Liberal Groups Turn on Dems to Pass Health Care Reform

Conservatives have warned Democrats that a vote for health care reform will be used against them in their next elections, but now liberals are telling Democrats a vote against the bill will result in a political challenge from the left. Even some liberal proponents of health care reform who once decried the Senate health care bill for not going far enough are now attacking liberal Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich for standing by his pledge to only support a bill with a public option.

MoveOn.org, the liberal grassroots organization that boasts five million members, launched a six-figure national ad campaign yesterday urging citizens to call Congress and ask them to vote for the health care bill "to fight for what's right." The ad compares congressmen willing to vote for the bill to historical leaders like Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Jr. and Franklin D. Roosevelt.

The group also launched a campaign to raise pledges of financial support from its remembers to back primary challengers against Democratic House members who vote against the bill.

"With the big vote happening as early as this Friday, Conservative Democrats need to know the stakes if they choose to side with Big Insurance over the voters on health care reform," MoveOn said in an e-mail to its supporters on Monday. The group highlights the strength of its organization -- MoveOn has already raised over $1 million for Bill Halter, a progressive primary challenger to moderate Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas.

Powerful union leaders are also threatening to run third-party candidates against Democrats who do not support the health care bill, a move that could help elect Republicans in swing districts. The Service Employees International Union is already preparing to potentially back candidates in New York, Illinois and Pennsylvania, the New York Times reports.

CBSNews.com Special Report: Health Care

The tactic is a reversal for MoveOn, which initially pressed for a more robust health care plan. "It's time for progressives to stop bargaining with themselves," MoveOn wrote in a Dec. 14, 2009 e-mail. "We need Senate Democrats to fight for the majority of voters who want a public option--and not let a few out-of-touch conservatives gut real reform."

The decision was made to back the Senate bill, however, after MoveOn polled its members and found that 83 percent want the bill passed. "The final health care package being crafted is far from perfect--and we'll keep fighting together for improvements," the group says in its Monday e-mail.

MoveOn is also a sponsor of a rally outside of Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio)'s Lakewood, Ohio office this afternoon to show support for the health care bill.

Kucinich says he is not yet backing the health care bill because it is not liberal enough, a position that has won the ire from some liberal commentators. The filing deadline for any candidate interested in challenging Kucinich in a primary has passed already, but that hasn't stopped some from endorsing the idea.

"What he is doing is undermining this reform," Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas said last week in an appearance on MSNBC. "He is making common cause with Republicans. And I think that is a perfect excuse and a rational one for a primary challenge."

Kucinich's position, however, is not far from the stance Moulitsas took on the Democrats' health care package back in December. "I think it's very clear, this is not insurance or healthcare reform," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Dec. 20, 2009. "What it is, it's allowing more people, 30 million people, to buy into the existing broken system."

Kucinich was not available for interviews today; however, he told Juan Gonzalez of Democracy Now earlier this week, "I have a responsibility to take a stand here on behalf of those who want a public option... If I were to just concede right now and say, 'Well, you know, whatever you want. All this pressure's building. Just forget about it,' actually weakens every last-minute bit of negotiations that would try to improve the bill."

The congressman's obstinance earned the attention of the president yesterday, when Mr. Obama traveled to Kucinich's district for a rally and egged on an attendee screaming for the legislator to vote for the bill.

A House vote on the health care package could come as early as Friday, but it is still unclear whether Democrats have enough votes to support it. A collection of pro-reform groups today are rolling out a new $1.4 million ad campaign this week in 11 key districts to coincide with the expected timing of the vote. The ads are sponsored by Health Care for America Now, SEIU, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), and Catholics United.

"After a year of debate, and decades of knowing that the system needs to be fixed, it's time to put health reform to a vote to see who sides with the American people and who sides with the insurance industry," AFSCME International President Gerald McEntee said in a statement. "Let's get this done - now."

Quick Poll

30 Comments Have Your Say
Email Story Send to a Friend
Share This Tell Your Friends
Tweet This Tweet This
More Share It

Add a Comment

See all 30 Comments


by Keefanda March 17, 2010 6:06 AM EDT: It is mathematically impossible to provide full healthcare long-term for even just most through a system as severely regressively financed with respect to income as the profit AND nonprofit health insurance models. Nonprofit does NOT make it mathematically possible - profit has nothing to do with it.

Subsidizing such a system would not avoid long-term disaster in comparison to what could be.

It is mathematically possible to have full healthcare for all long-term only through a system progressively financed with respect to income.

