/mcnerney-disappointed-by-failure-to.html
• Working Californians | Woeful Standards of Care:
  California’s HMOs
  http://workingcalifornians.com/blog/julia_rosen/2007/10/19/woeful_standards_of_care_californias_hmos
• California Progress Report – Why is the Governor Hiding the
  Cost of his Plan from California Families?
  http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/10/why_is_the_gove.html

Randy Goes to Campaign
Class

• The Bayne of Blog: Campaign and candidate training kicks
  off in Sacramento
  http://blog.bayneweb.com/2007/10/campaign-and-candidate-training-kicks.html
• The Bayne of Blog: Precinct targeting in “Toughtown”
  http://blog.bayneweb.com/2007/10/precinct-targeting-in-toughtown.html
• The Bayne of Blog: Close to the end of the day and we’re
  talking about polling
  http://blog.bayneweb.com/2007/10/close-to-end-of-day-and-were-talking.html

Local News

• SFist: Here Comes Sickness
  http://sfist.com/2007/10/19/touch_me_im_sic.php
• LAist: Compton & Long Beach Begin Garbage Strike
  http://laist.com/2007/10/19/compton_long_be.php
• Left In SF » Lgbt leaders to unite against
  Republican agenda in SF
  http://leftinsf.com/blog/index.php/archives/2302
• voiceofsandiego.org: Opinion… It Is Just Politics!
  http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/articles/2007/10/20/opinion/02labella1101907.txt
• voiceofsandiego.org: Opinion… DA Office: We’re Now a
  Political Pawn
  http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/articles/2007/10/20/opinion/03dumanis101907.txt
• Left In SF » Does the T stand alone? Sometimes.
  http://leftinsf.com/blog/index.php/archives/2301
• The People’s Vanguard of Davis: Students Claim Envelope
  Stuffing Never Actually Happened
  http://davisvanguard.blogspot.com/2007/10/students-claim-envelope-stuffing-never.html
• BlogaBarbara: Community Post: Independent Opposes Measure A
  http://blogabarbara.blogspot.com/2007/10/community-post-independent-opposes.html
• San Diego Politico: The Next Mayor?
  http://www.sandiegopolitico.com/2007/10/next-mayor.html
• Conejo Valley Democrat: Jim Dantona Knocks It Out of the
  Park
  http://conejovalleydemocrat.wordpress.com/2007/10/18/jim-dantona-knocks-it-out-of-the-park/
• The N-Judah Chronicles: A Challenge to the MUNI Labor
  Leaders Who Stuck It To MUNI, the Public, and Proposition A Today….
  http://www.njudahchronicles.com/2007/10/a_challenge_to_the_muni_labor.html
• Left In SF » Pictures from the GAP rally
  http://leftinsf.com/blog/index.php/archives/2299
• BeyondChron » Community Rallies Against Don Fisher
  http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=5021#more
• BeyondChron » Catholics Deny Communion on
  Political Grounds
  http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=5023#more
• The People’s Vanguard of Davis: School Board Campaign
  Fliers–‘Tis the Season
  http://davisvanguard.blogspot.com/2007/10/school-board-campaign-fliers-tis-season.html
• snicholsblog: All the way with HBJ
  http://snicholsblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/all-way-with-hbj.html

All the Rest

• California Progress Report – Planning and Conservation
  League 2007 California Legislative Wrap-up
  http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/10/planning_and_co.html
• California Progress Report – Portantino Reflects on His
  First Year in the California Assembly
  http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/10/portantino_refl_1.html
• California Progress Report – How to Revive California
  Redistricting Reform
  http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/10/how_to_revive_c.html
• California Progress Report – New California Figures Show
  Increase in Voters Registered Without a Party
  http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/10/new_california.html
• The California Majority Report // Today’s Fresh Meat
  http://www.camajorityreport.com/index.php?module=articles&func=display&ptid=9&aid=2361
• The Bayne of Blog: National Latina Business Women
  Association endorses Proposition 92
  http://blog.bayneweb.com/2007/10/national-latina-business-women.html
• Ruck Pad: Friday Quick Hits
  http://ruckpad.wordpress.com/2007/10/19/friday-quick-hits/
• BeyondChron » The Second Annual Alternative Car
  & Transportation Expo
  http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=5024#more
• California Progress Report – Recent California Registration
  Trends: Good News for
  Democrats, Bad News for G.O.P. in Districts Drawn by the Legislature
  http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/10/recent_californ.html
• The Ojai Post : Historic bill in Senate to fight climate
  crisis
  http://www.ojaipost.com/2007/10/historic_bill_in_senate_to_fig.shtml

Rep. Pete Stark (D-Fremont) voted against the 4 month Blank Check, just like he has in every previous Iraq War funding measure.  Rep. Stark has been right on Iraq from Day 1. 

