Endorsed by the SEIU, UFCW, Bricklayers and Teamsters and none other than DLA Piper Law Firm partner and former MO Congressman, Richard (Labor) Gephardt, the Illinois Health Care Reform Plan is off to a flying start. And if that isn’t enough the plan has now been endorsed by John Sweeney for the AFL-CIO.  Rose Ann DeMoro, Executive Director of the California Nurses Association (CNA), and Executive Board Member of the AFL-CIO, is definitely not amused. She calls the endorsement, “unfortunate”.

  The program, an employer based state health insurance reform plan has been pushed by Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich.  DeMoro, along with the Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP) have severely criticized employer based “reforms” as undermining to the nationwide single payer movement. 

According to Michael Lighty, public policy director for the CNA, the plan is very similar to the plans introduced by California’s Schwarzenegger, Mitt Romney in Massachusetts and Hillary Clinton’s candidate’s proposal.

They all take the current system and try to make it meet our current human health care needs.  We think that is wrong.  You can’t do that.  Private insurance by definition makes money by denial of care.  And you can’t meet the needs of people through that approach.  That’s why we support single payer.

Lighty went on to say that the Illinois plan “keeps the health insurance industry at the apex of power and diverts the momentum for single payer.” But he notes that just because the AFL-CIO has endorsed the Illinois plan it does not mean that they do not support single payer. The single payer movement in the labor movement is a bottom up effort and at least 300 locals support single payer. There are also 26 state AFL-CIO labor federations and 70 labor councils that support single payer.  Lighty states that there is no reason that the CNA cannot work with those supporters within the labor movement.

The California Nurses Association is no newcomer to the health care reform battle.  They have put blood, sweat and tears on the line for reform. In fact they passed a single payer bill in the California legislature last year, which was unfortunately vetoed by The Arnold. Only four votes in the Senate and six to eight votes in the Assembly were needed to override the veto.  Schwarzenegger’s compromise bill is currently moving through the California legislature and, of course, will put insurance back in the picture. 

And what does Blagojevich have to say about all of this.  Well, this is what…:

So much of what you do in politics is done through political realities. The art of politics in government is the recognition of what is possible.  The choice is between whether you take an existing structure – an employer based health care system and build on that, shore that up … or whether you scrap the whole thing and create a whole new system that has not yet taken root in the United States.

C’mon Rod, you can do better than that!  Did anyone ask Illinois employers if they want to continue to play on  the roller coaster  with insurance?  Perhaps if you were truly interested, you could find a plethora of polls that show that a majority of Americans would love for a single payer system to “take root”, if only the “artful” politicians would allow it to happen. And political realities generally have to do with big money donors or do you think we don’t know that.  I think overall,  this is what Lakoff calls “surrendering in advance”.

One bright spot in the picture is the fact that so much candidate energy (at least on the democratic side) is going into the health care reform debate. And the discussion centers on what kind of reform, rather than “should we reform”.  And that, I think, should be viewed as good.  But, if the economy worsens, the issue of health care may very likely take precedence over the Iraq war in the coming election.

Now let’s see, are Harry and Louis still on the Riviera?

Paul Krugman, speaking at the Women’s Democratic Forum of Greater St. Louis at a Thursday luncheon, opined that the long, Alaskan winter of Republican dominance is ending.  And Krugman, no Pollyanna, has solid reasons for thinking that “It’s almost over, or at least it can be over.”

Krugman began by explaining how the country has gone awry since the seventies.  The once powerful middle class of the fifties and sixties in this country, created by the New Deal, was decimated because many of the programs that enabled more equality than this nation had ever seen before have been dismantled by Movement Conservatives.  They have taken us into a second Gilded Age, with the concentration of wealth as great at the top now as it was in the twenties.  For example, last year the top 25 hedge fund managers made as much money as the 80,000 New York City teachers make in three years.

Conservatives have wrought this change because they see the Great Society and the New Deal as a violation of American principles.  Grover Norquist, when asked once what he wanted to accomplish, said that he intended to take this nation back to the time before Teddy Roosevelt introduced socialism. 

The reason Republicans were able to take us out of an age of equality and into another gilded age, according to Krugman, was that they gained a grip on power by appealing to racism.  The Civil Rights Act was the signal for many Southern white males to switch parties.  By the time Reagan was running for president, Republicans had learned to use race.  Reagan went to Mississippi, during his first presidential campaign, and spoke there–at the urging of Roger Ailes, currently the  president of Fox News–in favor of “states’ rights”, code for racism.   He popularized the notion of the “welfare queen”, even though the woman he described never existed.  She was a product of his fertile imagination.  Reagan’s successor, George H.W. Bush, relied on Willie Horton to get himself elected.