Informal Proof:

IMPORTANT PRELIMINARY NOTE: ALL insurance reforms will ultimately only slow the rate of growth of premiums and/or deductibles/copays, still growing faster than general inflation.

Health insurance is financed extremely regressively with respect to income: (A) For full coverage with given deductibles and copays, everyone regardless of income pays the same in premiums. (B) This full coverage and associated full healthcare is for only those who can pay all three.

Analogy:

Imagine trying to finance the US government this way, where all pay the same dollar amount in tax and only those who pay get services. To be affordable for even a minimum-wage worker, let this tax be roughly $1,000/yr, somewhat under 10% of take-home pay. For easy computing, assume roughly 200 million paying this tax. Result: 200-billion/yr. This finances less than 10% of the US government.

Now consider Fact Set M:

1/2 of ALL US jobs at ALL levels of experience pay BELOW roughly $15/hr PRETAX (national median wage), BELOW roughly $32,000/yr PRETAX 40/hr workweek. 1/3 of all households have pretax incomes BELOW roughly $30,000/yr. 2/3 of all health uninsured are BELOW twice poverty.

Conclusion:

(1) It is impossible for this system to provide full services to most. (2) It is impossible to avoid the fully served population fraction becoming ever-smaller because the severely regressive financing causes tax and/or additional point-of-service payment inflation to be higher than general inflation to maintain whatever full services exist.

This fits perfectly what happens:

(1) The system does not provide full private insurance coverage and full healthcare to most - not far above only 1/3 of roughly 300 million are fully privately insured. Roughly 1/3 have government-financed healthcare and not far below 1/3 are either uninsured or privately underinsured. (2) The fully privately covered population fraction is becoming ever-smaller because the severely regressive financing is causing premium and/or deductible/copay inflation to be higher than general inflation to maintain whatever full coverage exists.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Via never-ending dumping and denying on even just 1/3 of the population, the private market says it wants the opposite of universal healthcare.

Need more?

Average industry actuarial value (defined as healthcare portion paid by insurance) and loss ratio is each roughly 65-80%. Holding steady actuarial value, lower premiums until loss ratio equals real-life unattainable mathematical limit of 100%. Premiums decrease only 20-35% maximum. Average family premiums decrease roughly from $13-14,000/yr to $9-12,000/yr at best. By such facts as M, premiums at even this real-life unattainable mathematical limit of $9-12,000/yr are still not affordable for most. To add insult to injury: All those deductibles, copays, and future faster-than-general-inflation increases of all three.

Need more?

If such regressively financed insurance-healthcare were subsidized via vouchers, the there would still be a disaster long-term in comparison to what could be.

Imagine totally replacing Medicare with a voucher system.

This published science is instructive here (copy-paste-Google the title): "Relation between income inequality and mortality in Canada and in the United States: cross sectional assessment using census data and vital statistics" - They found that Canada has no association between income inequality and mortality. The US has a strong such association for those under 65 but no such association for those at least 65 - American government-financed universal healthcare Medicare saves the day. Such an association existed in Canada before government-financed universal healthcare.

Need more?

Imagine totally replacing public education with such a voucher system.

The lesson of vouchers? The further you go down the income scale, the more the subsidies become too small for the service in question to be affordable - the lower your income, the more you're screwed.

What more do you need?; Reply to this comment


by shadesmama March 17, 2010 3:05 AM EDT: riddle me this... If I was one of a few companies that sold purple woven baskets and the Gov says every man woman and child had to purchase a purple woven basket, but the repubs say NO WAY, who's passing laws in my favor? Just a thought!; Reply to this comment


by jonesbrother March 17, 2010 12:02 AM EDT: I have already donated to Halter's campaign in Arkansas (vs. Blanche Lincoln) and Connie Saltonstall's campaign in Michigan (vs. Bart Stupak). What good are Democrats that won't fight for health reform? MoveOn has it right on. Pass health reform now!; Reply to this comment


by endurorob_5 March 16, 2010 7:00 PM EDT: All I can say is "The idiocy of liberalism".; Reply to this comment


by mff45 March 16, 2010 3:16 PM EDT: The real culprits are the big health insurance companies raising the premiums every year and the republicans did nothing to fix the problems for years. Same thing for immigration. Now , it is the Democrats turn to fix it, creating the most expensive health care system. I don't want the government to take over it. We,the people wanted real health insurance reform. Now , if I want to start my own business, I must pay for employees insurance. That is insane.; Reply to this comment


by Rowbean March 16, 2010 3:12 PM EDT: No, No, No and No! Nowbody wants to be bullied into having themselves forcefed healthcare or any other big too-expensive and not-going-to-work-anyway governmental programs we don't agree with.

