Jack Kingston (you remember him, Mr. flag pin, leader of the privatize Social Security movement, proponent of drilling off the Georgia coast, etc.) tried to ignore Bill for a long time, but recently debated him in Brunswick, Georgia.
This is a substantive debate on the issues, with the moderator (Brunswick News reporter Jess Davis) sitting between the two candidates and pitching real questions.
Jack seems peeved to have to be on the same forum as some upstart; sound like certain other debates? Bill was the keynote speaker at the Valdosta Obama office opening.
Bill Gillespie wants to get us out of Iraq by handing over to the Iraqis, preferably within 18 months. Jack Kingston wants any timetable to be decided by the general in Baghdad.
Jack Kingston promotes himself as a champion of renewable energy (although local students don’t agree) but then gets off on offshore drilling.
Jack says he’s a champion of the middle class, and Bill calls him on it, pointing out that themiddleclass.org consistently gives Jack an F.
There’s more: economy, health care, regulation, etc. Watch it and see what you think. Want to knock out the Republican theme team leader? Here’s your chance, with a progressive Democrat, Bill Gillespie.
Exxon Ed Whitfield has been trying to clean up his voting record for this election year. He knows it is a bad year for Republicans, and that he has been a shameless enabler of every failed policy of the Bush Administration. All the election year scuffling to clean up his record cannot hide the fact that he has been a constant, bitter opponent to reform of our healthcare system, and of providing equal access to those in poverty as those with wealth to healthcare. Lets look at some of Exxon Eddie’s votes to limit the access of healthcare to working Americans
Oh goodness, where to begin? There have been so many bad votes by Ed Whitfield on this issue, it boggles the mind. However, lets start with Whitfield’s vote way back in 2000 to try and turn over Medicaire Drug coverage to the insurance companies, who we all know can be trusted to look out for our interests over their profits. (NOT):
Voted YES on subsidizing private insurance for Medicare Rx drug coverage.
HR 4680, the Medicare Rx 2000 Act, would institute a new program to provide voluntary prescription drug coverage for Medicare beneficiaries through subsidies to private plans. The program would cost an estimated $40 billion over five years and would go into effect in fiscal 2003.
Reference: Bill sponsored by Thomas, R-CA; Bill HR 4680 ; vote number 2000-357 on Jun 28, 2000
You see, in the twisted world of men like Exxon Ed Whitfield, profits for Insurance and Oil companies always come before people. Think I am exagerrating? Lets keep looking at the record Eddie wants us to forget:
Voted NO on allowing reimportation of prescription drugs.
Pharmaceutical Market Access Act of 2003: Vote to pass a bill that would call for the Food and Drug Administration to begin a program that would permit the importation of FDA-approved prescription drugs from Australia, Canada, the European Union, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Lichtenstein, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland and South Africa.
Reference: Bill sponsored by Gutknecht, R-MN; Bill HR.2427 ; vote number 2003-445 on Jul 24, 2003
Yes, in Exxon Eddie’s world, the sick and elderly should be required to pay the high prices of drugs to protect the profits of drug companies, even when safe, cheaper drugs are available from trustable countries who don’t have a powerful drug lobby.
It gets even worse. Not only does Exxon Eddie believe Americans should pay higher drug prices to protect profits, evidently he believes some Americans who desperately need prescription drugs should not have access to them:
Voted YES on limited prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients.
Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act of 2003: Vote to adopt the conference report on the bill that would create a prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients. Starting in 2006, prescription coverage would be made available through private insurers to seniors. Seniors would pay a monthly premium of an estimated $35 in 2006. Individuals enrolled in the plan would cover the first $250 of annual drug costs themselves, and 25 percent of all drug costs up to $2,250. The government would offer a fallback prescription drug plan in regions were no private plans had made a bid.Over a 10 year time period medicare payments to managed care plans would increase by $14.2 billion. A pilot project would begin in 2010 in which Medicare would compete with private insurers to provide coverage for doctors and hospitals costs in six metropolitan areas for six years. The importation of drugs from Canada would be approved only if HHS determines there is no safety risks and that consumers would be saving money.
Reference: Bill sponsored by Hastert, R-IL; Bill HR.1 ; vote number 2003-669 on Nov 22, 2003
That makes perfect sense in the world of Exxon Ed Whitfield, Insurance profits before people, at all costs. Even if it means denying people the medications they desperately need and struggle to afford. However, it continues to get much worse. Not satisfied in denying life-giving medications, Exxon Eddie would deny treatment of the working poor too:
Voted YES on denying non-emergency treatment for lack of Medicare co-pay.
