Kucinich and Conyers don't want a vote on single payer

[ProSense]

From Congressmen Dennis Kucinich and John Conyers

Thursday, 05 November 2009
Dear Friends,

We thank you for your continued devotion to the cause of health care for All Americans. We have worked together for many years to write, promote and campaign for HR676, a single payer, not for profit health care system. Your work, in communities across America, has been instrumental in helping at least ten states create single payer movements, with many more states to come.

Tomorrow, the House of Representatives is scheduled to consider a single payer bill. As the two principal co-authors of the Conyers single payer bill, we want to offer a strong note of caution about tomorrow's vote.

The bill presented tomorrow will not be HR676. While we are happy to relinquish authorship of a single payer bill to any member who can do better, we do not want a weak bill brought forward in a hostile climate to unwittingly accomplish what would be interpreted as a defeat for single payer.

Here are the facts: There has been no debate in Congress over HR676. There has not been a single mark-up of the bill. Single payer was "taken off the table" for the entire year by the White House and by congressional leaders. There has been no reasonable period of time to gather support in the Congress for single payer. Many members accepted a "robust public option" as the alternative to single payer and now that has disappeared. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has scored the bill scheduled for a vote tomorrow in a manner which is at odds with many credible assumptions, meaning that it will appear to cost way too much even though we know that true single payer saves money since one of every three dollars in the health care system goes to administrative costs caused by the insurance companies. Is this really the climate in which we want a test vote?

While state single payer movements are already strong, the national single payer movement is still growing. Many progressives in Congress, ourselves included, feel that calling for a vote tomorrow for single payer would be tantamount to driving the movement over a cliff. The thrill of the vote would disappear quickly when the result would be characterized not as a new beginning for single payer but as an end. Such a result would be seen as proof that Congress need not pay attention to efforts to restore in Conference Committee the right of states to pursue single payer without fear of legal attacks by insurance companies.

We are always grateful for your support. We are now asking you to join us in suggesting to congressional leaders that this is not the right time to call the roll on a stand-alone single payer bill. That time will come. And when it does there will not be any doubt of the outcome. This system of health care injustice will not be able to endure forever. We are pledged to make sure of that.

Sincerely,
Congressmen John Conyers and Dennis Kucinich

(emphasis added)

Reality kicks in.

[Cant trust em]

1. Huh? I didn't expect to reading that. nt

[bluestateguy]

2. Conyers just gets cookier every year

And Dennis Kucinich is like a 63 year old teenager.

[pnwmom]

4. Cookier as in he likes cookies? He's a good cook?

Or maybe you meant kookier?

;)

[pnwmom]

3. If anything belongs on the Greatest Page, this does. Thanks. n/t

[Kdillard]

5. Interesting.

[Oregone]

6. Disagree

Get the fakers on the record. Not one more damn dime for the lot of em

[John Q. Citizen]

42. Have you read the bill? Where can I read it?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

48. Do you still think I'm crazy regarding Sanders' intentions re: single payer in the Senate? (nt)

[karynnj]

7. Really amazing, The fact is that Kucinich has been pushing

single payer as have many progressive advocates. What this shows is that he knows that what other Democrats have said - that single payer does not have the votes - is completely accurate. The real question is why Kucinich has written diaries and made statements that seem to contradict what he says here.

[Davis_X_Machina]

8. Why? Simple. Self-aggrandizement. He's a politician...

...not a saint -- although that would be hard to substantiate solely from reading posts here.

[slipslidingaway]

9. This is not HR 676 as worked on by Conyers/Kucinich according to the ...

above statement, nobody can read what Weiner has proposed and sent to the CBO.

There is no published CBO estimate for the public to read, no debate etc.

Conyers/Kucinich are calling them on their BS - good for them!

I've called Weiner's office several times and posted about it, they stalled, changed information on what was being said, did nothing to promote this BS amendment.

[ProSense]

11. Does this really matter?

For weeks the push has been to get the Weiner single payer porosal scored and voted on. Now, a day before the vote, they're calling on people to contact their reps to stop the vote.

It really defies logic.

[slipslidingaway]

21. I thought this was a scam back in September, my push was for a score...

Weiner did us no favors and I told his office that this morning.

Played for suckers by the Dem leadership - exactly who were the players should be the question.

[slipslidingaway]

22. Why not add dental, vision, long term care and low co-pays to the House

bill and see the score.

Would you care? Everybody justs wants the bill to include something they can call a PO, who cares about the price?

