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
http://www.massscorecard.org/H…
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
http://www.massscorecard.org/H…
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
http://www.massscorecard.org/H…
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
http://www.massscorecard.org/H…
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
http://www.massscorecard.org/H…
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
http://www.massscorecard.org/H…
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:
LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME:Veto override failed, 260-152 (2/3rds required)
Reference: SCHIP Extension; Bill Veto override on H.R.3963 ; vote number 08-HR3963 on Jan 23, 2008
http://www.massscorecard.org/H…
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.
As seen here:
Health Professionals $99,601
Electric Utilities $39,266
Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $36,250
Railroads $29,300
TV/Movies/Music $22,750
http://www.opensecrets.org/pol…
And with the $215,000 in Insurance investments seen here:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pol…
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.
http://www.ryanforkentucky.com…
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:
