My name is Noelle Cigarroa Bell. I'm 27 years old, and deaf. I was recently married on August 3rd, 2009 to my wonderful husband. I started blogging about the fight for health care reform in the winter, and about my COBRA insurance when I was laid off in June. Then in July when nyceve and I started with our effort to get people to attend the congressional mark-ups, I started posting for donations to our public plan fund, and agreed to put a full disclosure in my signature line which linked to this pagehere.
For some people, the disclosure about donations in the diaries I've posted and the sig line linking to the FDL post wasn't enough. I understand that, and I've updated my sig line and added it to my profile, which should be clear enough now. And I would like to offer an apology to those that felt that I wasn't being clear enough about donations from people here at Dailykos going to me and nyceve.
Let me be clear, I am honored to be paid by you here in the DailyKos community to fight for the public option as an essential part of health care reform. Thank you for doing that, and it means a lot to me.
And the theme of this diary is full disclosure.
I'd like to know just precisely why these 55 Democrats in the House of Representatives have not joined in with their 65 colleagues in the House of Representatives to commit to voting against any bill without a public option. What do they have to lose by joining their colleagues in signing the letter that was circulated and signed by these representatives? They have nothing to lose at all, considering that they're in overwhelmingly safe Democratic districts.
It's too easy for Democrats to say they support the House version, but when it comes to the conference committee, the Senate traditionally has its way with the conference report, so most of the provisions from the Senate bill end up making it into the final conference report, with a lot of the progressive elements of the House version stripped out. It's the same old story that we've seen time and time again.
I'd like to highlight an excellent comment from puredesighee in Democratic Luntz's diary last night:
The implication of this diary is that because these politicians co-sponsored a liberal bill, we know what is in their hearts.
---What if one or more of those members of Congress turns out to support a liberal bill they know will never pass to get liberal cred?
---What if one or more of those members of Congress supports single payer in theory (like Obama) but become convinced that a watered down bill is better than no bill at all?
---What if one or more of those members of Congress supports single payer in theory but become convinced that co-ops will be a successful and robust alternative to a public option?
---What if one or more of those members of Congress is bought off by pharma, or the insurance industry?
Wouldn't it be very useful to have them on record, clearly stating what they will and will not support in a bill or in conference? It both keeps them accountable to their constituency -- which is part of their job description -- and gives them ammunition against pressure to compromise on the core issues of health care.
I can think of no valid reason not to get a clear statement from every member of Congress on their core commitments regarding passing or not passing a health care bill. To me, that seems like practical and intelligent Democracy.
And in this fight with the public option, that's where the end game is going. It's why we raised over$400,000 for the 65 Representatives in the House because they committed to being a voting bloc for the public option by refusing to support a potential final conference report without the public option.
These are the 55 Democrats that should supposedly be able to join their 65 colleagues in the House in the letter to Kathleen Sebelius since they're in safe Democratic districts:
Member | District | PVI | Member | District | PVI |
Davis, Artur | AL-07 | D+18 | Markey, Ed | MA-07 | D+15 |
Pastor, Ed | AZ-04 | D+13 | Lynch, Stephen F. | MA-09 | D+11 |
Thompson, Mike | CA-01 | D+13 | Van Hollen, Chris | MD-08 | D+21 |
