Calling Out the House Progressive Caucus: Are You Men and Women, or Are You Mice?

[Better Believe It]

Calling Out the House Progressive Caucus: Are You Men and Women, or Are You Mice?
By Miles Mogulescu
November 2, 2009
Miles Mogulescu is an entertainment attorney and former Senior Vice President at MGM. In his professional capacity, he recently represented the film "Bobby" about the assassination of Bobby Kennedy and Ed Zwick's upcoming film "Defiance" about 3,000 Jews who escaped Nazi ghettos and hid out for 3 years resisting Hitler. He has been a lifelong progressive since the age of 12 when his father helped raise money for Dr. Martin Luther King, who was a guest in his home several times. He will never forget the impression which that extraordinary man made on him, which helped lead to a lifelong commitment to social justice. He co-produced and co-directed Union Maids, a film about 3 women union organizers in Chicago in the 1930s and '40s, which was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Feature Documentary. At the time of the Gulf War, he and Danny Goldberg produced a super-star music video with new lyrics to Give Peace a Chance written by Lenny Kravitz and John Lennon's son, Sean. He recently organized a panel at the '08 Take Back America Conference on "Universal Healthcare and the Democratic Presidential Nominees" where he spoke along with Rep. John Conyers.

-----------------------------------


Yeah, that means you Weiner, and you Grayson, and you Schakowsky, and you Grijalva and you Woolsey, and all the rest of you in the House Progressive Caucus (I think there were at least 60) who signed a letter to Speaker Pelosi last summer promising to vote against any health reform bill that did not contain a "robust" public option including, at a minimum, Medicare plus 5% pricing.

If you break your pledge and vote for a health reform bill without this minimally robust version of the public option, you've ensured your own political impotence, and more critically, ensured that even with a Democratic Congressional majority, all "reform"--whether in health care, financial regulation, climate change, Afghanistan, or any other issue--will be limited by what's acceptable to your Blue Dog colleagues and their corporate contributors.

First of all, passing a health care bill which mandates that all Americans must buy private health insurance or face a stiff fine--which doesn't include a public option strong enough to put downward pressure on premiums--would be a disaster for Democrats when voters eventually catch on to reality that "health care reform" actually means they'll be forced to pay higher premiums or be fined by the government. Secondly, the White House thinks it needs a "win" on health care. Holding strong on your threat to vote down a health care bill that doesn't include a "robust" public option will force the White House to twist enough Blue Dog arms to round up the extra 10-12 votes. If the White House can't pull that off, then it's probably better for Democrats that this health care bill be defeated and you come back next year and try to pass something better. Thirdly, and most important, following through on your threat to block a weak health reform bill will give the Progressive caucus real power with which the White House and Blue Dogs will have to reckon, and will impact what is achievable in other important areas like climate change and financial regulation.

While you're at it, insist that Speaker Pelosi restore the Kucinich Amendment ,which removes impediments from states trying to implement their own single payer plans. Many of you have told your constituents that you're ideally for single payer and are only supporting a "robust" public option as a "pragmatic" alternative that can be passed now. If a public option makes it through the Senate, it's likely to include a state "opt out". The least you can do, in exchange, is insist that the legislation include a state "opt in" for single payer. That, alone, might make up for many of the corporate-friendly compromises already incorporated into health care "reform".

In many of the states you represent--including California, Colorado, Illinois, Maine, New Mexico, New York and Pennsylvania--there are vibrant movements among your constituents to pass state single payer systems. In fact, in my State of California, single payer has passed the legislature twice, only to be vetoed by Republican Gov. Schwarzenneger. If California can elect a Democratic Governor in 2010, it could become the first state to enact single payer, much as Sasckatchewan first enacted single payer in Canada, and then was so successful that it was adopted by the rest of the country. Incorporating the Kucinich amendment will provide an outlet when, in a few years, health care costs continue to escalate and remain unaffordable for many American individuals and businesses, even if health care "reform" is implemented.

Please read the complete article at:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/miles-mogulescu/calling-out-the-house-pro_b_342631.html

[BzaDem]

1. I'm glad that the people who wanted healthcare killed from the getgo are finally saying it on DU.

[Better Believe It]

3. You mean a healthcare plan written by the insurance industry and bigPharm?

Well, I really don't think that any serious progressives and liberals advocated a bill written by insurance/big Pharm lobbyists and introducted by their political whores in Congress.

Did you want that kind of bill?

