Support For Public Option In Connecticut By District

Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight.com did a great job of breaking down some poll numbers for the Public Option on a district by district level and across the nation. I did a quick cut and paste of the numbers just for Connecticut:

The results beg the question of why some more of Connecticut's Congress critters are not leading the charge for the Public Option? They know the people want it and they have to know that it is the right thing to do.

It is an all around political winner and just plain old common sense good public policy.

Some important notes on this from Nate Silver:

We can systematize these results by means of a regression analysis that accounts for the Obama vote share and the poverty level in each district. (Technically, we'll be using a logistic regession, treating each of the voters included in one of these surveys as a separate data point.) This analysis finds that support for the public option nationwide is about 55 percent, against 36 percent opposed, similar results to what I believe to be the most reliable polls on the subject.

What's more interesting, though, is where we project the public option in individual districts. We find that:

-- The public option is estimated to have plurality support in 291 of the 435 Congressional Districts nationwide, or almost exactly two-thirds.
-- The public option is estimated to have plurality support in 235 of 257 Democratic-held districts.
-- The public option is estimated to have plurality support in 34 of 52 Blue Dog - held districts, and has overall popularity of 51 percent in these districts versus 39 percent opposed.

Obviously, there is a margin of error inherent to this analysis when applied to any individual district. The polls that inform this analysis themselves have a margin of error, and there is an additional layer of error introduced by the statistical process that we apply to the data.

There is some pretty good reasoning behind this data to tell the few Blue Dogs trying to stand in the way of the Public Option to suck it up and do the right thing, as well. Go and take a look at the data yourself. The information is a real eye opener as to where there is some really strong support for the Public Option even in some supposedly "conservative" districts.

Dodd and Larson Get an Earful on Healthcare

Via Mark Pazniokas of the Hartford Courant, 675 angry and frustrated people showed up to this healthcare forum at Goodwin College:

On the first day of a listening tour on health care, an issue pivotal to the new Congress and his own re-election, U.S. Sen. Christopher J. Dodd got an earful Friday.

The first comment came from a furious homeless shelter manager: He and his clients have no coverage, yet insurance giant American International Group got an $85 billion federal loan.

Over 90 minutes, the Democratic senator heard from a string of constituents, who waved their hands, hoping for a chance to describe a struggle to hang onto middle-class lives after losing jobs and affordable health care. A few were angry, others just scared.

On the way out, Dodd embraced one woman who burst into tears as she described losing health coverage for her disabled 2-year-old. Dodd held her until she stopped sobbing.

Dodd says that Tom Daschle, Obama's pick to guide healthcare reform, will be coming to Connecticut to discuss the issue. I say that they better be prepared to get another earful because the incremental changes being proposed will not answer the massive problems we are facing.

Problems like this:

"[the forum] included the president of Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, a reassuring signal to Connecticut's insurance industry."

Yep! Dodd and Larson think that these people are supposed to be our allies on this issue.

MA regulators: Did Blue Cross/Blue Shield and Partners HealthCare collude to fix prices and raise rates 75%?

Partners, insurer under scrutiny

Attorney General Martha Coakley has launched an investigation into whether the state's largest health insurance company and its largest healthcare provider may have illegally colluded to increase the price of health insurance statewide over the last nine years, according to several legal and government sources.

The attorney general sent formal demands for information to Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Massachusetts and Partners HealthCare late last week, the sources say, calling for a detailed account of their contract negotiations in recent years.

Since 2000, Blue Cross has boosted the rate it pays for medical care by Partners doctors and hospitals by 75 percent, dramatically more than the increases given to most other Massachusetts hospitals. Blue Cross now pays $2 billion a year to Partners, parent company of Massachusetts General and Brigham and Women's hospitals.

Why do we put up with this?

I don't want these insurance industries' input into my healthcare in any way, shape or form. This the kind of health care the insurance giants have provided us thus far:



H/t nyceve for the video, where I encourage you to go read the entire piece and watch all the videos:

We all know that during the Bush regime, American citizens never saw the coffins of our fallen heroes coming back from Iraq.

Americans are also shielded from the brutal ugliness of our collapsed healthcare system. The traditional media is ill-informed (what else is new?), and rarely, if ever, give us frank and candid reporting about the grotesque realities of the U.S. healthcare catastrophe. So the BBC picks up the slack.