Matsui, Doris | CA-05 | D+15 | Kildee, Dale E. | MI-05 | D+11 |
Miller, George | CA-07 | D+19 | Levin, Sander | MI-12 | D+12 |
Eshoo, Anna | CA-14 | D+21 | Dingell, John | MI-15 | D+13 |
Lofgren, Zoe | CA-16 | D+16 | McCollum, Betty | MN-04 | D+13 |
Capps, Lois | CA-23 | D+12 | Andrews, Robert | NJ-01 | D+12 |
Berman, Howard | CA-28 | D+23 | Berkley, Shelley | NV-01 | D+10 |
Schiff, Adam | CA-29 | D+14 | Ackerman, Gary | NY-05 | D+12 |
Waxman, Henry | CA-30 | D+18 | Meeks, Gregory W. | NY-06 | D+36 |
Becerra, Xavier | CA-31 | D+29 | Rangel, Charles | NY-15 | D+41 |
Harman, Jane | CA-36 | D+12 | Engel, Eliot L. | NY-17 | D+18 |
Baca, Joe | CA-43 | D+13 | Slaughter , Louise | NY-28 | D+15 |
Davis, Susan | CA-53 | D+14 | Ryan, Tim | OH-17 | D+12 |
DeGette, Diane | CO-01 | D+21 | Brady, Robert | PA-01 | D+35 |
Polis, Jared | CO-02 | D+11 | Doyle, Michael F. | PA-14 | D+19 |
Larson, John | CT-01 | D+13 | Kennedy, Patrick J. | RI-01 | D+13 |
Castor, Kathy | FL-11 | D+11 | Clyburn, James E. | SC-06 | D+12 |
Meek, Kendrick | FL-17 | D+34 | Cohen, Steve | TN-09 | D+23 |
Wasserman-Schultz, Debbie | FL-20 | D+13 | Green, Al | TX-09 | D+22 |
Lewis, John | GA-05 | D+26 | Reyes, Sylvestre | TX-16 | D+10 |
Scott, David | GA-13 | D+15 | Jackson-Lee, Sheila | TX-18 | D+24 |
Abercrombie, Neil | HI-01 | D+11 | Scott, Bobby | VA-03 | D+20 |
Rush, Bobby | IL-01 | D+34 | Moran, Jim | VA-08 | D+16 |
Lipinski, Dan | IL-03 | D+11 | Welch, Peter | VT-AL | D+13 |
Davis, Danny | IL-07 | D+35 | Baldwin, Tammy | WI-01 | D+15 |
Schakowsky, Jan | IL-09 | D+20 | | | |
And in the research in the diary yesterday, I found out that Rep. Xavier Becerra had taken over $122,827 from private insurers, hospitals, HMOs, pharmaceutical companies, and device makers. Many of these associations OPPOSE a strong robust public option in the final bill. However, Rep. Xavier Becerra has come out in strong support of a public option, bashed the usefulness of co-operatives, but refuses to answer questions about whether he'd support a final bill without a public option. He could simply answer that question by joining with the 65 Democrats in the House in that letter to Kathleen Sebelius, or by committing publicly as Jerrod Nadler has to voting against the final bill without a public option in it.
Once again, here's why it's important to get these Democrats on the record, because as Rep. Jerrod Nadler has said--taking the FDL pledge, and signing onto the letter with 65 other Democrats in the House--allows him to have leverage in the House to support the public option as a essential element of the final bill, and prevents him from being pressured to support a watered-down bill without a public option.
And here's why the research is important into these 55 members, because as we've already seen from Rep. James Clyburn in his comments today about "weakening the national public option in favor of a regional or a state-based public option as an experiment," professed statements of support aren't enough. Rep. Clyburn has said he supports the public option, and but for him to turn around and say stuff like this?
Clyburn, for his part, is advocating a “two step” approach in which the most widely supported health insurance reforms, like coverage for pre-existing conditions, go into effect immediately, while the public option is framed as a distant step — something that would go into effect in 2013, only after benchmarks and pilot programs are studied.
Clyburn has proposed setting up modest pilot programs for the public option in certain regions or states — an experimental way of seeing whether these health exchanges can actually work at the local level before they go nationwide.
What Rep. Clyburn is proposing is nothing more than a "pre-trigger" for the public option. Basically what he's saying is that the public option should be a case study, and if it doesn't work, then the national public option that's in the actual bill won't even go into effect at all. It's wrong, and it's a moronic concession to make. He's in a safe Democratic district, so it makes absolutely no sense for him to backtrack on what a majority of Americans want.