I have no idea how Weiner changed HR 676, he just finished writing it not too long ago and never published the amendment.

Nothing to read, no estimate, but let's have a vote.

It is BS.

[John Q. Citizen]

46. It only matters if the facts matter. Since the facts rarely matter to you, then why would it matter?

It see your point, when you look at it like that.

The micro public option defies logic. But it doesn't matter, does it? It matters to the rest of us, but not to you.


For weeks, in fact months, there hasn't been a push.

In fact, Weiner agreed to put it on hold last July as long as it could come up at some indefinite time in the future.

Weiner said it was being scored last Aug, and then it just slipped off the radar.


So no, there hasn't been a big push at all. In fact the push has been to get the Kucinich amendment restored to the micro public option bill so that states would have the option for a publicly funded state single payer system.

You should read more. You seem kind of out of the loop on health care reform issues.

[John Q. Citizen]

41. Nobody knows what's in this bill. Have you read it. Where is it posted? It's not HR676.

And there haven't been any hearings.

Why not?

When was the last time you saw a bill put up for a vote with no hearings, no amendments, no chance for anybody to read it?


Something is wrong here. This is hinkey.

[karynnj]

52. The point is one of Prosense's hightlighted sentences

The one that says it is not time to bring a standalone single payer bill up for a vote. Note it is not saying that specific bill - but A bill.

This is where Kucinich can be called a hypocrite as he has gone on Daily Kos and elsewhere arguing for just that. Then the Kucinich fans here have attacked every Democrat who will not publicly call for and support single payer. (Including at least one who said he was for it, but it didn't have the votes. http://www.singlepayeraction.org/blog/?p=1281 ) The fact is that now is the position of Kucinich!

[John Q. Citizen]

54. Looks like Weiner agrees with Kucinich and with Conyers. Letting Pelosi

give them 5 minutes and pretending that's a fair hearing isn't exactly their idea of a level playing field. Good for them for not taking the bait.

I think the most hypocritical thing I've seen this year is all the insiders pretending they wanted and expected a Public Option when they knew from the start that the whole thing was a giant kabuki dance, and they knew there would be no public option that did anything at all.

Heck, that's what every single, single payer advocate I know and every one I read predicted last February. They said that if the insurers won't allow single payer they also won't allow the public option. They were right. Weren't they. Or are you too proud to admit we were right about it from the start?

People like Obama, Dean, Baucus, Pelosi, the Move-on leaders, the OFA leaders, the SEIU leaders, they all knew that the insurance industry and pharma and the AMA wasn't going to sign on to the bill if it was going to have a real public option.

It was classic how they fooled all the outsiders into donating money, time and energy to chase an imaginary public option, wasn't it?

I guess the real joke is on you, eh karynnj? Or did you know from the start as well?

[karynnj]

55. The joke was not on me

In fact, I never thought the public option was the end all and be all of health insurance. There were many very big reforms that I thought were at least as important. Here are three:
1) Eliminating pre-existing conditions
2) Providing the biggest additional subsidies to let people buy health insurance since the 1960s. (The number of people here who thought the public option would be free was pathetic.)
3) Allowing small businesses and individuals to buy into large group type plans.

I think there will be a public option - but even if there wasn't, the goal of the public option is to drive down costs. The government itself needs this. Therefore if the public option is not in the bill, the idea will resurface within a very small number of years as a standalone bill.

(PS, I posted that list of three things months ago - so I am not just changing because of circumstances. )

[John Q. Citizen]

56. so, as I read the bill a company can charge whatever premiums they want if

someone has a pre-existing condition.

Since the tiny public option will be run by private insurance companies and it will have to charge more, where does someone with a preexisting condition find affordable coverage? If they have to pay 50,000 a year to be covered. for instance, how will they afford that?

What if a company "loses" somebody's application, repeatedly? What enforcement mechanism is there? Do we go to the FBI? Or do we have to sue in federal court and will need 10 to 15 grand just to get in the door? Again, what is the enforcement mechanism and what will it cost a company who repeatedly "loses" someones application for insurance?

Since the bill was written as a bail out for the insurance industry, and largely written by industry insiders, i would imagine that enforcement will be at least as lax as RESPA. So probably we are looking at millions of consumers who will have no useful recourse as they take it in the shorts.

Also, #3 sounds good except it would be more accurate to say "forcing" individuals and small businesses to buy into group plans, no? I'm sure that some will see it as a good thing and many won't.