Vote to pass a resolution, agreeing to S. AMDT. 2691 that removes the following provisions from S 1932:
Allows hospitals to refuse treatment to Medicaid patients when they are unable to pay their co-pay if the hospital deems the situation to be a non-emergency
Excludes payment to grandparents for foster care
Reference: Reconciliation resolution on the FY06 budget; Bill H Res 653 on S. AMDT. 2691 ; vote number 2006-004 on Feb 1, 2006
In the world of Exxon Eddie, it makes perfect sense to let those who are making a profit decide whether it is an emergency for those who may not be able to pay to recieve treatment.
In keeping with the theme of protecting Insurance profits at all costs, once again we see how Whitfield would keep drug prices high, to protect his big money contributors:
Voted NO on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D.
Would require negotiating with pharmaceutical manufacturers the prices that may be charged to prescription drug plan sponsors for covered Medicare part D drugs.
Proponents support voting YES because:
This legislation is an overdue step to improve part D drug benefits. The bipartisan bill is simple and straightforward. It removes the prohibition from negotiating discounts with pharmaceutical manufacturers, and requires the Secretary of Health & Human Services to negotiate. This legislation will deliver lower premiums to the seniors, lower prices at the pharmacy and savings for all taxpayers.
It is equally important to understand that this legislation does not do certain things. HR4 does not preclude private plans from getting additional discounts on medicines they offer seniors and people with disabilities. HR4 does not establish a national formulary. HR4 does not require price controls. HR4 does not hamstring research and development by pharmaceutical houses. HR4 does not require using the Department of Veterans Affairs’ price schedule.
Reference: Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act; Bill HR 4 (“First 100 hours”) ; vote number 2007-023 on Jan 12, 2007
Now, if you think it could not get much worse than this, unfortunately you are sadly mistaken. Exxon Ed Whitfield puts profits over people, even CHILDREN!!! Yes, in the twisted world of men like Ed Whitfield, profits are so much more important than even the health of our children that he would vote not once, but twice to make sure that Insurance Company profits are protected at all costs, even over the well-being of American children:
Voted NO on adding 2 to 4 million children to SCHIP eligibility.
Allows State Children’s Health Insurance Programs (SCHIP), that require state legislation to meet additional requirements imposed by this Act, additional time to make required plan changes. Pres. Bush vetoed this bill on Dec. 12, 2007, as well as a version (HR976) from Feb. 2007.
Proponents support voting YES because:
Rep. DINGELL: This is not a perfect bill, but it is an excellent bipartisan compromise. The bill provides health coverage for 3.9 million children who are eligible, yet remain uninsured. It meets the concerns expressed in the President’s veto message [from HR976]:
It terminates the coverage of childless adults.
It targets bonus payments only to States that increase enrollments of the poorest uninsured children, and it prohibits States from covering families with incomes above $51,000.
It contains adequate enforcement to ensure that only US citizens are covered.
Reference: Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act; Bill H.R. 3963 ; vote number 2007-1009 on Oct 25, 2007
Of course, this bill was passed by more compassionate members of Congress, but vetoed by the biggest corporate profiteer of them all, President Bush:
Veto message from President Bush:
Like its predecessor, HR976, this bill does not put poor children first and it moves our country’s health care system in the wrong direction. Ultimately, our goal should be to move children who have no health insurance to private coverage–not to move children who already have private health insurance to government coverage. As a result, I cannot sign this legislation.
Reference: Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act; Bill H.R. 3963 ; vote number 2007-1009 on Oct 25, 2007
Yes, it would be a shame if uncovered children recieved coverage without huge profits for the Insurance companies. From those who are always lecturing us about our “Christian values” it would be a shame if they valued children as much as Christ did. From Mark 10: 13-16:
13 ΒΆ Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them.
14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.
15 And he laid his hands on them, and departed thence.
Yes, Christian values dictate that the children be brought to be healed, but Exxon Eddie voted against Christian values on children not once, but twice:
Voted NO on Veto override: Extend SCHIP to cover 6M more kids.
OnTheIssues Explanation: This vote is a veto override of the SCHIP extension (State Children’s Health Insurance Program). The bill passed the House 265-142 on 10/25/07, and was vetoed by Pres. Bush on 12/12/07.
CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY: This Act would enroll all 6 million uninsured children who are eligible, but not enrolled, for coverage under existing programs.
Even after changes were made to accomodate President Bush’s concerns:
The bill makes changes to accommodate the President’s stated concerns.
It terminates the coverage of childless adults in 1 year.
It prohibits States from covering children in families with incomes above $51,000.
It contains adequate enforcement to ensure that only US citizens are covered.
It encourages securing health insurance provided through private employer.
The result? Another victory for big insurance, and another defeat for true Christian values:
So, why would Exxon Eddie cast all these votes against the healthcare of even children if he is so Christian? Well, that is because the only god he worships is Mammon.
So as you can see, Exxon Eddie is clearly lined up for profits, and against people.