I started looking into Rep. Clyburn's FEC donations to see if there was any contributions that would explain this sudden "weakening" on the public option:
Altria $5000
American Health Care Association PAC $1500
Eli Lilly $5000
Genentech $2500
HealthSouth Inc PAC $2000
Humana $2500
UnitedHealth $5000
WellPoint $2500
I wouldn't be so proud about taking donations from private insurers to influence the debate. Rep. Clyburn hasn't just taken donations from private insurers, he's taken donations from major pharmaceuticals, medical associations, and medical-device makers that are opposed to a strong, robust public option.
People have every right to ask Rep. Clyburn questions like "Why won't you commit to voting against a bill without a strong public option in it? Why are you now working to weaken the national public option into a regional or a state-based public option as a case study? Why are you now making concessions on the public option? Could it be the donations you've taken from PACs that represent private insurers, hospitals, and pharmaceutical companies?"
We now have the support of The Sunlight Foundation in our fight for accountability from these 55 members of Congress.
I know many of you disagree with my effort to hold these 55 Democrats accountable, but when we have Democrats like Jerrod Nadler and Yvette Clarke standing up and doing the right thing, what's preventing these 55 Democratic members from doing so?
It's clear that some of these 55 Democrats have been taking donations from private insurers, lobbyists, pharmaceuticals, and medical device-makers. Are we so naive to think that donations like these won't influence their vote on the final bill? Some of these Democrats, like Tammy Baldwin, Jim Moran, and John Larson haven't taken donations from heavy PAC hitters. That's a good thing, and I'm glad we know that information.
However, whenever we have a "good" Democrat that professes support for the public option, but refuses to commit to voting against the final bill without a strong public option, that Democrat isn't drawing a line in the sand for the public option. That Democrat should be held accountable by us, and if that Democrat doesn't want to be held accountable, then perhaps, he or she should join brave health care heroes like Rep. Yvette Clarke below, and we'll add him or her to our ActBlue page.
Here's Rep. Yvette Clarke to show you what a health care hero looks like, and exactly why she has over $5,708 from us on ActBlue:
There is absolutely no reason for these 55 Democrats to worry about drawing a line in the sand for the public option in the way that their 65 colleagues have and they're in incredibly safe districts! Unless these Democrats are worried about publicly committing themselves, and if the final bill comes down without a public option, they feel they'll have to support a mandated bailout of the murder-by-spreadsheet industry.
That would be terrible if it was true. And it's why we need to get them on the record in supporting the public option in the FINAL bill by joining their 65 colleagues in the House.
Here are the five Democrats for us to hold accountable today:
Rep. James Clyburn D-SC
Rep. Lois Capps D-CA
Rep. Chris Van Hollen D-MD
Rep. Gary Ackerman D-NY
Rep. Jared Polis D-CO
You can start with theaccountability process by researching their FEC contributions, how much they have on OpenSecrets, who's hosted political fundraisers for them, and the individual donations from lobbyists on behalf of firms that represent the worst insurers: AHIP, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Aetna, Humana, and UnitedHealth.
After doing research, we'll know who's taken the most money from special interests, and who should be rightly held accountable by us. That's what the accountability process is about, and it's democracy in action. This is one of the "stick" parts of our carrot and sticks program at FDL.
And now for the big "carrot" part of our work--we're releasing videos with that guy from M.A.S.H. thanking our health care heroes such as Reps. Louis Gutierrez, Phil Hare and Jesse Jackson Jr. in Illinois:
If you want to see more stuff like this, then please help support our work (since we do literally work for you guys) by donating to our fund at Firedoglake! Your donations go to our living stipends, expenses, and travel costs, including awesome tools like these.
Now, let's keep holding our elected officials accountable for the public option as a required component of the FINAL bill!
And by the way, Rep. Steny Hoyer, who waffled on the public option, is having a townhall TONIGHT! So please go if you live in D.C., Maryland, or the Virginia area!
PLEASE recommend this diary so others can see Rep. Steny Hoyer's townhall event and GO TO that event!