[BzaDem]

5. Yawn.

How about this. We'll see if any serious progressives and liberals will vote for a bill that you claim to be written by insurance/big Pharm lobbyists/etc etc etc.

When 90% of the progressive caucus votes for the bill and you get proven wrong, you will just come and say it turns out 90% of the progressive caucus isn't really progressive. Pepole like you don't listen to facts. Your claims are unfalsifiable, because as soon as a whole slew of facts proves you wrong, you just come up with increasingly bonkers justifications for why you are right.

I guess there will always be these types of people in any political party.

[Better Believe It]

9. So you can't present any facts that refute any of the statements of the writer. OK

So if 10% of the progressive caucus votes against a bill written by the insurance industry/big Pharma lobbyists that might be enough to kill their bill and force Pelosi to include the Kucinich amendment (which you apparently oppose) and a robust public option (which you also oppose) in order to get a bill passed that big business lobbyists oppose.

And that kind of bill is just way to radical for your conservative tastes .... is that right?

[BzaDem]

10. LOL. Now you are just making it all up.

Please point to me where I ever said I was opposed to a robust public option or the Kucinich amendment. Put up or shut up.

What I have consistently said was that the robust public option won't pass Congress. It won't even pass the House. Proof of the former is the leaked whip count that shows 47 hard-no Democratic votes for any healthcare bill that has a robust public option. These are 47 Democratic votes who would rather see no bill than see one with a robust public option. Not only would they kill any bill with a robust public option -- they would do it gleefully.

In your fantasy land, this is not a problem. Why? Because... it would contradict your thesis that we can somehow pass a robust public option. Any fact that contradicts your thesis must be wrong, simply because it contradicts your thesis. Pay no heed to the facts. Just spout BS over and over and over again hoping that if you say it 1000 times it will somehow become more true than it was after the first 999 times.

Maybe Pelosi should add a robust public option to the bill, and then call 10 votes on it. I think the failure of such a provision 10 times might be good therapy for you.

[Better Believe It]

14. If Democrats can't pass progressive legislation when they control Congress and the White House .....

and seem almost eager to surrender to so-called "moderates", Republicans, Wall Street banksters and corporate America given the slightest excuse, how do you think they can help working people?

Do you really believe this is the best they can do given the Democrats control of Congress and the White House?

Perhaps the real question should be: "Who is controlling them?" We aren't, that's for sure.

Expect the Republicans to regain control of Congress and the White House in 2012 if this so-called health insurance "reform" turns out to be a total failure .... one that will only line the pockets of the insurance industry and big Pharma while we will pay even mhigher premiums for private insurance that offers fewer benefits.

Of course, we won't really have the final results in on this insurance industry legislation in 2012. Most of it won't even go into operation until fricken 2013 .... after the election .... how convenient! :)

But, the economy may be in pretty bad or perhaps even worse shape than it is now in 2012. One main problem is that President Obama failed to propose a "robust" job creating stimulus plan this year. Instead, three Republican Senators wrote a watered down and greatly weakened stimilus plan that was bound to fail. But, it was bi-partisan! Yippee!

[BzaDem]

16. Why do you think that the definition of Democrat is someone who agrees with you?

There are many, many elected Democrats whose position is probably defined as the opposite of yours on most major issues. So I don't understand why you think that just because we have a Democratic majority that we have a progressive majority.

[depakid]

19. That's EXACTLY the sort of deal that cost the US 12 years of Republican rule in Congress

and gave America 8 years of Bush.

If you think it can't happen again- via stand for nothing sell out Dems- and be exponentially worse, you're kidding yourself.

[BzaDem]

22. What "deal" are you talking about? Who mentioned a "deal"?

The fact that we currently have a progressive minority is not due to some sort of deal that was made. It is because progressives were elected in a minority of Congressional districts. Our minority in Congress doesn't all of a sudden become a majority just because you don't particularly like the fact that we are a minority.

The Blue Dogs that are preventing a robust public option don't necessarily stand for nothing. I think they do stand for something. They stand for defeating a robust public option. The only way to make the Blue Dogs irrelevant is to elect more progressives. If the base decides to stay home for the 2010 elections (which might very well happen), that is certainly their right. But that will end up making it harder for progressives to get a majority, not easier. After all, liberals who stayed home in 1994 didn't really accomplish much. 15 years later, we are not even going to come close to enacting the reform that progressives actually want. Maybe if progressives went to the polls in 1994, we would have expanded our majorities and have been able to enact a better healthcare bill in 1995.