As the Republicans gained power, their goal was to weaken labor.  Union membership declined from 30 percent of the workers in the sixties to 12 percent now.  Canada, on the other hand, still has about a 30 percent union membership workforce.  Why the difference in the two countries?  The Reagan years saw open warfare on unions, and it is no accident that Wal-Mart, with its focus on keeping unions out, began its climb to power during those years.

Now, however, the Republican hold on America is losing its grip.  Racism is less powerful.  Look at what happened to George Allen last year, in Virginia no less, for using a racial epithet, “macaca”.  His racist comment put Jim Webb into Allen’s senate seat.

The other critical factor in loosening Republican power is a surge of progressive economic populism.  Americans see what is happening to their jobs and their health insurance under Republican rule.  Last year Democracy Corps did a poll which revealed that 70 percent of Americans think the country is headed in the wrong direction.  Respondents in the poll were asked to choose from various phrases that described the possible reasons they thought so.  The most commonly chosen phrases were “Big business gets everything it wants” and “leaders have forgotten the middle class.”  Americans are angrier than those pollsters have ever seen them.

The place to begin progressive reform, Krugman believes, is with health care.  We spend 60 percent more on health care than France, for example, and yet the French get better health outcomes than we do.  Now, however, there is a strong progressive coalition behind health care reform, and all three major Democratic presidential candidates have introduced health plans that could eventually turn into Medicare for All.  (Krugman’s only caveat was that he fears interest groups might be able to buy their way out of real health care reform.)

Less than three years ago, it looked as if we might lose social security, but the left fought back and we didn’t.  Now, we may get health care reform by 2009.  The times they are a-changin’, and Paul Krugman believes they’re likely to be better. 

In today’s Kansas City Star their resident political stenographer finally notices [tiny URL] that something is afoot with this e-mail thingy plaguing the “baby” Blunt Administration:

…There’s only one option left for Gov. Matt Blunt….

That’s a major staff shake-up that includes the ouster of his pedal-always-to-the-metal chief of staff, Ed Martin.

Only a move that dramatic, that far-reaching, will help Blunt shake off the aftertaste of a miserable month that has left his administration facing a probable lawsuit from a fired staff lawyer and a special investigator nipping at its heels.

This flare-up, of course, could hardly come at a more inopportune time….

Nah, dumping Ed Martin won’t help at all. It’s not just one person, it’s a pervasive attitude within the administration – driven by either gross incompetence or Machiavellian arrogance at the top. Come to think of it, the combination of the two sound like business as usual from dubya’s administration.

The stenographer’s political advice is the equivalent of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

“…This flare-up, of course, could hardly come at a more inopportune time…” You think?

There is one chuckle worthy line (well, we must give credit where credit is due) – the stenographer calls the recent media domino game:

…The Shove From the Guv…

The Missouri presidential primary will take place on February 5, 2008. After that, the process for selecting Missouri’s delegates who will nominate the party’s candidate for president in Denver at the Democratic National Convention will unfold at various levels through the beginning of May.

The first step is to be registered to vote by January 9, 2008. The second step is to actually vote in the February 5th presidential primary. If you don’t do so, you can’t be a delegate. Period.

Missouri Delegate Selection Plan for the 2008 Democratic National Convention [pdf]

…Participation in the Missouri delegate selection process is open to all voters who wish to participate as Democrats, who are residents of and registered voters in the political subdivision (ward, township, county, legislative district) which is holding the mass meeting, who are at least eighteen (18) years of age, who declare themselves to be Democrats, and are not members of any other political party. Every person attending a ward, township, legislative district, or county mass meeting shall sign a standardized declaration furnished by the Missouri State Democratic Committee that states he or she meets the qualifications as set forth in this section and indicates the address and telephone number of his or her permanent residence. They shall then receive a pledge of support form to be submitted to their caucus leader at the time caucuses are formed. This form shall also include a declaration of affiliation to the Democratic Party and confirm that they voted in the 2008 Presidential Democratic Primary…

The party will check to see if you voted in the primary – it’s a public record. If you didn’t vote in the presidential primary and you somehow get selected in the early part of the process you will forfeit your position.

Missouri’s presidential primary vote is binding. The delegates will be allocated in proportion to the candidates’ percentage of votes in the primary as long as the candidate has reached a threshold of 15%.

If you want to try to get elected as a delegate to the national convention you must participate in all applicable meetings through the state party convention in May. No proxies are allowed. If you are otherwise eligible to participate (that is, you’ve been elected early in the process) and you don’t show up, you are not eligible to stand for election as a delegate at that level.

