A lot has been written by the pundits about the Democrats who lost their House seats in the mid-term elections.
From some you hear that the Blue Dogs -- and others from swing districts -- did not do enough to prepare for the battle this fall -- that they should have raised more money, or run more robust campaigns.
From some Progressives you actually hear that the House will be better off without so many Members representing moderate districts.
And from some conservatives you hear that Democrats representing moderate districts were stupid to vote for measures like health care reform, energy reform, the stimulus bill and even Wall Street reform.
This Thanksgiving, I want to thank those Democrats from moderate districts who voted to do what they thought was right for the country, even though they knew there might be negative short-term political consequences. They are the true heroes who made possible some of the many important reforms that were enacted since President Obama was elected, and they deserve our admiration and thanks. America needs more political leaders who will do what is best for the next generation, not just the next election.
Let me be clear that I do not mean to imply that I think their support for any of these measures was a bad political decision. Supporters of the Wall Street reform bill occupied, and continue to occupy, super high political ground. In fact, if Wall Street had been made a bigger issue during the recent campaign, most Democratic candidates -- everywhere -- would have likely received more votes.
And let us recall that the fundamental factor that cost Democrats control of the House had nothing to do with any of these issues -- but rather the broad anger about the state of the economy.
Remember that in 2008, President Obama won the votes of people who said their personal economic situation had gotten worse by a 43 percent margin. In 2010, Democrats lost those voters by 29 percent. Those numbers tell the story about what really caused so many Democrats to lose.
The stimulus bill was not a net positive for Democrats in swing districts -- as it should have been, since it helped prevent a depression. But the fact is that the one thing that could have been done to truly diminish Republican successes this fall would have been passage of a much larger stimulus package that was necessary to truly jumpstart the economy. Ironically, at the time the vote was taken, that would have been even more politically difficult for some of the Democrats who lost -- though it may have saved many of them by Election Day.
Votes for the health care bill and energy reform certainly did little to help many candidates in these districts -- and may have further damaged a few -- even though those votes were absolutely the right thing to do.
To make fundamental change, you anger those vested interests with a stake in the status quo. And the most politically vulnerable often pay the price. It's not a new story. In the mid-term elections following the passage of Medicare and the other critical "Great Society" programs of the 1960s, Democrats lost 48 seats. But who among the Democratic Members of Congress would have wanted his grandchildren to remember that he voted against Medicare?
Progressives, in particular, often forget that it is much easier to stand up straight for the progressive policies that are so critical for our nation's future if you represent a heavily Democratic district. Like Medicare, these positions represent incredibly good politics over the long run pretty much everywhere, but in the short run it's easy for Republicans and their corporate allies to use some progressive votes as cudgels against Democrats who represent more conservative districts like Southwest Virginia or Bucks County, Pennsylvania. Of course, that is especially true when you are not constrained by the truth.
The health care bill is a particular case in point. Republicans and their allies in the insurance industry spent millions distorting the provisions of the bill -- lying about "Obamacare," "death panels" and "the Government takeover of health care." They used the bill to inflame passions, and channeled the anger about the economy at Democrats instead of at Wall Street and the policies of the Bush Administration that lead to the 2008 economic catastrophe. They didn't just start attacking Democrats a month or two before the election. The Chamber of Commerce, insurance industry front groups, and the other special interests hammered on Democrats who voted for the bill for a solid eighteen months.
We went into the day of the health care vote in the House six votes short, and in the end, the first major reform of the health care system -- since Medicare -- passed with just a two vote margin. Had it not been for people like Tom Periello, Phil Hare, Steve Kagen, Dan Maffei, Betsy Markey, Mary Jo Kilroy, Pat Murphy -- and many, many others -- that historic, critically important reform would never have been passed.
It would have been easier -- at least politically -- for some of those Members to vote no. But they didn't -- and many of them have stood proudly for health care reform and the progressive agenda for their entire professional lives. Some Democrats that represented swing districts required some arm-twisting to vote yes -- but not most. Most didn't have to be convinced that health care is a right. They voted aye because it was the right thing to do. A lot of the Members who lost earlier this month ran for Congress to do something -- not be something.
The night of November 2nd, as she conceded defeat in her bid for re-election, Congresswoman Betsy Markey said: "This is where I end the discussion about whether the policy of the health care bill was worth the politics of it. It was. And I am uniquely qualified to know that."
After the health care reform bill passed in the House, I saw Congressman -- and Doctor -- Steve Kagen getting his colleagues in the House to autograph his copy of the bill. He said: "You know, this is what I came to Congress to do."
Kagen ran a terrific campaign. He stood up proudly for the progressive agenda. He framed his message in clear, populist, resonant terms. He had a massive get out the vote operation. He was beaten by the bad economy and by the millions of dollars of largely secret corporate money spent to drive home the lie that the health care reform bill had "cut Medicare."