The public option in the house bill is a bad joke, projected to enroll 6 million by 2019. The Senate version is worse. Either way, the insurance industry will in all likely hood be running those options. And the options will be selling insurance for more cost than private companies. According to the CBO.


I would suggest that it is far more likely that as cost shoot up (since the more it costs the more money the insurance companies and the drug companies make) that peoples benefits will be cut.

Why would the insurance industry allow their bought and paid for congress people to implement anything that would threaten their profits? That makes no sense. If they won't allow it now, after all the money they rake in from these "reforms" they will have much more ability to stop any people reforms than they do now.

And of course the Democrats will be telling people that they already did reform, what's the problem?


I think we got a very shitty deal. So thanks for helping to make it happen.

[karynnj]

57. "As you read the bill" ???

Your interpretation on pre-existing conditions is at odds with every other interpretation.

[NYC_SKP]

10. Well this development makes pointless a couple dozen DU threads on the matter.

Awesome.

[ProSense]

12. Well, when you can fool some people all the time

why not?

Summary of the statement: We don't have the votes and single payer cost too much.

[NYC_SKP]

13. "That time will come."

From your D.K's Kos Diary:

We are always grateful for your support. We are now asking you to join us in suggesting to congressional leaders that this is not the right time to call the roll on a stand-alone single payer bill. That time will come. And when it does there will not be any doubt of the outcome. This system of health care injustice will not be able to endure forever. We are pledged to make sure of that.

Sincerely,
Congressmen John Conyers and Dennis Kucinich

:P

[ProSense]

14. No doubt. n/t

[slipslidingaway]

19. It is not the Conyers/Kucinich bill - get it! n/t

[ProSense]

23. Why do you think no one understands what is being considered? n/t

[slipslidingaway]

25. Do you read what you write ... obviously not, as your summary is just spin...

"Summary of the statement: We don't have the votes and single payer cost too much."

Full statement from your link...

Dear Kos,

We thank you for your continued devotion to the cause of health care for All Americans. We have worked together for many years to write, promote and campaign for HR676, a single payer, not for profit health care system. Your work, in communities across America, has been instrumental in helping at least ten states create single payer movements, with many more states to come.

Tomorrow, the House of Representatives is scheduled to consider a single payer bill. As the two principal co-authors of the Conyers single payer bill, we want to offer a strong note of caution about tomorrow's vote.

The bill presented tomorrow will not be HR676. While we are happy to relinquish authorship of a single payer bill to any member who can do better, we do not want a weak bill brought forward in a hostile climate to unwittingly accomplish what would be interpreted as a defeat for single payer.

Here are the facts: There has been no debate in Congress over HR676. There has not been a single mark-up of the bill. Single payer was "taken off the table" for the entire year by the White House and by congressional leaders. There has been no reasonable period of time to gather support in the Congress for single payer. Many members accepted a "robust public option" as the alternative to single payer and now that has disappeared. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has scored the bill scheduled for a vote tomorrow in a manner which is at odds with many credible assumptions, meaning that it will appear to cost way too much even though we know that true single payer saves money since one of every three dollars in the health care system goes to administrative costs caused by the insurance companies. Is this really the climate in which we want a test vote?

While state single payer movements are already strong, the national single payer movement is still growing. Many progressives in Congress, ourselves included, feel that calling for a vote tomorrow for single payer would be tantamount to driving the movement over a cliff. The thrill of the vote would disappear quickly when the result would be characterized not as a new beginning for single payer but as an end. Such a result would be seen as proof that Congress need not pay attention to efforts to restore in Conference Committee the right of states to pursue single payer without fear of legal attacks by insurance companies.

We are always grateful for your support. We are now asking you to join us in suggesting to congressional leaders that this is not the right time to call the roll on a stand-alone single payer bill. That time will come. And when it does there will not be any doubt of the outcome. This system of health care injustice will not be able to endure forever. We are pledged to make sure of that.

Sincerely,
Congressmen John Conyers and Dennis Kucinich

[ProSense]

27. Again, why do you think no one understand what is being presented? n/t

[slipslidingaway]

28. Others might, by Your summary you obviously do not, otherwise you...

would have pointed out the very clear statement...this is not HR 676.

Maybe it was just your normal bash Kucinich post, at least you stopped posting misleading information on his SCHIP vote - finally! Only took three posts to you and each time - crickets.

[ProSense]

29. Or maybe some people are realizing that

they've been taken for ride

[slipslidingaway]

31. The date of the vote was not known at that time - but who exactly...

took their voters for a ride?

