Tuesday, September 18, 2018

Medicare-For-All-- Who's For It? Who's Against It?

>




Do you remember the leaked DCCC memo instructing the corporate shills they were recruiting as candidates to try to avoid any specifics about what to do about healthcare other than "fix" ObamaCare and to never talk about Medicare-For-All or single payer? The DCCC had some phony-baloney polling they were able to twist into meaning that people don't like Medicare-For-All. Classic DCCC bullshit. Below, you'll find some information about the new effort to help elect candidates who have said they will CO-SPONSOR Medicare-For-All legislation when they get to Congress.



Just over a week ago, Arit John did a story for Bloomberg News about the growing strength of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party within the House caucus-- basically New Dems, Blue Dogs and so-called "ex"-Republicans. Lately they seem to be holding Pelosi's puppet strings. Her brain-dead comments about PAY-GO can be music to anyone's ears but Blue Dogs, New Dems, the No Labels criminals-- and actual Republicans, who love seeing the Democrats planting the seeds for the next anti-Blue Wave.

When I was a kid-- when Pelosi and Hoyer were just slightly older kids-- the Democrats owned Congress. That's because they were the Santa Claus Party and the Republicans were the Grinch Party. The Republicans spent decades on the outside complaining about the Democrats spending us into doom-- although doom seemed to look a lot like prosperity. Then, in 1994, the Republicans finally took over... and the DCCC, DNC and DSCC interpretation was immediately that the Republicans were right for all those decades and they tried emulating the GOP's fiscal conservatism. Of course, once the GOP grabbed power, they had no interest in fiscal conservatism. They were interested in rewarding the big contributors and corporations with immense tax cuts at the expense of the successful social programs that had made the Democrats so popular for so many decades. The Democrats were too stupid to see what was happening as they turned the party-- compliments of the Clintons-- into a quasi Republican-lite party but with a Janus-like friendly face towards identity groups and friendly face towards corporate power. Pelosi and Hoyer are two old dogs who will never learn any new tricks, which is why-- in the midst of immense progressive fervor-- they announced that PAY-GO is one of their top 3 priorities when they take over Congress in January.
Electing Democrats in conservative districts is particularly important for the Blue Dog Coalition. The group is attempting to rebuild after hitting its peak membership in 2008, when it had 54 members and Democrats controlled the House. Pelosi was the speaker.

When the party lost power in 2010 most of the casualties were conservative Democrats from the South and Midwest. Now there are 18 Democrats in the group.

The group says that it’s not currently backing anyone for leadership, but that whomever they do pick needs to be able to manage expectations and decentralize power in the caucus, similar to the demands that the most conservative Republicans are making on their leaders.

The Blue Dogs also are seeking to stop what they see as the party’s leftward drift. That shift has been evident in a handful of upset victories by progressives in primaries, including Kara Eastman’s defeat of former Representative Brad Ashford, a Blue Dog, in a primary for a Nebraska House seat earlier this year.

"Whether it’s Pelosi or whoever our speaker’s going to be, you’re going to see that person play a very important role," said Representative Henry Cuellar, a Texas Democrat. The next leader needs to be strong enough tamp down "the more progressive folks to make sure that we come up with something that’s good for all of us."

Blue Dog leaders say they want a Democratic-controlled House to avoid a push to impeach President Donald Trump and politically motivated oversight of the administration. Schrader said it’s not their job to "go after President Trump" and he’s advised all of their candidates to not be anti-Trump.

"A lot of my voters are pro-Trump and Blue Dogs will generally work with him when he’s representing our districts and be against him when he’s not," he said. "We’re looking to empower Congress, not take revenge on the president."

If the Democrats take back control of the House with a narrow majority the Blue Dogs say they could be an influential voting bloc. Schrader said he expects the 18-member group to grow into the mid- to high-20s, enough to influence a vote on House speaker.
Last week Cuellar hosted a fundraiser for far right Republican John Carter, who is being challenged by MJ Hegar, a conservative Democrat endorsed by the Blue Dogs. The Blue Dogs and New Dems may be ready for war against Medicare-for-All-- and Pelosi may be using PAY-GO as a way to prevent it-- but its popularity has taken over the Democratic base and its power may sweep Pelosi away just as anti-war sentiment swept Dick Gephardt away and put her into power. Even in conservative districts, Democratic candidates are sensing their voters demand Medicare-for-All (not PAY-GO). Katie Porter has surged into the lead in her red Orange County district with messages like this; "It’s not a real marketplace for people, and so I think the best system is the one that will provide the most care to the most folks at the best price, and for me that’s a Medicare for All type system... There’s a lot of support [for Medicare for All] from people young and old. Those who are on Medicare know that the system works, and young people… know the path we’ve been on the last few years is not one we can stay on."

Goal ThermometerBlue America has just put up a new page. Every candidate on the page has told us that they will sign on as a co-sponsor of the Medicare-For-All legislation when they get to Congress. Period. No wiggling around the way the New Dems and Blue Dogs do. You can probably guess the names of the first candidates who asked to be included. Take a look by clicking on the thermometer on the right. We'll be adding more as the days go by. Please consider contributing what you can directly to them on this page. The only incumbent we've included is Matt Cartwright on Pennsylvania. His district was redrawn and he is being relentlessly attacked by a multimillionaire with unlimited funds. Matt is already a co-sponsor of the current Medicare-for-All legislation before Congress. Everyone else on the list is a challenger running on a platform that includes support for Medicare-For-All. These are the kinds of men and women it's so important to elect to the new Congress, rather than just the gaggle of New Dems and Blue Dogs the DCCC has recruited and is supporting financially. If there's a Blue Wave, it's because Americans are excited about programs like Medicare-For-All. If Pelosi, Hoyer and their Blue Dogs and New Dems sabotage it, the Republicans will waltz back into office in 2022.

Labels: , , ,

4 Comments:

At 5:35 AM, Anonymous Jill said...

Off topic a bit, but Steve Kornacki was on "Morning Schmoe" this morning talking about CA-39, where DCCC hand-picked asshole Gil Cisneros is running 10 points behind Republican Young Kim. You predicted this a year ago. Another House seat lost because of the DCCC money chase.

 
At 7:18 AM, Blogger DownWithTyranny said...

Jill, funny you should bring that up. Last night I had dinner with some running a team of Democratic Party canvassers in Southern California. She was embullent about how amazingly well Ammar Campa-Najjar is doing. She predicted he would win. She was also optimistic about Harley Rouda, Mike Levin, Katie Porter and Katie Hill. She said the one stinker in the pack is Cisneros and that in a full day of canvassing CA-39, they found only two (2!!!) Democrats who would commit to voting for him.

Meanwhile the DCCC is about to waste another $3,000,000 on this conservative multimillionaire, money they could spend more wisely on candidates with a much better chance to win. Why recruit these rich conservative candidates if they don't even pay for their own campaigns? Really-- what's the logic there?

 
At 9:52 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

MFA SHOULD be a plank in any progressive platform. If it isn't there, then the candidate is NOT a progressive.

Anyone planning on running in 2020 is well-advised to begin establishing bona fides in support of this worthy measure.

 
At 12:10 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Pelosi and hoyer are against it. Therefore, it doesn't matter who else is for it. The PARTY is against it.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home