On February 28, 2008 the first of the mass meetings in the process will take place. It’s a convoluted process depending on where you live, so check the plan to see what applies to you.

On March 27, 2008 delegates to the national convention will be selected in the congressional district meetings. Each congressional district is allocated a specific number of delegates and alternates based on previous voting performance in presidential elections. That is, if you live in a predominantly Democratic district your area gets more delegates.

The party also has an affirmative action plan. Half the delegate and alternate positions are allocated to males, half are allocated to females. There are also allocations based on race and orientation. Since it is a very public record, if you run and are elected as a national delegate based on your orientation, everyone who’s paying attention, including people who didn’t previously know of your orientation, will know.

The state Democratic Committee will meet on April 5, 2008 to elect PLEO (party leader/elected official) delegates in proportion to the presidential candidates’ votes in the primary. PLEO delegates can be state wide office holders, large city mayors, and/or other prominent elected officials or party activists.

The state convention will be on May 10, 2008. At large national delegates will be elected there.

I was elected as a national delegate in 2000 at my congressional district meeting. I first had to get elected at my county meeting. I participated in the state convention and, of course, the national convention. In 1996 I was an alternate to the state convention, getting seated as a voting delegate when another individual couldn’t attend. I learned about the process by participating in it. In 2004 I was on the state committee – however, I had supported Howard Dean who did not meet the 15% threshold. I caucused with the Edwards meeting (I had a choice – Edwards or Kerry – no other candidates met the threshold) and cast my vote to elect Edwards delegates to the national convention. I am no longer on the state committee so I won’t be involved in that part of the process.

I plan on participating in the process as much as I am able (that is, county meeting, congressional district meeting, state convention) but I will not be running for a national delegate slot.

You can view the plan at the Missouri Democratic Party web site:

Missouri Delegate Selection Plan for the 2008 Democratic National Convention [pdf]

The Democratic National Convention will be in Denver, Colorado from August 25-28, 2008. If you want to try and participate as a delegate to the national convention you better start familiarizing yourself with the process and start planning now.

A few words of advice. Half the battle is in just showing up. Depending on a lot of other variables you just might find yourself in the right place at the right time.

An acquaintance of mine recently sent me a question to this effect:  What kind of country is this when Barry Bonds gets indicted for perjury but we can’t get impeachment proceedings started for George Bush, whose crimes are infinitely worse.

I realize that technically there’s some logical fallacy in that thinking–though I can’t recall the name of the fallacy–but no matter.  It’s still a good question.

Feel free to speculate on the answer.  Or just rant.

On November 13th SurveyUSA released a 600 sample poll taken in Missouri from November 9th through the 11th which shows that dubya has a similar poor approval rating from the previous one released last month. The margin of error is 4%.

The poll was sponsored by KCTV in Kansas City.

Do you approve or disapprove of the job George W. Bush is doing as President?

All
35% – approve
63% – disapprove
2% – not sure

Democrats [40% of sample]
10% – approve
89% – disapprove
1% – not sure

republicans [28% of sample]
72% – approve
27% – disapprove
2% – not sure

Independents [26% of sample]
37% – approve
59% – disapprove
3% – not sure

His approval rating has improved (not much) among Independents – still it’s at -22%. His approval remains unchanged among Democrats and Republicans. Self identified Democrats make up 40% of the sample.

A majority (53% to 46%) of anti-choice folks [48% of the sample] give him approval. A larger majority of pro-choice folks (78% to 20%) disapprove [and they’re 49% of the sample].

Ebb and flow. Just when I think that things are finally getting down to a trickle, the floodgates open. It’s the nature of this subject in our polarized society.

I have previously written about the commitment announcement of two males published in the Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal and the reactions in letters to the editor in the paper here [original diary], here [part 2], here [part 3], here [part 4], here [part 5], here [part 6], here [part 7], here [part 8], and here [part 9].

One short supportive letter was published in the Wednesday, November 14th edition of the paper. Three lengthy letters were published in the Thursday, November 15th edition.

The headers for the letters were provided by the paper.

The lone letter from someone in St. Louis on November 14th:

Supporting Decision

“…I want to say THANK YOU for making me proud of my state.

I commend you for being patriots and supporting ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’ for ALL Americans.”

The November 15th edition had two letters criticizing the announcement and one supportive letter:

Be Tolerant Of Others

“All these letters have become is a way to sling hateful remarks at one another. It’s time to stop. Just because Christians do not support this union by no way makes them uncaring…

…it’s a disagreement of what defines traditional marriage. This community needs to restore itself by being tolerant of each opinion….

Okay, I think there’s a truth in advertising problem in there somewhere.

“All these letters have become is a way to sling hateful remarks at one another…” I recall reading somewhere something about “not casting the second stone”, though I could be in error. Apparently, casting the first stone is always an option for many people.