Luckily, this time Exxon Eddie has a real challenge. Heather Ryan believes all Americans should have a fundamental right to healhcare, whether it brings insurance profits or not:
It is an absolute travesty that 50 million Americans struggle without health care in the wealthiest nation in the world. What’s worse is when our representative votes against improvements in access to health services for children and the poor. Unfortunately, these are both realities that we’ve experienced under the current leadership. I propose that health care for every American is more important than tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy.
It is time we had a representative who thinks about more than just how much money he can make when he helps pass legislation that benefits drug and insurance companies. As the leaders of the free world, it is an embarrassment that we are the only industrialized nation that does not offer health care for our citizens.
In fact, near the end of my interview with her, Heather Ryan states that the first thing she wants to work on in Washington is the introduction of healtcare for all Americans:
New leadership will mean a new direction for Kentucky, and our country:
Please, go here to help us win this race. With the resources to get Whitfield’s terrible record out to the 63% of registered Democrats in this district, we can easily win this race, and alleviate Exxon Eddie’s complaints:
Please go here and support fellow grassroots Democrats in their quest to expand our Congressional majorities and move our country in the direction of progress for everyone:
“Once again, illegal immigration is helping tie Congress in knots.
The subject has been injected into some seemingly unlikely discussions this year, including debate over a new farm bill.Now it has become a major hang-up delaying renewal of the popular State Children’s Health Insurance Program, which Republicans and Democrats alike largely support…
Many Republicans who support Bush’s threatened veto…say the renewal legislation would give health benefits to illegal immigrants…the bill’s defenders disagree…
Against that backdrop, federal officials say they have no idea whether illegal immigrants have used the 10-year-old program because it hasn’t required proof of citizenship.At the same time, they say they have no anecdotal reports that participation by illegal immigrants is a problem.
That has prompted some Democrats and children’s advocates to accuse the bill’s Republican foes of using the immigration issue as political cover.
They contend that without playing the immigration card, it’s hard for GOP congressmen to side with Bush and oppose a kids’ health care bill…
“I feel they are sounding an alarm when I have yet to see any evidence there are a significant number of undocumented immigrants obtaining benefits,” said Tiffany Siebert of Voices for Children in Nebraska.”
So with no reports of wide spread use by illegal immigrants our own Congressman is making much ago about nothing. (again!)
As quoted in the story:
…Terry said the bill would have led to “taxpayer-funded health care to illegal immigrants.”
He is running out of reasons to be against what is an effective, affordable, and popular piece of legislation that will help millions of children in this country.
First it was that this bill would give Healthcare to people as old as 25 years old. Which was debunked because the provision is for full time college students not everybody.
That was lie #1!
Then it was that those who make $80,000 a year will get coverage under this bill which was a flat out distortion of the truth. The real issue was that the state of New York requested to have funds to cover that level do to cost of living with in the state. It was denied and the state government is planning on covering the fees itself.
That was lie #2!
This next one wasn’t a lie, but an over reaction on Congressman Terry’s part. His claim was that the bill would take kids who would already have insurance and put them on SCHIP. True, but it is inevitable part of any program such as SCHIP. But as countless experts will tell you, the amount of kids that wouldn’t have coverage regardless is worth the few what would.
That was over reaction #1!
Now we find ourselves listening to the boy Congressman who can not figure out a reason to be against his bill. I guess that’s what happens when you are an out of touch, and pampered by my tax dollars. (which pay for the healthcare you deny to so many children)
As the article notes, there is no reason to believe that illegal immigration is a major issue with the SCHIP legislation. They are making something out of nothing.
Republican Senator Chuck Grassley put it best:
“There’s absolutely nothing in this bill that would make coverage more easily available for illegal immigrants,” Grassley said. “Those who say otherwise believe what they want to believe, not the facts.”
It’s World Series week, and Congressman Mike McCaul is about to get another chance to improve his batting average when a measure providing uninsured Texas kids the kind of health insurance program he enjoys comes up again for debate.
So far, he’s batting 0-2.
First, he voted against the bi-partisan SCHIP bill that would have extended coverage to nearly 1.4 million Texas children whose parents work hard and earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but too little to afford private insurance. Then, he remained in lockstep with the Bush-Cheney administration and voted against overriding the President’s veto.
Forty-four Republicans joined the Democratic majority in voting to override last week and guarantee access to affordable health care for the children of parents who are working hard and playing by the rules. They ignored the misinformation spread by the White House and did the right thing.
But not Mr. McCaul. So here are some facts to help him do the right thing, too:
More than 90 percent of those families covered by SCHIP earn less than $41,000 a year and can’t afford the average $12,000 annual premiums to cover their children.