And when did we elect Move-on to rule this country? I don't ever remember voting them in, do you?Did I miss something? Just who do these pushy rahm-ing bullies think they are, and who do they think voted them in? This is a suicide mission for the bunch of them. My congressman, who is going to vote for this bill no matter what, and all incumbants that have pushed this through without listening are getting voted out by me and mine.; Reply to this comment


by freepress6 March 16, 2010 3:08 PM EDT: The U.S. economy is seventy percent consumer-generated and consumers aren't spending. Passage of health-care reform requiring everyone to buy health insurance is a way into the pockets of tight-fisted consumers. We should feel lucky Congress isn't passing a law requiring us to buy a new car every year. Meanwhile, the health legislation might be viewed as a bailout of the insurance industry. On the bright side, Obamacare, though far from ideal, it is a giant step toward long-overdue universal health care. Sterling Greenwood/AspenFreePress; Reply to this comment


by VoteThemOut2010 March 16, 2010 2:40 PM EDT: Compulsory Health Insurance is Unconstitutional and unenforcable. The Constitutional challenges by the states has already begun. Without Compulsory Health Insurance the Progressive Socialist plan falls completely apart, because it is all about who is gonna be forced to pay the cost (what ever they are), instead of how do we cover everyone and make CARE affordable to everyone. Probably more about total control and Socialism. I don't care about affordable Insurance, I want affordable HEALTH CARE ! ! !
If you are looking for handout and never planned on paying your own way in life, this is great for you. Those that have to pay anything are going to be asked to pay more and get less.
Making this about Insurance is a joke. Insurance is practically worthless unless you have a catostrophic event (as with all insurance). Insurance companies (or a single payer system) is not going to provide services under cost. It is the COST for CARE that is the issue that is being totally ignored. Probably because those in favor are not worried about cost, they don't plan on paying anything.; Reply to this comment


by AngryMobVoter March 16, 2010 2:38 PM EDT: REMEMBER IN November!!!

If the average middle class American does not do what his boss wants, he gets fired. Since the Congress and Administration plan to ram a healthcare bill into law the American people do not want, they should be FIRED. It is time to VOTE THEM OUT!!! The Congress and Administration want to use a process that was never intended to be used for this purpose to ram this bill into law against the will of the American people. This sets a dangerous precedent that subverts our system of government. Anyone that votes in favor of this bill is the enemy of our system of government. It is time to VOTE THEM OUT!!! ABRAHAM LINCOLN said ?and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth?. The American people are the boss not the Congress or Administration. It is time to take our government back from the arrogant members of Congress and Administration who think they know better how we should live our lives than we do. It is time to VOTE THEM OUT!!!

REMEMBER IN NOVEMBER?VOTE THEM OUT!!!; Reply to this comment

by wcochran60 March 16, 2010 2:30 PM EDT

It is almost as if a mob mentality has taken over some Democrats in Congress. To some extent they can be pardoned for simply playing "follow the leader" - President Barack Obama - but at some point we hope they can be brought back to reality.

During the weekend, some Democrat leaders predicted that the president's cherished health care bill will be passed quickly. "It won't be long," chortled House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

But a majority of Americans have made it very clear they want no part of the bill. It has become a monstrosity, threatening to plunge the nation even deeper and faster into debt while making it more, not less, expensive for many people to care for their health.

Just during the past few days, the extraordinarily political nature of the contest has become more apparent. In a desperate attempt to gain more votes for the health care bill, Obama agreed to insert billions of dollars in aid for college students into the measure.

What does that have to do with health care? Simple: It gives Obama another reason to condemn Republicans for opposing the bill. It also gives Democrats a new rationalization for supporting it - votes from young people.

Clearly, Obama has become obsessed with winning the fight over the bill. It is a simple matter of demonstrating his political power - not of health care reform.

That can happen with presidents of both political parties. But when lawmakers - people who are supposed to represent their constituents - hop on the obsession bandwagon, something is terribly wrong. It is time to hit the brakes.

Reply to this comment


by purplethunder March 16, 2010 2:34 PM EDT: The majority of Americans have made it clear they don't want this bill, but the reason they don't want this bill is because it has been castrated by right-wing obstructionism. People want a real public option so that we can begin to join the rest of the civilized world - countries that actually care about the people who live in them.

See all 30 Comments

Report offensive content:

E-mail this comment to a friend.

Follow Political Hotsheet

CBS This Morning