That is the real question we should be answering!

[John Q. Citizen]

38. Where can I read the bill? Have you read it yourself yet?

[ProSense]

40. Inquire here

Urge your rep to vote 'Yes' for single payer!

[John Q. Citizen]

43. I will in the morning. But you don't know what is being introduced? Hmmm. I wonder what it is?

[slipslidingaway]

45. That was back in the summer, things change...

"This fall presents a historic opportunity for members of Congress to go on the record in support of single-payer legislation.
Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) is introducing a substitute amendment to the House leadership’s bill, H.R. 3200, that would delete the language of that bill and substitute the provisions of H.R. 676, the single-payer, Medicare-for-All bill sponsored by Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.). House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has promised a full floor vote on Weiner’s amendment in the weeks or months ahead..."

[NorthCarolina]

15. I fully trust that Kucinich knows exactly what he's doing here

and that his intentions are in the best interest of keeping single payer alive.

[mkultra]

18. hes playing 3-dimensional chess

:)

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

49. Why? What has he ever accomplished to earn that trust?

I hear a lot of people bitching about how Obama's words need to amount to actions... why does Kucinich get a pass here?

[harun]

51. Been right on every major issue for as long as I have been following him, that's what.

[FlyingSquirrel]

16. I think that people who are being cynical about this

do not understand the way politics works. Kucinich and Conyers are quite right, unfortunately, and the reason they're right is that the corporate media will use the defeat of this bill disingenuously for their own purposes to drive the thinking of the masses.

The real problem, which remains unchanged, is corporate consolidation of the media. But we have to work within that reality at this time. We have to fight the battle on multiple fronts. We also have to play their game right now because they make the rules, whether we like it or not.

Sometimes in battle you have to make a strategic retreat in order to secure an eventual victory. This appears to be one of those times.

[slipslidingaway]

20. Very well said! n/t

[ProSense]

24. "the corporate media will use the defeat of this bill disingenuously for their own purposes"

They couldn't have figured that out long ago? Why was everyone wasting energy pushing for a vote? Wouldn't it have been better to channel that energy into trying to get a robust public option passed?

[slipslidingaway]

26. People trusted the Dem leadership - lesson learned! n/t

[ProSense]

30. Can't blame the Dem leadership on this one.

A lot of people were pushing for the Weiner amendment.

[slipslidingaway]

32. Spinning again, that post was made to wake people up that there was...

no estimate which Congressman Weiner had said was being done over the August recess. I have been pushing for an estimate before Weiner made his statement.

The Dem leadership is never to blame - guess someone else is leading then???

[ProSense]

33. You're in this thread actively trying to disown the Weiner amendment. n/t

[slipslidingaway]

35. Disown, I never knew what the hell it was and have been suspicious for...

a long time.

See my early October post below.

[FlyingSquirrel]

47. Perhaps

they just wanted to get it out there, to let people see what was possible and what they were going to be missing out on.

:shrug:

Lots of things get put up for a vote, knowing they will fail or eventually be withdrawn. It's all part of the game. Sad that people's lives depend on a game, but that's life.

[slipslidingaway]

17. Posted this a month ago and then earlier today - played for suckers...

David Swanson is correct.

Does anybody wonder why Weiner stated on the Ed Show back in early August that his amendment was being scored and Nothing never materialized???

Nothing on his website, no push for a CBO estimate, a new website for the public option...single payer - nothing to gain support.

I've posted about this several times and people can do a search if they are interested.

My original thought was to follow up and make sure this was in fact was being done.

Weiner stating that it was being scored took pressure off the Dems...why bother to call and push for a score if it is being done?

They strung everyone along for three months, no estimate, no time for discussion... most people just waiting!


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6932890&mesg_id=6933569

No confirmation, but what I suspect from speaking with the CBO is that...

a "personal" estimate was given, something they do for various members which does not get published. If so this estimate will be released shortly before the vote, no time for this info to be discussed on the blogs etc.

Weiner's office was giving me the run around, as far as I can tell he never really tried to gather support for his amendment. He could have done so by publishing his amendment and asking people to contact the leadership to get a timely estimate...he did not.

Instead he created a new website for the public option, the same bill that, according to him in September, contained a weak and watered down public option.

So we have been played for suckers and that is what people need to know - was Weiner involved, my inclination is Yes.


My post from early October, it was pretty clear that we were being played for suckers back then.