And by the way, what is four months really going to do? I listened to Bush’s presser this morning, and it is clear that come September, it’ll be more money into a civil war. If we are doing well, well … um… the pigs can keep on flying.  If we aren’t it’s because the terrorists have objectives and they new our resolve in September would be weak. No, as disastrous as it will be if we pull out, it will be more disastrous if we wait there, helping terrorist recruitment for the day that we eventually pull out. It is now clear that we are refereeing a Civil War for which we couldn’t pick a winner even if we wanted to.

So, read Rep. Stark’s release over the flip.

STARK STATEMENT OPPOSING ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE WAR IN IRAQ

WASHINGTON, DC – Representative Pete Stark (D-CA) issued the following statement on the Iraq spending bill:

“Decades ago, I ran for Congress because I opposed the War in Vietnam. After arriving in Washington, I carried out the will of my constituents, repeatedly voting to stop funding the death of American troops and Vietnamese civilians.

“More than four years ago, I voted against the original resolution authorizing the President to take unprecedented preemptive military action against Iraq. In the years since, I have consistently opposed the President at every turn, always voting to deny him the funding he requested to continue his failed War in Iraq.

“Last November, the American people delivered a loud and clear message to their representatives in Washington. In electing a Democratic House and Senate, the public demanded a new direction in Iraq.

“Today, however, we’re staying the course.

“The supplemental before us includes no deadlines for troop withdrawal and no enforceable benchmarks for holding President Bush accountable.

“In other words, there is no way I – or the overwhelming majority of my constituents – would ever support it.

“We can’t go on like this, killing our troops and Iraqi civilians – and wasting tens of billions that would be better spent on vital domestic priorities like education and health care.

“You know who supports this bill? President Bush and Republicans in Congress who refuse to acknowledge either the Shiite-Sunni civil war or our lack of progress in Iraq.

“I strongly urge my colleagues to remember who sent them to Washington. It wasn’t President Bush; it was America’s voters. They’ve made their opposition to this war clear. It’s time for Congress to do the same.”
 

This is more of a national story, but considering the importance of the health care debate in California, I think this is a significant development.

WASHINGTON, April 16 – AARP, the lobby for older Americans, announced Monday that it would become a major participant in the nation’s health insurance market, offering a health maintenance organization to Medicare recipients and several other products to people 50 to 64 years old.

The products for people under 65 include a managed care plan, known as a preferred provider organization, and a high-deductible insurance policy that could be used with a health savings account.

When the new coverage becomes available next year, AARP will be the largest provider of private insurance to Medicare recipients. In addition to the new H.M.O., AARP will continue providing prescription drug coverage and policies to supplement Medicare, known as Medigap coverage.

William D. Novelli, the chief executive of AARP, said, “In launching these initiatives, we are driven by our mission to create a healthier America.”

This is the equivalent of the Sierra Club buying an oil company.

I suppose it’s to be expected that the AARP, a major power broker with a keen interest in seeing responsible health care legislation coming out of Congress, would step into the breach with the failure to pass that legislation.  But once you put this interest group into the insurance industry, it’s going to be phenomenally hard, next to impossible, for them to be a part of any health care solution that marginalizes or removes the insurance industry.

Pete Stark preferred to look on the bright side:

Representative Pete Stark, Democrat of California and chairman of the House Ways and Means subcommittee on health, welcomed AARP executives to the Medicare managed care market. “If they provide quality care at a fair price,” Mr. Stark said in an interview, “they could be a wonderful addition.”

But Judith A. Stein, director of the Center for Medicare Advocacy, a nonprofit group that counsels people on Medicare, said, “The new arrangements with insurance companies create a tremendous number of potential conflicts for AARP, which is a powerhouse, perceived as the most important voice for older people.” […]

“AARP will not be perceived as a truly independent advocate on Medicare if it’s making hefty profits by selling insurance products that provide Medicare coverage,” Ms. Stein said. “AARP’s role in this market could give a big boost to the privatization of Medicare.”

The conflicts of interest here are enormous.  The insurance industry has a definitive interest in their own survival.  Yet we know that a for-profit manager of health care is always going to be more concerned with profit than caring for patients.  In fact, the AARP tipped their hand within the article, saying that they would not be able to deny coverage to everyone between the ages of 50 and 64 (that should read “We won’t cover really sick people”).  Kevin Drum writes:

One of the great arguments among universal healthcare advocates is whether to press for a system that continues to make use of private insurance companies or to press for a purer single-payer system that gets rid of insurance companies altogether. The argument for working with the insurance industry is a political one: if we try to eliminate a role for insurance companies they’ll fight us tooth and nail, and that’s the last thing we need. Universal healthcare has enough powerful enemies as it is. The argument for pure single-payer is mostly (though not exclusively) economic: in our current system, healthcare administration uses up about 30% of all healthcare dollars, compared to 10% or less in countries with national systems […]

I think they’ll fight national healthcare just as hard no matter what the plan is, because the private health insurance industry is so big that even a reduced role means an enormous loss of revenue for them. What’s more, I think they’ll also judge (correctly) that even a reduced role is just the camel’s nose under the tent that will eventually lead to the end of private insurance entirely.

