How About If Members Of Congress Forgo Free Health Care Until The Rest of Us Get it Too?

stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust mixx.com

Posted April 22, 2008 | 05:23 PM (EST)



Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

Saturday the Blue America PAC endorsed Larry Joe Doherty, a populist Democrat running for Congress in one of the gerrymandered districts Tom DeLay created to thwart the will of Austin residents by cutting the city up into three pieces and giving each piece to a bizarre entity designed solely to elect Republicans. But even among Republicans, even among Texas Republicans, the misdeeds and incompetence of the Bush Regime -- and of the rubber stamp enablers like incumbent Michael McCaul -- have so turned off voters that Democrats are finding opportunities where none "should" exist. By all means go back and read over the archive of the chat session we had with Larry at Firedoglake.

Larry covered a whole range of positions with us but there is something he said that has stuck with me.

When I sued lawyers, I sued them for breaching their fiduciary duty, failing to put the interest of their clients above their own. I've known how to do that for more than 37 years in my law practice and I intend to see to it that Congress gets an explanation of how to put their constituents' interests above their own. We don't have a national health care plan for the public but Congress has one for itself. I've called on Michael McCaul to give up his national health care plan until he can legislate one that's at least as good for the public as he gets for himself. He hasn't responded to that.


I've already pledged that I'm not taking the national health care plan afforded congressmen until we pass a plan that's available for the public. It'll be the same for me as it'll be for them or I'm not going to have it... If you don't appreciate how suffering takes place until you've suffered a little then Congress needs to go without its medical plan until they can give one as good to the public.

Yesterday I ran this by a dozen or so other candidates looking for their perspectives. Some of the responses were encouraging and some were disappointing -- like one from a campaign manager who told me that he thought his candidate would like it but that if he told him about it, the candidate's wife would be angry. Along similar lines, although put in a way that was a lot easier to digest, another candidate said he loves the idea and it's "certainly consistent with my politics and my ethics. But I have to talk to my wife about this pledge before I can make it public." He promised to get back to me and I know he will. Russ Warner, who is running against a rubber stamp Republican who violently opposes universal health care (Republican closet queen David Dreier), told me he and his wife and decided that they will forego the congressional health care package if he ousts Dreier -- forego it until every American is covered. "I'm fortunate that I can afford to pay for my family's health insurance," he said. "Hard working American families are struggling every day just to get by. With $4 a gallon gas and food cost rising, the average family has a decision to make. To fill their tanks to get to work or to cut back on needed food for their families. President Bush and David Dreier keep telling us that things are just fine. Tell that to America's hard working families."

Even before Russ got back with me, the very first response was from one of the most impressive of the Blue America candidates, Alan Grayson in Orlando, who gave me permission to re-print his note:

It's a very interesting question. I think that the problem goes a lot deeper than that. The problem is not only that Congressmen have a good health care plan, but that they are paid over $170,000 a year, with plenty of other perks beyond that. And the problem is not only that Congressmen are treated that way, but also TV news anchors, newspaper editors, judges, generals, and bosses of all kinds. All of these people act in concert to protect their privileges.

In my experience, no group of people ever acts to reduce their own privileges. It's far more likely that you will see corporations adopt "green" environmental policies than you will see corporate executives give up their private jets. It's far more likely that you'll see baseball players submit to weekly drug testing than a salary cap. And it's far more likely that you'll see national health care than you'll see any cut back in health care for members of Congress.

Congressmen also get free haircuts. If we all take a pledge against that, you'll still see plenty of mullets in Tennessee.

Here's an analogy. Jeff Flake of Arizona constantly attacks "earmarks." The result is that his district never gets any earmarks, he never passes any bills of any kind, and his committee assignments are lousy. He gets some good media out of it, but he never accomplishes anything. People think he's a flake. Not just a Flake, but a flake.

I'm not saying that cutting health care for members of Congress is a bad idea. Actually, as you can see, I'd not only be in favor of that, but a lot beyond that.

Vic Wulsin, the courageous physician and public health expert who's taking on Mean Jean Schmidt in southern Ohio, reminded me that she already made this pledge to the residents of OH-02. "I pledged to not take Congressional health insurance during my '06 race. During my '08 primary, I repeated the pledge even in my first TV commercial. I will proudly stand with every candidate who does the same." That's why we love her so much; and why we need her and others like her in Congress.

And, in fact, another Blue America-endorsed candidate has also already made a similar pledge. Lehigh Valley's Sam Bennett, who is running a strong campaign to oust Bush rubber stamp Charlie Dent, sent me this note yesterday: "I've already committed in my announcement speech that I will not accept any governmental health care plan until all Americans can have a comparable one." If anyone can think of a better answer, please let me know.