One last quote from Dodd:

"I hear people talking about a single-payer plan and the like," Dodd said. "That isn't going to happen. It's going to be a combination of public, private."

We already have a failed combination of public and private. We need the proven model of single payer and private practitioners. You want to stay in Congress with these kinds of answers, Senator Dodd?

"That isn't going to happen."

Why not send Senator Dodd a message?

"Single payer IS on the table!"

U.S. Senator Chris Dodd
448 Russell Building | Washington D.C., 20510
Tel: (202) 224-2823 | Fax: (202) 224-1083

Ya might want to mention the problem with his Blue Cross buddies, as well.

Will Larson Replace Emanuel?

Via Roll Call, with Rahm Emanuel going to President elect Obama's side at the White House there could be a lot of jockeying for positioning down the line:

So far, the race for Caucus chairman is a two-way matchup pitting Vice Chairman John Larson (Conn.) against Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.), who engineered the 20-seat gain as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Van Hollen had a standing offer from Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to do a second tour heading up the party’s campaign arm, but he made clear on Wednesday that he wasn’t interested.

“I’m exploring all my options,” Van Hollen said at a midday press conference. “One option I’m not exploring is continuing as chairman of the DCCC.”

Instead, a senior Democratic aide said, Van Hollen is eyeing a run to replace Emanuel, whom he followed at the DCCC. He will have to defeat Larson, who briefly chaired the Caucus when Democrats were in the minority. Larson essentially handed the post to Emanuel at Pelosi’s urging as a reward for quarterbacking their comeback when Democrats retook the House.

Van Hollen and Larson have begun calling colleagues to lock up support. But the race is just beginning, and others could jump in.

Will CT-01 Rep. John Larson bag the job?

Larson Joins the Chorus To Neuter Bush

Via Matt Browner Hamlin at MLN:

Just in my email box from Rep. John Larson (CT-01):

"I am pleased that my colleagues in the Senate have raised the issue of revoking President Bush's authority to wage war. The President callously and carelessly entered this war. Clearly, things have gotten worse and not better. We cannot afford to have a President that continues to abuse his authority and not listen to the Congress or the will of the American people. Taking this action would be another important step to keep the pressure on the President. Congress also needs to look to address the Congressional War Powers Act to ensure that this kind of an abuse of power never occurs again. In March, I introduced similar legislation in the House and hope that we can work together to take this critical step that can aid in ending this war."

Obviously I'm happy to see Larson take this opportunity to renew his pressure on President Bush for ending the war in Iraq.

Yesterday I posted on Gov. Bill Richardson and Hillary Clinton joining the calls to strip bush of war powers:

De-Authorize the War Now, No Residual Troops

There would be no need to negotiate the withdrawal with the President, and he could not veto the resolution.

The time has has come for Congress to stand up to this President who refuses to recognize that his war is bleeding our military and weakening our country. He believes mere stubbornness is a foreign policy and that he can just ignore the will of the American people. In the interest of our national security, he must be stopped.

Congress has the ability to end this war under the War Powers Act -- let's not wait or waver while more people die. And de-authorizing the war should mean removing all our troops. Every last one.

Hillary Clinton has joined Robert Byrd in calls for the same:

Via the NY Times:

Mrs. Clinton’s proposal brings her full circle on Iraq — she supported the war measure five years ago — and it sharpens her own political positioning at a time when Democrats are vying to confront the White House.

“It is time to reverse the failed policies of President Bush and to end this war as soon as possible,” Mrs. Clinton said as she joined Senator Robert C. Byrd, Democrat of West Virginia, in calling for a vote to end the authority as of Oct. 11, the fifth anniversary of the original vote.

Her stance emerged just as Congressional leaders and the White House opened delicate negotiations over a new war-financing measure to replace the one that Mr. Bush vetoed Tuesday.

In spin that only a right wingnut could choke down the NY Times also says that it is not clear if Congress has the power to withdraw the power that only they can empower upon the little brat...

Even if Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Byrd succeed in their effort, it is not clear whether President Bush would have to withdraw troops, or if he could resist by claiming that Congress cannot withdraw its earlier authorization but instead has to deny money for the war to achieve that result.

Sure... bush can claim it, but that does not make it credible in any way, shape, or form.

Can you say IMPEACH?



Yep...
No More Kings!