McCaul and his fellow ideologues claim the SCHIP proposal would cover families earning $83,000 a year. But they’re wrong — and they know it. No state, including Texas, can cover higher-income families without approval from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which President Bush controls.
SCHIP is a fiscally responsible plan that saves local taxpayers money by guaranteeing access to health care at the doctor's office, not the emergency room.
SCHIP isn’t a step toward the kind of government-run health care McCaul and his cronies enjoy. Under the proposal, states are free to provide health coverage any way they choose — and most of them, including Texas, choose to use private insurers to deliver coverage.
SCHIP is aimed directly at those who need it. States earn bonuses for enrolling those most in need and lose federal matching funds if they don't cover the poorest children — and it phases out coverage for those few adults who are currently enrolled.
The issue isn’t going away. More than 80 percent of Americans favor the measure Mr. McCaul has voted against — twice. The question now is whether he will be independent enough next time to swing for the fences or continue to look to the bench for instructions on what to do.
My opponent once more failed to do the right thing today.
He again put his loyalty to the Bush-Cheney administration ahead of his obligation to the families who pay for his own health care with their taxes but can’t afford the same rights for their own children.
Central Texans were looking for more leadership and less followership in Washington, D.C. today, because with more uninsured children than any other state, we had more to lose. We didn’t get that leadership today.
I’m Robin Weirauch. I’m running for Congress in the December 11th special election in Ohio’s 5th District and I need your support!
When I heard that President Bush had vetoed the bill expanding SCHIP, I couldn’t believe it. The State Children’s Health Insurance Program helps millions of American children whose families are struggling.
I recently spoke with a single mother from our district that told me she has worked at least two jobs her whole adult life but has never had health insurance through her work. Her daughter has been covered by the SCHIP program since infancy. She told me she wouldn’t know what she would do without the program.
Read the rest of the story and see my video message after the jump:
She was glad to have the choice with SCHIP between three plans so that she could, for example, choose a plan that would give vision coverage for her daughter, which she has needed most of her young life. She was not aware of the President’s veto of the expansion of the program or of the fact that the President’s budget did not provide enough funding to cover all those already in the program. She would be in serious financial trouble if her daughter’s healthcare coverage through SCHIP were not available.
She has to pay for her own insurance coverage and is forced to put off the regular checkups that are recommended until she can afford to pay the deductible. She delays her vision checkup and replacing her glasses for much longer than recommended as she must save up to be able to afford it. If she also had to pay for her daughter’s coverage, she wouldn’t be able to take care of her own health needs.
People often ask me what difference one Representative can make in Congress? But when a 15-vote margin will decide whether American children in need will receive health care or be struck by the business end of George Bush’s veto pen, it becomes evident that every vote counts.
This is where I need your help. We all know that the online community can bring much needed attention to competitive special elections. Senator Sherrod Brown and Governor Ted Strickland both won this district and I believe that we will win this special– but I need your support!
The U.S. House Thursday is scheduled to vote on whether to override the President’s controversial veto of the bi-partisan State Children’s Health Insurance Program. Rep. Mike McCaul should vote to provide more than 1.4 million uninsured Texas children the health care they need.
Unfortunately, McCaul voted against uninsured kids and for insurance industry special interests the first round. Will he find the moral courage to do the right thing today? Will he finally make Texas priorities his priorities?
You can help by calling Rep. McCaul’s Capitol Hill office at 202-225-2401 and asking him to vote for nearly 1.5 million eligible children of working parents who deserve the same health insurance taxpayers give him.
Last week, Rep. McCaul was quick to hand out a congressional certificate of recognition to an Austin woman honored as one of 18 child care providers across the country at the first annual National
Child Care Provider Awards. She deserved it. Now it’s time for McCaul to recognize that uninsured Texas kids deserve his attention, too.
Call McCaul today and tell him to vote to override the Bush-Cheney veto.
Using poor children as pawns is the nastiest sort of partisan politics. That Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), once a poor child himself, would stoop to this level by voting against the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP) shows that his desire to become president has surpassed his ability to support progressive values.
This bill would have expanded an already successful program to provide health insurance to millions of children across the country. It takes some twisted logic for someone who claims to support health care coverage for all to oppose this necessary and overdue move in the right direction.
It wasn’t perfect, Kucinich expounded, because it didn’t include children who are legal aliens. He took the opportunity to promote his own universal health care bill, HR 676, which would cover both children and adults as a better choice – despite the fact that it is not going anywhere soon.
Back in June, somebody noted that if Bill Gillespie got more votes in his primary than Jack Kingston did in his, the DCCC would come down and do a poll. Well, BIll got more votes than Jack in the primary. Nobody’s ever done that before. DCCC still hasn’t done anything, but with Bill’s tireless campaigning and massively increased voter registration in his district, and the stars are aligned for Bill Gillespie to win GA-01.