Kagen, like many of the other Democrats from moderate districts may be back in 2012. They deserve to be. And this Thanksgiving they deserve our thanks.
Robert Creamer is a long-time political organizer and strategist, and author of the recent book: Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win, available on Amazon.com.
Except...it does cut medicare.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE62J1FS20100322
This stuff is easy to fact check.
"--There are no cuts to the traditional Medicare benefit--The lion's share of spending cuts are in Medicare Advantage -- a program that uses private firms such as Humana and UnitedHealth Group to deliver Medicare benefits. Many of these providers offer extra coverage and some of those extras could be dropped--as Medicare Advantage subsidies are bought more in line with the cost of traditional Medicare benefits.--Medicare Advantage payment rates will be frozen in 2011 and then gradually reduced giving companies time to adjust to the changes."
prescription drug coverage
preventive-care services
coor dinated care for chronic conditions
routine physical examinations
additional hospitalization
skilled nursing facility stays
routine eye and hearing examinations
glasses and hearing aids
In addition medicare payments to doctors will be cut 23% on January 1. Think this will have any impact on the services they provide.
Medicare is being cut, tonto.
Whether the cuts were to traditional medicare or the advantage plans, the end result is over 1/2 trillion dollars less service to seniors.
"to do something....not be something", love it
midterms are that way, unsatisfied presidential high hopes
It took over 70 years of labor pains but the baby was delivered, the bill came due Nov. 2
There will be decades more payments due.
The timid Mr.Obama was afraid (even though he had more power than any President in 40 years) that he couldn't pass a health care bill. So instead of doing what 90% of his contituents wanted, he huddled with industry insiders and groveled. They made promises (which later turned out to be worthless) and Obama,in spite of being punked, used all his political capital to maintain those bad deals and kill single payer.
He had Baucus, awash in industry money start the debate in the Senate (instead of the House where debates of this kind usually begin), introduced an insurance industry bailout and shut out health care experts, caregivers and activists. When Progressives in the House refused to sign a bill unless it had an anemic "health care option" Obama sent Emmanuel over to the House to acuse of disloyalty and threaten to dump on new Reps. It was a disgusting display of gutlessness and bad political manuevering. The Democrats dumped on voters and that's why they got dumped on in November. While we're assigning blame, how about fixing the ridiculous corporate owned voting system that keeps stealing your elections.
It isn't insider information. Ask Donna Smith of California Nurse's Assc. or better yet read her stuff and a lot of other well informed observers. It's there for those who want to see.
The political spin machine was able to once again convince people to vote against their own best interests. It takes a lot of money, a tight organization and the ability to hire experts who are willing to pretend that the things that are bad for us are actually good for us. We keep falling for it over and over and over. They'll keep using the spin until we learn to question everything. The old saying is still true, "Don't believe anything your hear and only half of what you see.".
is social democratic shorthand code covering a much more heinous agenda:
“To enact law that blatantly steals ever more of productive people’s money, their children’s, and grandchildren’s on the pretext of redistributing it to the deserving poor, while giving it instead to ruling elites to throw down their ideological social engineering rat holes, angers those sold by this law into indentured servitude to an already overweening social democratic state.
Worse, it is apparent that our class of rent seeking thieves suffers from an insatiable sense of entitlement that leads the more candid among them to admit that they regard ALL money in society as ALREADY belonging to the state and subject upon demand to be yielded to it.
Worst of all, the coercion, the armed robbery, the indentured servitude, the rat holes all are merely emblematic of a gutless ideological position that willingly and willfully sacrifices our freedom by vesting society’s locus of control in a ruling class that ostensibly represents the collective interest, destroying the very freedom upon which this nation was founded.
It should surprise no one that those who demand freedom will not submit to this legalized tyranny. It should surprise no one that America’s third revolution is now under way and that only the unconditional surrender of the social democratic state and restoration of freedom will bring it to a peaceful end.â€
Power and the Tiny Acts of Rebellion
By Chris Hedges
And the result is?
Who gave the ultimate sacrifice for the Progressive, Liberal agenda's.
I am sure the the fact that they were all Progressive, Liberal and Democrats is mere coincidence
1. Both want to wage wars -- Bush (Iraq and Afghanistan) and Obama (Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Yemen)
2. Both want to bail out the banks -- $17 trillion hole (through TARP, Federal Reserve 0% interest lending, etc.)
3. Both want to keep the status quo of private health insurance
4. Both want to take away our civil liberties (monitoring of our communications, etc.)
5. Both want to eliminate habeas corpus
Everything else (including the health care bill, stimulus package, etc.) is just noise - doesn't and will not amount to much except to support the agenda encompassing the aforementioned five things.