If you are unclear on the many reasons why the little brat needs to be impeached here is one of them:

“The Bush administration is urging Congress to pass a law that would halt dozens of lawsuits charging phone companies with invading ordinary citizens’ privacy through a post-Sept. 11 warrantless surveillance program.”

Got a Beef With a CT Dem? I do...

Via Kos at the big orange cat herd:

Let's not forget this from Ellen Tauscher and her friends:

The Honorable J. Dennis Hastert
Speaker
U.S. House of Representatives
H-232, The Capitol
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Speaker:

We write to encourage you to bring bankruptcy reform legislation to the House floor as soon as the Senate completes its consideration of the bill. The New Democrat Coalition has backed common sense bankruptcy reform in the past and helped in passing the bankruptcy reform bill by overwhelming margins in the House of Representatives during the 108th Congress.

Over the last several years, we have worked to advance reasonable and balanced legislation that would require individuals who have the ability to repay their debts to do so, while preserving the important safety net of bankruptcy under Chapter 7 for those who truly need it. We believe that responsible bankruptcy reform embodies the New Democrat principle of personal responsibility, while at the same time adding important new consumer protections such as requiring enhanced credit card disclosure information and encouraging participation in consumer credit counseling.

It is our hope that the House of Representatives will consider this important piece of legislation in an expedited manner. We stand ready to work with you and our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to pass bankruptcy reform into law.

Sincerely,

Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher
Rep. Adam Smith
Rep. Ron Kind
Rep. Artur Davis
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy
Rep. John Larson <<<<
Rep. Stephanie Herseth
Rep. Dennis Moore
Rep. Mike McIntyre
Rep. Joe Crowley
Rep. Jay Israel
Rep. David Wu
Rep. Diane Hooley
Rep. Melissa Bean
Rep. Jim Davis
Rep. Harold E. Ford, Jr.
Rep Ed Case
Rep. Jay Inslee
Rep. Shelley Berkeley
Rep. Gregory W. Meeks

When we criticized this crowd, they whined and cried that they were being attacked for being "centrists", refusing to explain how gifting the credit card industry in this manner was "centrist".

That's because the legislation wasn't "centrist". It was corporatist at the expense of American consumers.

Well, Representative Larson... Are you proud of this? Sirota was right, and you and your money party friends selling out Americans to the credit card industry were all wrong. There is a long list of right wingers up there.

Watcha gonna do about it? Did anyone in the Democratic party really think Lieberman would be the end of it?

Elect Real Democrats officially launches
By Met00

Well, today was the formal launch of Elect Real Democrats.

In CT there is one DLC Democrat in the House (Larson). But for those of you who live in "safe" districts, there are any number of other DLC and Blue Dog Democrats for you to consider helping when a progressive Democrat comes along to challenge them.

The interactive map was fun to make and I hope that everyone likes the way it works.

As always, any input that anyone from MLN has is always welcome.

Also, the power of this type of campaign is the power of you telling others about it. Since I personally hate the psuedo-spam from "tell a friend" pages, I have begged in my tax-hiking, government-expanding, latte-drinking, sushi-eating, Volvo-driving, New York Times-reading, Hollywood-loving, left-wing freak show member progressive Democrat way that you help by letting others know about the site and what we are trying to accomplish.

Before we can help Dr. Dean and his 50-State effort, we have to clean up our own house so we can have a chance to really help the working men and women of America.

I am not a Democratic party member, but this is a better idea than the status quo...

This is THE Healthcare Plan YOU Have Asked For

The United States National Health Insurance Act

H.R. 676

("Expanded & Improved Medicare For All")

*introduced by Reps. John Conyers, Dennis Kucinich, Jim McDermott and Donna Christensen

"National health insurance is not only the best answer,

it is the only answer to eliminating health disparities."

Representative John Conyers, Jr., State of the Black Union 2005

Via SarahLee's dKos diary:

If you want to read the bill, H.R. 676, just go to Thomas.gov, click in Conyers' name and scroll down to 676 - right now it says that the bill has not yet been received from the GPO.

NEW CO-SPONSORS LIST:


(Three are not yet listed yet, so I am not sure who they are).