So trying to make nice with the insurance industry is a mug’s game. They just aren’t ever going to be on our side, and frankly, I don’t blame them. All that said, however, the fight against the entrenched interests of the insurance industry gets a lot harder when an organization that might have provided significant lobbying muscle for a single-payer system is depending on a private insurance business line for a big chunk of its revenue. It’s definitely not pleasant news for the good guys.

Obviously, the AARP as an entity cannot be stopped from forming a corporation and making a profit.  And generally they’ve been good on health care.  But you can’t very well act to change the system when you’re part of the system.  Also, because they’re such a political force, lawmakers are going to be a little more wary of shutting down the HMO of such a big benefactor.

Forget ArnoldCare, Rep. Pete Stark wants to go BIG.(h/t to Josh Richman) 

Stark’s plan would basically expand MediCare (and redub it AmeriCare…how patriotic) by um, basically doing what Arnold wants to do.  However, Stark’s plan would leverage the existing MediCare infrastructure.  Americans would either be covered by employers or AmeriCare. The plan would be funded through employer contributions and other government revenue. And check out this doozy:

In 2007, {a Commonwealth Fund study} suggests Stark’s legislation would cost the federal government $154.5 billion – less than the price of the Bush tax breaks for the top 20 percent of wage earners. But AmeriCare would save households $142.6 billion, state and local governments $57.4 billion and private employers $15.2 billion. As a result, its net impact on health care costs would be a $60.7 billion reduction in overall spending.

First, let me say that I appreciate the efforts of those in California that are trying to get us universal health care. Especially Shiel Kuehl. Single payer is ultimately where we are going to end up, but in the interim, we’ll need some stepping stones. The federal government has advantages due to the size and the national economy that make these things more workable there.  That’s why Rep. Stark’s plan is so important.

Over the flip, you shall find Stark’s press release.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Representative Pete Stark (D-CA), Chairman of the Ways and Means Health Subcommittee, today introduced the AmeriCare Health Care Act. This straightforward legislation would provide universal coverage by building on what works in today’s health care system – Medicare and employer-based coverage.

“After more than a decade on the back burner, America’s 45 million uninsured are finally receiving the attention they deserve,” said Stark. “Employers, unions, consumer groups and presidential candidates are all debating not whether our health care system needs reform, but how it should be improved. I suggest AmeriCare, a simple proposal that would guarantee quality health care for all, reduce costs and improve quality for people who already have coverage.”

Under the AmeriCare Health Care Act, people would either be covered through their employer or through AmeriCare, a new program modeled on Medicare. AmeriCare would use Medicare’s existing administrative infrastructure, but improve upon its benefits to provide a comprehensive prescription drug benefit, mental health parity, pediatric care and family planning and pregnancy-related services.

Financed through contributions from employers, individuals and states, AmeriCare would limit out-of-pocket costs for all and subsidize costs for people with incomes of less than 300 percent of the poverty level.

The Commonwealth Fund, a nationally recognized foundation that provides independent health care research, last week released an evaluation of existing proposals to expand health insurance coverage. According to the study, only AmeriCare would provide universal coverage and lower national health care spending.

In 2007, the study suggests Stark’s legislation would cost the federal government $154.5 billion – less than the price of the Bush tax breaks for the top 20 percent of wage earners. But AmeriCare would save households $142.6 billion, state and local governments $57.4 billion and private employers $15.2 billion. As a result, its net impact on health care costs would be a $60.7 billion reduction in overall spending.

AmeriCare has been endorsed by a broad coalition of organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, AFL-CIO, Center for Medicare Advocacy, SEIU, NETWORK: A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby, United Auto Workers, National Association of Community Health Centers, Families USA, National Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems, AFSCME, Consumers Union, American Federation of Teachers and the Communication Workers of America.

A one-page summary of the “AmeriCare Health Care Act” is available at
http://www.house.gov…

The Commonwealth Fund study is available at
http://www.cmwf.org/…

BIG-TIME Freedom Fighter!!!

“Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.), a member of Congress since 1973, acknowledged his nontheism in response to an inquiry by the Secular Coalition for America (www.secular.org ). Rep. Stark is a senior member of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee and is Chair of the Health Subcommittee.”

http://secular.org/n…

Hopefully, this will set a precedent for others to join Stark (and me since I am atheist too) in becoming open about their secular beliefs. Usually making an announcement like this is considered political suicide, so it will be interesting to see how Stark will fare in the future now that he “came out”.