But that would be too rational. Instead, I bet many progressives will stay home because their minority in Congress couldn't enact its policy agenda. And we will come even farther from being able to enact progressive healthcare reform. And the cycle will continue -- whenever we get close to a majority of progressives in Congress, progressives stop going to the polls and bring the cause back 15 years. And the cycle will repeat.

[depakid]

24. "many progressives will stay home"

That's exactly what will happen- and it will happen because the "Democrats" choose to pander to the <i>minority</i> right, rather than do what their constituents elected them to do- put progressive policies in place.

Policies which, btw- are popular (often overwhelmingly so) in credible poll after credible poll.

Republicans on the other hand are adept at putting profoundly unpopular policies in place- and over the years, haven't paid much of a price at the polls for that. At least. not until major chickens come home to roost- as in disastrous wars, economic collapse and environmental disasters like Katrina.

What's wrong with that picture?

Democrats behaving like Republican lite costs them- just as it costs all of us. Rationalizing it doesn't stop the pattern.

[ProSense]

2. .

:rofl:

[derby378]

4. This guy gets a +1 for chutzpah

And he's right. The Progressive Caucus needs to develop a spine and tell Obama it's not voting for corproate welfare.

[timzi]

6. They Seem To Be Mice And Should Be Called Out......

Ditto for Obama.

[TheKentuckian]

7. Since anything short of single payer will be seen as selling out then

they are mice because they will vote for less than that for sure.

[ej510]

8. Wrong a strong Public Option is acceptable, but we will continue

the fight for a single payer system.

[Garam_Masala]

13. Single payer is the ONLY thing which is true HCR

What is coming up is going to benefit mainly the insurance industry
and to some extent medical providers. Why? Because there will be more
patients to pay premiums, and fill hospitals and doctor's offices.

In order to buy the PO coverage you will be forking over even more $$
than private insurance since PO covers anybody and everybody. Patients
with serious problems will get the run around and as much hassle as
possible from the private insurance and will end up in the Public Option.
So, over a period the PO will be loaded with people with serious
health problems and that will increase its premiums and cost.

A single payer is far superior since the pool of payers is all encompassing
and therefore costs are shared by the largest pool possible. The best system
is where no one pays insurance premiums but rather are taxed on income. Then
everybody is covered and the richer earners pay more in proportion.

[TheKentuckian]

17. I certainly don't question single payer at all but I don't confuse what is best

with what can be done. There is no way in hell that single payer could possibly pass this Congress nor would it survive in the current political environment as far as public opinion goes. The distrust of government is too ramped up and the media is way too far in the tank to allow a straight message to get out on a policy with near zero legwork put into it.

You are preaching to choir on this. I think we all grasp the benefits and the logic of the policy, the point is there is no way to enact it at this time and the problem is too acute to just let slide for some fervently wished for future date.

[Garam_Masala]

23. if we can't get it done with all 3 branch majority then when?

The white house, senate and house are all democratic.
How often does that happen?

If single payer is truly a good thing, why would public opinion go against it?
If enacted and the public sees it in action, majority opinion will be favorable
in the long run anyways.

Even if it may be politically unpopular at this moment, leadership requires that
it be get done. Enough of this playing games with people's health.

[Bluenorthwest]

11. He's completly correct

and I note that those who don't like it have nothing but emoticons and barbs about 'people like you' to offer in rebuttal. The agenda is so clear is is pitiful.

[geek tragedy]

12. More lectures from Hollywood.

Because if there's anyone who knows what it takes to get good legislation passed, it's those people.

Hilarious how even the Congressional Progressive Caucus are sellout wimps in the minds of the rabid peanut gallery.

[jefferson_dem]

15. I'm still trying to figure out who wants to kill health care reform more...

Freepers and Repugs or the self-righteous "liberal" purists.

Close call there.

[eridani]

18. A poison ivy salad does not become edible just because you put

--expensive balsamic vinegar dressing on it. Why not save the vinegar and use it as is?

There are quite a few things in the bill that the Progressive Caucus would never object to. Many of the items could stand on their own as separate legislation. Others could be grouped into a Consumer Health Insurance Protection Act and a Medicare Reform Act. I've actually suggested this in a number of threads, one with a lot of detail.

But nooooo! You purists keep insisting that we all have to accept the whole bill or nothing!

[polichick]

21. I'm still trying to figure out who wants to kill REAL health care reform more...

The Republicans or "centrist" Dems.

[polichick]

20. The audacity of expecting our leaders to put people ahead of corporations! k&r