I guarantee you without a doubt that when the DCCC talks to candidates they don't ask them a question like this. And they're not looking for the kinds of attitudes we are. Yesterday Phil Munger, at Alaska's most respected blog, Progressive Alaska, did an astute analysis of who donates to Rahm Emanuel's notorious leadership PAC, Our Common Values. The common values are those shared with Emanuel by "supporters of war with Iran, defenders of the worst aspects of our health care industry, opponents of net neutrality, and enablers of the financial deregulation that allows hedge fund managers to be taxed very little, and who helped engineer the sub-prime mortgage industry meltdown. The list includes the producer of Bill O'Reilly's radio show, several Fox executives, war criminal Henry Kissinger's main business partner, and a whole host of other people who make Alaska's Corrupt Bastard Club look like a kindergarten roster."

Taking a pledge to eschew government paid health care until all Americans get the same package, is as likely to be endorsed by Rahm Emanuel and his supporters as it is to be endorsed by Dick Cheney, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner. But what about you? Would you take that pledge? Larry Joe Doherty, Sam Bennett, Russ Warner, Alan Grayson and Vic Wulsin already have. If you're not running for Congress, how about giving each of these candidates $5.01-- or whatever you can afford-- today to tell them that you approve?

 
 

Comments
56
Pending Comments
0

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
- ICUP See Profile I'm a Fan of ICUP

The healthcare problem couldbe solved without government intervention. Workers need to unionize and collectively bargain for health benefits. Unions were key to the growth of the American middle class and need to be revived in order to save it. It's a shame the Dems, La Raza, and the Catholic Church are helping the conglomerates to acquire cheap labor via illegal aliens.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:59 PM on 04/23/2008
- RoloTomassi See Profile I'm a Fan of RoloTomassi

What you suggest would be an excellent idea [and I'm all for any labor / union advancements], if not for the fact that the system is highly inefficient in it's current state. The government provides most of the R&D backing for new drugs, yet big pharma claims that the outrageous prices it charges in the US is necessary to fund R&D; health insurers run up 30%+ administration costs due to inefficiency; and doctors in the US [particularly specialists] demand and get exorbitant fees for their services when compared to other 1st world nations.

We all know this truth: those who are riding the gravy train do not want to get off.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:23 PM on 04/23/2008
- RoloTomassi See Profile I'm a Fan of RoloTomassi
    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:38 PM on 04/23/2008
- RoloTomassi See Profile I'm a Fan of RoloTomassi

If you missed the PBS program Frontline last week, do try to catch it if it airs again. Here's a link to a page with a brief synopsis of five UHC systems from around the world:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:33 PM on 04/23/2008
- ProudLiberalDan See Profile I'm a Fan of ProudLiberalDan

What would be more likely is to get every Democrat running to pledge not to accept corporate campaign cash. What is really going to stymie any health care reform is how in political hock the Democrats are to health care insurance and pharmaceutical corporations who buy and sell politicians with their campaign contributions like bubble gum cards.

Campaign finance reform is the issue that underlies all progressive reforms. I would prefer a movement for the Democrats to say that "Because we will have to make health care systemic reforms that are in the best interests of people, not necessarily health care corporation CEOs, I cannot in good conscience and will not accept any political campaign contributions from health care or pharmaceutical corporations so that there is no conflict of interest.

Howard Dean in 2004 and Barack Obama today proved that the Democrats don't "need" corporate money to compete. One shouldn't need a law to do the right thing. IT's not "unilateral disarmament". It's arming yourself with the good will and support of the electorate and voting public instead of corporate lobbyists.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:34 PM on 04/23/2008
- paixa3 See Profile I'm a Fan of paixa3

Nothing is FREE. However, I agree that we should all have EQUAL and good healthcare and determine the best way to fund it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:12 PM on 04/23/2008
- RedDogBear See Profile I'm a Fan of RedDogBear

Its just a silly gimick. Prohibiting someone else from getting good health care does nothing for me. And BTW, I AM one of those nightmare stories where I was between jobs and then got a major illness and haven't yet completely recovered.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:03 AM on 04/23/2008
- Lemastre See Profile I'm a Fan of Lemastre

It's a silly gimmick insofar as it's almost certain never to happen. But if it did, and if Congress could get its perks back by extending health coverage, then it would be a very effective gimmick. Obviously, Congress is not being sufficiently motivated by anything currently going on, so something needs trying.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:30 PM on 04/23/2008
- julieeiluj See Profile I'm a Fan of julieeiluj

With the money all of them spend to get elected, only to not care about the people of this country, they could pay for a universal health care plan for all. Great idea btw.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:26 AM on 04/23/2008
- UnbiasView See Profile I'm a Fan of UnbiasView

It would take OVER $2 trillion PER YEAR to support the population of this country.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:37 AM on 04/23/2008
- TXfemmom See Profile I'm a Fan of TXfemmom

The key here is that were we to be as reckless as we are now, then it would be quite expensive. Go to the system as in France, where they pay half as much for the technology, but use it every bit as much as we do, and half as much for the pharmaceuticals, but the companies sell it to them for that, because France tells them that they won't pay more and they take it.

