One of the lesser known facts about Judy Baker is that she is the daughter of a Navy physician. Not surprisingly, then, she has investigated veterans’ health care and has spelled out a specific plan to improve it.

That’s how it came about that I had a chance to talk to Lt. General Claudia Kennedy on Friday. She’s impressed with Baker–not only for Judy’s concern about veterans, but for her concern for all working families as well. Kennedy, the only woman to rise to the rank of Lt. General in the army, spoke on a conference call about why she’s endorsing Judy.

She had become aware of this obscure candidate from the Midwest who offered a sound appraisal of the basic problems in veterans’ health care and who had savvy ideas about how to tackle them. Kennedy noted that Baker is the only candidate to receive the endorsement of the VFW, because they recognize how serious Judy is about helping veterans.

As a member of Congress I will fight to ensure our deserving veterans have accessible healthcare and that all of the 1.8 million uninsured veterans in this country have access to quality, affordable health care.  My plan focuses on three major areas of concern: increased access, mental health services and reducing bureaucratic delays.

• Increased Access: My plan would investigate ways to allow veterans in the VA system to access local providers instead of restricting them to traveling to a VA hospital. For example, veterans could continue their existing coverage or receive care from local providers contracted with the VA or Medicare system. Too many times, especially in our rural communities, veterans are forced to drive hundreds of miles and pass several hospitals on the way to access care.

The plan also would allow National Guard and Reserve member’s access to the VA healthcare system.  Many gave up civilian jobs when they were deployed overseas and have now permanently lost these jobs and with them their health insurance, pensions, and other benefits.

• Mental Health Services: While it is necessary to treat the physical needs of our veterans, it is as crucial to treat mental health needs. Our service members deserve the ability to access local mental health providers and to receive care from providers with whom they can establish an ongoing therapeutic relationship; a standard of care available in the civilian sector.My plan proposes to increase in the number of brain specialists available to treat Traumatic Brain Injury and to set standards of care for TBI, the signature injury of the Iraq war.
• Reducing Bureaucratic Delays: VA’s budget has been pushed to the limit in recent years by the War on Terrorism, so much so that it can not provide disability determinations to veterans in a timely fashion. I support hiring additional claims workers with improved training and accountability so VA benefit decisions are rated fairly, consistently and quickly. I support transforming the paper benefit claims process to an electronic one to reduce errors and improve timeliness.

Judy deserves the endorsement from General Kennedy as well as from the VFW. Baker’s concern for veterans is just one more reason to hope that Blaine Luetkemeyer gets deep sixed on Tuesday.

A couple of stations in Columbia have pulled Judy Baker’s ad about Luetkemeyer wanting to privatize Social Security:

Seems there’s a difference between privatization and “allowing individuals to use personal accounts to invest their Social Security benefits”.

Whatever. That’s old news now. How long do you think it will take Baker’s people to get a new ad up about the fact that Luetkemeyer was the only representative in the House to vote against a bill requiring nursing homes to report abuse of elderly patients. That’s as in, 153 reps voted for HB 349 and Blaine Luetkemeyer, all by his lonesome, voted against it.

His vote probably had nothing to do with the fact that he was being paid to sit on the board of the St. Elizabeth Care Center, a for-profit nursing home. Nah, surely nothing as crass as money would motivate that vote.  More likely, he thinks it’s a good idea for helpless seniors to suffer needlessly.

Look for the new ad.

Hell, look for a Democratic rep from the Ninth come November 5th.

On Wednesday, Blaine Luetkemeyer and Judy Baker squared off in a debate at Barat Academy in St. Charles County. Both were articulate and forceful. I wish I’d had access to the dozens of Academy students in the audience afterwards to get their take on who won the debate for the Ninth Congressional Seat, but the bottom line would probably have been: all depends on your own ideology and concerns–because Luetkemeyer didn’t pretend to be anything but a Republican.

Asked how he would revive the moribund housing industry, he said he wants to extend the Bush tax cuts. Otherwise, he believes, we’ll lose 20,000 jobs in Missouri alone, and people will have trouble meeting their mortgage payments. We need to keep businesses here in the United States. They’re leaving, why? Because of all that pesky regulation. Hoo boy, not even John McCain would dare spout that line these days. Maybe Luetkemeyer figures high school students don’t understand enough about the current eonomic crisis to doubt his wisdom.