Do you wonder what is taking so long to score this bill, Weiner said back in August it was being scored during the August recess.

But when I called his office sometime in early September they said it had not been sent to the CBO.

Later in September they said it had been sent to the CBO, when I asked if there was somewhere I could read the amendment being scored the person replied - 'Is it a life or death matter'

I should have replied yes.

Today his office said the CBO is scoring something??? the amendment is still being worked on so it cannot be read.

They are not scoring HR 676 and my fear is that a number will be released close to the vote for....something.

Great job Dems!

[slipslidingaway]

34. My post in early October ...

Do you wonder what is taking so long to score this bill, Weiner said back in August it was being scored during the August recess.

But when I called his office sometime in early September they said it had not been sent to the CBO.

Later in September they said it had been sent to the CBO, when I asked if there was somewhere I could read the amendment being scored the person replied - 'Is it a life or death matter'

I should have replied yes.

Today his office said the CBO is scoring something??? the amendment is still being worked on so it cannot be read.

They are not scoring HR 676 and my fear is that a number will be released close to the vote for....something.

Great job Dems!

[ProSense]

36. So instead of pressuring Weiner to release the details of his amendment

people spent the time distorting a public option and calling for a vote on an amendment they hadn't seen?

Brilliant.

[John Q. Citizen]

39. Nope. You got your facts wrong. What ever happened to the public option, anyway? Why is it so tiny?

Seems to me the house distorted the public option last June.

Didn't anybody line anyone up to introduce a robust public option? Why not? Couldn't find a sponcer? Didn't pressure your congress people to introduce a real public option that actually does something?


Pelosi decided out of the blue that she was going to do this tomorrow.

Who knew?

She released the house bill last week so people could read it. Before it is voted on. That's reasonable.

[slipslidingaway]

44. I'm not responsible for what others post on DU, all I can say is that...

I was pushing for a score, the details of his amendment and asked others to do the same.

His staff was not normally very helpful...

...when I asked if there was somewhere I could read the amendment being scored the person replied - 'Is it a life or death matter'

I should have replied yes.


These are your words and so funny...

"...people spent the time distorting a public option and calling for a vote on an amendment they hadn't seen?

Brilliant."


Anyone here pushing for the public option before they knew what it was and before the bill was published, good to look in the mirror sometimes.


And your broad smear about people distorting a PO is noted, but you still have not addressed the points raised in Kip Sullivan's articles...when you cannot point to specifics you generally play cut and paste games or are silent.

[truedelphi]

58. There were many reasons that I grieved when Kennedy died this summer.

And one reason was that his staff was unfailingly courteous and ALWAYS INSISTED on getting back to me on whatever it was I needed - information, copies of a bill, etc.

Unfortunately most House Of Reps and most Senators lack such magnificently trained staff.

Often, a staffer will just tell you to go on the web - no matter what the question is.

And Di Feinstein's staff used to not even say hello - they immediately said, "please state the name of the Corporation that you are representing." I vowed the week that started happening to me to NEVER vote for Her TRULY Scam Artist-san.

It seems to get worse each passing year - in terms of finding competent staffers.

[John Q. Citizen]

37. No debate, no mark up no hearings, just a vote? Doesn't seem fair to me. Does it to you?

[truedelphi]

59. There was this really neat guy who ran for President last year.

He kept insisting that he would see to it that if elected, business would no longer be run in a non-transparent method in Congress.

Don't know what happened to him. Some here insist that he was elected, but my feeling is that if he HAD BEEN elected, surely there would be proof of it. Like a major campaign promise or two would have been kept. ("Change you and I can believe in" "Lobbyists out of the mix" etc)

[Life Long Dem]

50. Obama in 2003 on single payer.

"A single payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. And that’s what I’d like to see. But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately. Because first we have to take back the White House, we have to take back the Senate, and we have to take back the House.”

Obama speaking to the Illinois AFL-CIO, June 30, 2003."

And notice why he said we won't get there immediately? Nothing about foot in the door and add all the amendments some time when we can in the future. He said "when" we have "first we have to take back the White House, we have to take back the Senate, and we have to take back the House.".

[Fire1]

53. Kudos to Conyers and Kucinich. n/t

[truedelphi]

60. Yes kudos to them.

They are the only two that understand that "The Shock Doctrine" need not be employed any and every time a major need in the USA is addressed.

And apparently they are serious about Women suffering from miscarriage, who will be treated shabbily on account of this bill.

And the notion that Women should have the option to terminate a pregnancy.