Rep Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1] - 1/24/2007


Rep Baldwin, Tammy [WI-2] - 1/24/2007


Rep Carson, Julia [IN-7] - 1/24/2007


Rep Christensen, Donna M. [VI] - 1/24/2007


Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] - 1/24/2007

Rep Cummings, Elijah E. [MD-7] - 1/24/2007


Rep Davis, Danny K. [IL-7] - 1/24/2007


Rep Ellison, Keith [MN-5] - 1/24/2007


Rep Engel, Eliot L. [NY-17] - 1/24/2007


Rep Farr, Sam [CA-17] - 1/24/2007


Rep Fattah, Chaka [PA-2] - 1/24/2007


Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51] - 1/24/2007


Rep Green, Al [TX-9] - 1/24/2007


Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-7] - 1/24/2007


Rep Gutierrez, Luis V. [IL-4] - 1/24/2007


Rep Hinchey, Maurice D. [NY-22] - 1/24/2007


Rep Honda, Michael M. [CA-15] - 1/24/2007


Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] - 1/24/2007


Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] - 1/24/2007


Rep Johnson, Eddie Bernice [TX-30] - 1/24/2007


Rep Kilpatrick, Carolyn C. [MI-13] - 1/24/2007


Rep Kucinich, Dennis J. [OH-10] - 1/24/2007

Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-9] - 1/24/2007


Rep Lewis, John [GA-5] - 1/24/2007


Rep Loebsack, David [IA-2] - 1/24/2007


Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] - 1/24/2007


Rep McGovern, James P. [MA-3] - 1/24/2007


Rep McNulty, Michael R. [NY-21] - 1/24/2007


Rep Meehan, Martin T. [MA-5] - 1/24/2007


Rep Miller, George [CA-7] - 1/24/2007


Rep Moore, Gwen [WI-4] - 1/24/2007


Rep Pastor, Ed [AZ-4] - 1/24/2007


Rep Payne, Donald M. [NJ-10] - 1/24/2007


Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] - 1/24/2007


Rep Roybal-Allard, Lucille [CA-34] - 1/24/2007


Rep Scott, Robert C. [VA-3] - 1/24/2007


Rep Towns, Edolphus [NY-10] - 1/24/2007


Rep Watson, Diane E. [CA-33] - 1/24/2007


Rep Weiner, Anthony D. [NY-9] - 1/24/2007

Rep Wexler, Robert [FL-19] - 1/24/2007


Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. [CA-6] - 1/24/2007


Rep Wynn, Albert Russell [MD-4] - 1/24/2007

HMMM? I believe that there may be some CT Reps missing from that list...

Write Your Rep... <<< :)

(x-posted at MLN)

Where Do YOUR Congress Critters Stand on Escalation?

Do you know who is in the BIPARTISAN CAMP and who stands out like a sore thumb?

Rep. John Larson (D, CT-1)

“The rally, organized by Connecticut Opposes the War, a single-issue coalition of political, religious, community and labor organizations, focused on two themes: the Iraq war’s continuing cost in lives, money and American ideals and the need for the new Congress to say no more, particularly to Bush’s recently announced plan to send about 20,000 more troops to Iraq. … ‘What we need to do is escalate diplomacy in the [Mideast] region,’ Larson told the crowd.” [Link]

Rep. Joe Courtney (D, CT-2)

“U.S. Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Conn., who won his first term by defeating Republican Rob Simmons in November, criticized the president’s plan and said adding more troops is not the answer to stopping the sectarian violence.” [Link]

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D, CT-3)

“I have opposed this war from the outset, and I have cosponsored legislation opposing an escalation of the Iraq war.” [Link]

Rep. Christopher Shays (R, CT-4)

U.S. Rep. Christopher Shays said yesterday it would be a ‘huge mistake’ to send more American troops to Iraq if that country’s government ‘doesn’t do the heavy lifting it has to do.’ [Link]

Rep. Christopher Murphy (D, CT-5)

No opinion given YET!

Sen. Chris Dodd (D, CT)

“I believe it will be a mistake for us at this juncture to be adding more troops. … I don’t see any mission associated with this. It sounds to me like a tactic in search of a strategy.” [Link]

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I, CT)

“I applaud the President for rejecting the fatalism of failure and pursuing a new course to achieve success in Iraq.”...“Tonight, the President did not take the easy path, but he took the correct and courageous course.” [Link]

Interesting that the primary sore loser stands out like sore thumb...

We need to get an official response from Chris Murphy on this!