Or maybe he’s just sticking by what he’s always believed. He’s principled. And principally, he’s in love with big business. Including big ag. He spoke proudly of his endorsements by the Farm Bureau and the Soybean Association.  

He abhors legislators who think big government is the “do all and be all”, and likes what he refers to as the “private sector”. He favors privatizing Social Security and sees taxes not as a solution but as the problem. You know. Standard GOP line.

Baker, too, stood for her party’s values. Like Obama, she wants to tax the wealthiest more and give tax cuts to everyone else. She wants money in the pockets of workers because they are “the gas in this nation’s economic engine.” And being a nurse, she stresses health care. When she was allowed to ask Luetkemeyer a question of her own, she wanted to know why, with insurance companies making record profits, why he thinks it’s OK to let insurance companies drop preventive measures like mammograms and other cancer screenings.

Luetkemeyer was unapologetic. He insisted that mandates for preventive care raise our health care rates by 25 percent. What he wants is affordability and accessibility, and he pointed out that as a state legislator he promoted a bill that would have let people with pre-existing conditions get insurance.

Baker’s attitude was:

“It costs a whole lot more, Blaine, to treat cancer than to spring for a mammogram. How often do we get the chance to save lives and money at the same time?”

Judy Baker, in short, realizes what the real problems are that face us. She is looking toward solving the twin problems of energy and climate change. She stressed the need for a modernized electrical grid so that energy produced by windmills in northern New York can be transported to New York City. Judy said we need a new superhighway for energy. I couldn’t agree more.

Blaine Luetkemeyer, on the other hand, is a grumpy old Republican, complaining about “failed liberal–he practically held his nose when he said the word–leadership” that has, in its two years of controlling Congress, seen unemployment go up and people’s grocery bills rise by $70 a month.

Well, I see him as a grumpy old Republican. We’ll find out, in 2 1/2 weeks whether voters in the Ninth agree.

She’s up by 4 in the latest poll.

Health Care for America Now just released a new ad questioning Republican Blaine Luetkemeyer’s record of supporting insurance companies and their ability to deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions. Luetkemeyer is facing Democrat Judy Baker (a health care expert, no less) for the open seat in Missouri’s Ninth Congressional District. In the ad, a cancer survivor notes that she just beat her battle with cancer, but because of people like Luetkemeyer and the insurance companies, she could lose her health insurance based on pre-existing conditions like cancer.

Watch the ad:

Whoops! This could potentially cost Luetkemeyer hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Columbia, MO – Blaine Luetkemeyer broke federal laws instituted by the

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) with a television

advertisement that distorted his opponent’s record. The violations

mean that for the rest of the campaign the Luetkemeyer camp should not

be eligible for discounted advertising rates given to candidates that

follow federal law.

“Blaine Luetkemeyer will say anything and break any law to get

elected. He is part of the old politics that just hurts Missouri

families by dividing us,” said Paul Tencher, spokesman for the Baker

campaign. “These violations are serious because they are laws created

specifically to let voters know Mr. Luetkemeyer is responsible for the

negative campaign tactics he has used to distort Judy’s record and

distract voters from the real issues. If he is so proud of his gutter

advertising he should follow the law and put his name on them.”

According to FCC law, a television advertisement sponsored by a

candidate and that makes direct reference to an opponent during the 45-

or 60-day windows must include, at the end of the broadcast,

simultaneously, and for at least four seconds:

•    A clearly identifiable photographic or similar image of the

candidate; and

•    A clearly readable printed statement identifying the candidate

and stating that the candidate has approved the broadcast and that the

candidate’s authorized committee has paid for it.

The Baker campaign will now take legal action to have television

stations that aired the broadcasts enforce the law and repeal the

Luetkemeyer campaign’s certification for the discounted advertising

rates. A copy of the letter sent to every television station in the

Ninth District is attached to this release.

So where do Missouri’s representatives stand on the bailout as proposed by Bush? How about candidates running to represent Missouri? I haven’t seen any statements yet from any of them on the Bush proposal.