We are the patsies. We need to be tough, pay more for primary care, preventive care, stop paying twice as much for the same technology and meds, and overcompensating certain specialties. Enough said. It could be done, and we just have to get the will to act adult and smart in our relationships with these special interests. Personally, I think that the ability to maintain the health and welfare of our country in those terms should be our number one priority and not those of the overpriced technology, drugs and predators within the system.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:16 PM on 04/23/2008
- montemalone See Profile I'm a Fan of montemalone

Please cite sources.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:54 AM on 04/23/2008
- Lemastre See Profile I'm a Fan of Lemastre

If I could design my own tax-funded healthcare/retirement/salary scheme, it would look a lot like the one Congress has designed for itself. So why would I give it up? The financial problems afflicting those who live and work outside the beltway are mostly abstractions to Congress. I've long thought members of Congress should not be allowed to leave their districts during the legislative session, so that their constituents could have easier access to them regarding their various votes. This might also lessen the number of lobbyists swarming around their offices.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:21 AM on 04/23/2008
- elbzee See Profile I'm a Fan of elbzee

Ya know, I like that a lot. Hell, we have multiple ways of telecommuting. No reason they have to go to DC and rest their fat asses on those lovely leather seats. Imagine the money that would be saved? Imagine an elected official stopping at the diner for a bite after screwing his/her constituents on legislation. (Better yet, as Lemastre points out, having voted themselves a raise!)

As long as we're coming up with ideas, how about a state wide annual evaluation (similar to those us working stiffs endure) that would establish IF that legislator deserved a raise based on the objectives that were stated during the election cycle. Oh, damn, my mouth's watering!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:31 AM on 04/23/2008
- scooperss See Profile I'm a Fan of scooperss

Some of these people have been in office so long they consider it their right to get everything free. After all, they're the *princes* (snort) who decide not only what we can do but what they themselves can do. They give themselves raises even though we don't feel they've done their jobs and don't deserve a raise.

And the worst part is they're raising their offspring to also suck from the taxpayer's teat. Politics has become a FAMILY BUSINESS.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:14 AM on 04/23/2008
- elbzee See Profile I'm a Fan of elbzee

I think we have to keep in mind that fundamentally, to be elected to public office requires enormous personal wealth. So, we keep putting these wealthy people into positions of power to make decisions for us. There is no way a millionaire will have the same concerns that I on my $25K income will. He /she can, however, ensure that their wealth will grow. So, we now have the wealthy elite pulling the strings on each and every one of us. (Btw, nothing cracks me up so much as to have a millionaire accuse another of being elitist LOL)

However, any politician who makes and keeps this pledge earns my respect. (Something I very, very rarely do.)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:02 AM on 04/23/2008
- obamanation31 See Profile I'm a Fan of obamanation31

That's a great idea! why are we paying for their health care when so many Americans can't afford to buy it for themselves.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:54 AM on 04/23/2008
- skibum49 See Profile I'm a Fan of skibum49

I don't want to spoil your little rant but members of Congress do not have FREE healthcare.
They are eligible to enroll in the Federal Employees Health Benefits program (as are all Federal employees). While this plan is a very good plan and while its most certainly subsidized by you and me it isn't free.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:46 AM on 04/23/2008
- mamacat See Profile I'm a Fan of mamacat

The FEHBP covers between 70% and 75% of the cost of the health plan that subscribers enjoy. It is available to active and retired Federal employees and their dependents. Federal employees who are retired military may choose to use that health plan instead, since it costs them less than FEHBP.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:29 AM on 04/23/2008
- fisharefreinds See Profile I'm a Fan of fisharefreinds

I love this proposal. I think they should pay for their insurance and I think their salaries are outrageous.
Not just congress, but judges and all of government. We the people are forced to pay for insurance because our companies won't and don't!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:07 AM on 04/23/2008
- UnbiasView See Profile I'm a Fan of UnbiasView

That's because they get to vote to give themselves a raise, my salary would be $10 million a year if I had that power.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:39 AM on 04/23/2008
- earlyearlyearly See Profile I'm a Fan of earlyearlyearly

The other day Trent Lott said he hadn't paid for his own lunch in thirty years, and laughed.
Sorry Howie, but these guys ain't givin' up nothin".
Hell, that's why they call it public service. The public's only use is to service these sanctimonious money grabbin' windbags.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:34 AM on 04/23/2008
- rationalist See Profile I'm a Fan of rationalist

Actually, there already is a member of Congress who has declined to participate in the Congressional health care plan until all Americans have access to affordable health care. He has also authored a bill to end discrimination in health care.

His name is Steve Kagen, he represents Wisconsin's 8th District. He was elected in 2006 - as a Democrat in a district that has elected Republican Representatives in nearly every election for well over 100 years.

He could use your support in his reelection campaign, as well as some credit for actually being out front on this issue.

He wrote a Daily Kos post back in July of 2007 abou why he declined Congressional health care:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/6/29/8123/83327

His website is here:
http://kagen4congress.com/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:57 PM on 04/22/2008
- evekendall See Profile I'm a Fan of evekendall

Thank you for the links.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:21 AM on 04/23/2008
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in

 
 

 
 
Related Tags