“…Just because Christians do not support this union…” I guess someone took a poll. The good news is that some other belief systems in our community kind of like the idea. But, we all know that no right thinking, all knowing, and truly righteous Christian would disagree with the letter writer.

That settles it.

“…This community needs to restore itself by being tolerant of each opinion…” Chutzpah and delicious irony for the irony impaired. Yes, let’s “tolerate” intolerance.

It’s enough to make one weep.

Hate Sin, Love The Sinner

“Most Americans, citizens of the United States, a country once known as a Christian nation, have been desensitized to sin…

Wow. Just wow.

“… a country once known as a Christian nation, have been desensitized to sin…”  Where to begin? I could write a dissertation length piece on ignorance, asking: “Why can’t Johnny retain critical thinking skills in a culture devoid of ‘knowledge’, you know, based on actual facts?” – but I’m pretty sure that’s already been done.

“…once known as a Christian nation…”

Well, at least not since 1796.

Treaty of peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary

…Art. 11. As the Government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility, of Musselmen;  and, as the said States never entered into war, or act of hostility against any Mohametan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext, arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption in the harmony existing between the two countries…”

Or, a little earlier:

United States Constitution
Article VI

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

Bill of Rights
Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…

Hate self-righteous ignorance, pity the self-righteously ignorant.

And finally, a lengthy supportive letter.

Play Nicely With Others

“Recently while at the local hospital, I wandered into the chapel. I began reading a pie chart of approximately thirty different religions and each of their beliefs. The foundation of all was the same. Simply put, ‘Treat others like you want to be treated’….

I am disillusioned that in some churches ‘treat others like you want to be treated’ is a totally lost concept. The foundation forgotten. Don’t call names. Don’t throw stones. Don’t hate. Don’t judge. Don’t cheat. Don’t lie. Respect others and yourself. Play nice….

…And shame on you (you know who you are), whose Christian outreach only reaches as far as your own denomination.

So please profess a bit less, reflect a bit more, put down your rocks, stretch out your arms…

Now go play nice…”

I had a conversation about all this at an unrelated event last night [by most accounts this is the subject for discussion in Warrensburg]. An individual mentioned the letter which pointed out the 1967 swimming pool vote. He told me, “That opened up some painful issues. There’s a lot of stuff we all need to get out in the open and discuss around here.”

“…Don’t call names. Don’t throw stones. Don’t hate. Don’t judge. Don’t cheat. Don’t lie. Respect others and yourself. Play nice…” I’m trying. God is not finished with me yet. And boy, is she pissed.

Matt Blunt refused to reveal what’s in his own e-mail files about Scott Eckersley’s advice to him and then got caught red-handed in a lie about what those files would have shown.  So he’s decided to paint himself as the high priest of transparency.  His minions filed Sunshine Law requests for every scrap of paper and every e-mail for the last three years from nineteen leading Democratic legislators.  As you can see, he believes in transparency–from other people.  Don’t think of it as harassment; think of it as making other people practice what he preaches.

And he does preach it, brother.  He has been converted and has proven it by announcing the creation of a permanent e-mail retention system for the entire state government.

“I take great pride in my administration’s commitment to being good stewards of taxpayer dollars and commitment to accountable and transparent government.”

All both of the voters who might be taken in by his more-transparent-than-thou act, should notice that he’s still not revealing his past e-mail files in the Eckersley scandal.

Instead, by firing Eckersley to begin with and now by harassing Democrats about their records, he has turned what could have been a minor skirmish into war. 

OzarksPolitics.com recommends a counterattack, one justified by the Republican abuse of the Sunshine Law.  The harassment of Democrats is so obviously just that:

No particular issues or events are targeted, Sloca wants everything. Among the targets is Springfield State Rep. Sara Lampe, who holds a leadership position in the Democratic caucus. So, if you have ever sent her an e-mail expressing your opinion on an issue or asking for help in a personal manner, or just telling her she is doing a good job, the Missouri GOP will soon get their hands on it.

So the blogger recommends that we knock out some Sunshine Law requests that do focus on particular issues and lists nine possibilities.  My favorite would be to write one requesting:

Any correspondence between St. Louis County State Rep. (and Senate hopeful) Jane Cunningham, Rex Sinquefield and the organization All Children Matter in regard to school voucher plans.

That request would be using the Sunshine Law rather than abusing it, and the results might be worth a look-see.  How does one write a Sunshine Law request?  Do I just put my request on paper, noting that it’s a Sunshine Law request, and pop it in the mail?

Who else deserves to get one of these letters?

photo courtesy of Fired Up!