If you see anything before I’ve posted it here, put it in comments and I’ll update.

UPDATE: Finally, someone steps up to the plate.

Judy Baker, Democratic candidate for Congress in the 9th District:

Judy would support a plan that provides for everyday people that have invested their retirement and life savings in Wall Street. She would make stronger regulatory monitoring part of the bill to prevent this from happening again. Judy would not support any bill that includes compensation for corporate executives that are responsible for this meltdown.

From comments, Republican Senator Kit Bond:

U.S. Senator Kit Bond today urged bold action through bipartisan cooperation to address our nation’s financial crisis, while emphasizing that any plan Congress adopts must ensure accountability, oversight, and transparency.    

“This is an emergency crisis.  We all believe the free market is the best system in the world, but there are times when we must take temporary emergency action to get us through the rare crisis,” said Bond.  “In acting we must demand accountability so that we do not reward those who made bad decisions, greater oversight so that taxpayers and the overall economy are protected, and transparency so that people can have trust in our financial system and know that their money is safe.”  

Blaine Luetkemeyer can’t answer a simple question from a reporter:

When asked whether he supported allowing the Medicare program to negotiate with prescription drug companies, Luetkemeyer’s campaign sent out a release criticizing Baker for voting against a push last year to strip away taxes on Social Security benefits.

“I believe that the hard-working people of the 9th Congressional District especially our seniors should be allowed to keep more money in their pockets rather than turn it over to Judy Baker’s liberal friends in Congress with a knack for funding pork barrel projects,” Luetkemeyer said in a statement. “There is a clear contrast between my dedication to fiscal responsibility and Judy Baker’s tax-and-spend approach to government including her unwillingness to give Missouri seniors a tax break.”

So we still don’t know where Luetkemeyer stands on making prescription drugs more affordable. We do know that Luetkemeyer stands for “fiscal responsibility”, which apparently means giving away billions to pharmaceutical companies.

Let’s back up a second. In a time when all Americans, particularly the elderly, face rapidly rising health care costs, and the federal budget deficit spirals out of control, you’d think candidates for federal office would get behind commonsense solutions that tackle both problems at the same time. In the race for the 9th Congressional District, Judy Baker is the only candidate who’s taking on this challenge.

In 2002, Pharmaceutical companies managed to extract a major concession from Congress in the massive legislative wrangling over the addition of prescription drug coverage to Medicare. The federal government would subsidize the cost of prescription drugs for seniors, but would not be permitted to use the power of bulk purchasing to negotiate the price of the drugs. Which is insane. It’s the only part of the government restrained from doing just that (the VA actually negotiates prices for prescription drugs for veterans), and private companies from insurance firms to Wal-Mart negotiate lower prices using the size of their purchases. Wal Mart even does it for prescription drugs for its pharmacies.

Negotiating for lower prescription drug prices could save consumers (and the federal budget) billions of dollars, which is especially relevant at a time when the economy is stagnating and the federal deficit is over $400 billion a year. But Luetkemeyer seems to think that bleating “fiscal responsibility” over and over again and closing his ears will get us past the problem.

My guess is that he’ll keep silent, because there’s no way he can win a debate with a health care expert like Judy Baker.

Judy Baker has an excellent new ad on the air right now. I know us bloggers generally like unconventional ads, but for a conventional ad, this one is just about perfect.

(I ordinarily don’t promote posts by campaigns or organizations, but this is definitely worth some attention. – promoted by Clark)

Democrats are most effective when we utilize all our resources. Therefore, 21st Century Democrats wants to harness the excitement of the Netroots to power our Grassroots field organizing. We’ve created a contest between 12 great congressional candidates, and now we need your vote to decide who should get field organizers to help them until Election Day. Round One will pare down the twelve to six and then Round Two will decide the three winners.

If you believe in Judy Baker or Kay Barnes, head on over to our website and vote. It will only take a few moments and your vote could put Judy Baker or Kay Barnes over the top on Election Day.

There is one vote per valid email and voting for Round One will end on September 20, 2008. You can start voting for Round Two on September 21st. We’ll declare our winner on October 1, 2008.