Trump's Continuing War Against Seniors In Long Term Care Facilities

Last Wednesday we noted the latest group Trumpanzee's Regime in targeting: senior citizens in long term care facilities. The Regime is trying to take away the right of victims of nursing home abuse to sue the nursing facilities-- something they claim in bad for business... businesses that contribute a great deal of money to corrupt conservative officials. And they tried to minimize the seriousness of old people in nursing homes being abused and neglected-- as though it rarely happens. That's just another Trump World lie, as an A.P. report made clear Monday afternoon.

More than 1 in 4 cases of possible sexual and physical abuse against nursing home patients apparently went unreported to police, says a government audit that faults Medicare for failing to enforce a federal law requiring immediate notification.

The Health and Human Services inspector general's office issued an "early alert" Monday on preliminary findings from a large sampling of cases in 33 states. The results were sufficiently alarming that investigators say corrective action is needed now.

"We hope that we can stop this from happening to anybody else," said Curtis Roy, an audit manager with the inspector general's office, which investigates fraud, waste and abuse in the health care system. The audit is part of a larger ongoing probe, and additional findings are expected.

With some 1.4 million people living in U.S. nursing homes, quality is an ongoing concern. Despite greater awareness, egregious incidents still occur.

In a statement, Medicare emphasized that nursing home safety is a high priority, but said it will await a complete report before announcing a response. That didn't impress Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, who said he will push for Medicare to take immediate action.

"A crime is a crime wherever it takes place," Grassley said in a statement. "It's unacceptable for more than one-fourth of potential crimes in nursing homes to apparently go unreported."

Of the unreported cases, about 4 out of 5 involved alleged or suspected rape or sexual abuse.

The inspector general urged Medicare to systematically scour computerized billing records for tell-tale signs of possible abuse of nursing home residents. Investigators used that approach to find the cases, matching hospital emergency room and nursing home records.

Auditors identified 134 cases in which emergency room records indicated possible sexual or physical abuse, or neglect. The incidents spanned a two-year period from 2015-2016.

Illinois had the largest number of incidents overall, with 17. It was followed by Michigan (13), Texas (9), and California (8).

In 38 of the total cases (28 percent), investigators could find no evidence in hospital records that the incident had been reported to local law enforcement, despite a federal law requiring prompt reporting by nursing homes, as well as similar state and local requirements.

The federal statute has been on the books more than five years, but investigators found that Medicare has not enforced its requirement to report incidents to police and other agencies, or risk fines of up to $300,000.

Nursing home personnel must immediately report incidents that involve a suspected crime, within a two-hour window if there's serious bodily injury. Otherwise, authorities must be notified within 24 hours.

Medicare "has inadequate procedures to ensure that incidents of potential abuse or neglect of Medicare beneficiaries residing in (nursing homes) are identified and reported," the inspector general's report said. Medicare responded it has long required immediate reporting, but to state inspectors.

Even among the 96 cases that were ultimately reported to police departments, investigators were unable to tell if the federal requirement for "immediate" notification was followed.

In one case classified as "reported to law enforcement," an elderly woman with verbal and mobility limitations was taken to the emergency room after she was allegedly sexually assaulted by a male resident of the same nursing home. The report said two silver-dollar-sized bruises were noted on her right breast.

Nursing home staff had helped the woman bathe and change clothes after the incident. "These actions could have destroyed any evidence that may have been detected using the rape kit," said the report.

Nursing home employees did not immediately report the incident to police, although the federal reporting requirement was in effect. The nursing home "should have reported the incident to law enforcement within two hours of witnessing the incident," the report said.

Instead, the following day the nursing home contacted the woman's family, who called the police, triggering an investigation.

Citing a separate probe by state officials, the inspector general's report said the nursing home "contacted local law enforcement in an attempt to keep law enforcement from investigating the incident."

The state's own report found that the nursing home told police "we were required to report it but that we were doing our own internal investigation and did not need (police) to make a site visit...no one was interested in pressing charges." The police continued their investigation.

The state later cited the nursing home for failing to immediately notify the patient's doctor and family, as well as other violations of federal regulations. But state inspectors classified the incident as resulting in "minimum harm or potential for actual harm."

No other details were provided in the federal report. The inspector general's office reported all 134 cases to local police.

The number of nursing home residents is expected to grow in coming years as more people live into their 80s and 90s. Medicaid is the main payer for long-term care, while Medicare covers doctors' services and hospital care for elderly people and the disabled.

In a statement, the nursing home industry trade group said its members know they must immediately report alleged abuse. The American Health Care Association said it will work with the government to ensure safety.

-photo by Nirmal Gosh... Maryland

Dr. Kathie Allen, the progressive Democrat running for the open congressional seat in Utah's 4th district, offered to add an important perspective... "that many nursing home patients are unable to speak for themselves, so it is up to providers and family members to advocate for them. Sexual abuse of nursing home patients is a real and present danger and is under-reported. To force a patient to opt for arbitration instead of legal resolution of possible malpractice is to ignore the fact that many people being admitted to nursing homes are not fully lucid due to recent surgery, drugs, and innervated status. They should not be induced to compromise their rights while their mental state is suboptimal. This whole thing is a disgrace."





UPDATE: Here's An Example Of Why Dotty Nygard Will Replace Jeff Denham In Congress

Although the DCCC recruited some wealthy San Franciscan to run in CA-10 (Modesto, Tracy, Manteca, Turlock and Riverbank) Dotty Nygard, a nurse and former local elected official, is the progressive in the primary race. She told us that "It's horrifying that there are people in our communities who have the audacity to abuse the elderly. As a healthcare provider, I am mandated to report any suspicion of neglect or abuse immediately. Unfortunately, there have been several situations involving elder abuse where I have been forced to report individuals who have the nerve to harm seniors who were in an extremely vulnerable state. So many cases of negligence and harmful disrespect for our seniors have plagued our healthcare system and it's long overdue for advocates to step up and defend them. Seniors should be our most respected members of society-- it's time we provide them the support they need."

Hey, Hey! Ho, Ho! Ben Ray Lujan's Got To Go!

I've been mad at the DCCC since Pelosi named Rahm Emanuel chairman in 2005. It's barely over a decade and other people are starting to catch on as well. The latest shit from this assholes: Pelosi and Ben Gay Lujan now admit the DCCC recruits and funds Blue Dogs and anti-Choice freaks and passes them off on unsuspecting Democratic voters as normal Democrats, Monday. Becca Andrews, reporting for Mother Jones used the DCCC p.r. shop's deceitfully-crafted messaging: "The Democrats will not withhold financial support from candidates who oppose abortion, according to Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) chair Rep. Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)." Oh... "not withhold?" As if they ever did! Conservatives always get the biggest share of DCCC money.

Democratic party leaders, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) have also said the Democratic party should not draw a hard line when it comes to abortion. In June, DNC chair Tom Perez met with Democrats for Life of America who demanded that abortion not be a “litmus test” of the party. The 2016 Democratic platform stated that the party believed “unequivocally” that “every woman should have access to quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion.”

At a time when the Democratic party is searching for a coherent identity and program after its resounding defeat in 2016, the debate over whether the party openly supports abortion rights will likely continue to heat up as the 2018 races loom.

“Throwing weight behind anti-choice candidates is bad politics that will lead to worse policy,” Mitchell Stille, who oversees campaigns for NARAL Pro-Choice America, told The Hill. “The idea that jettisoning this issue wins elections for Democrats is folly contradicted by all available data.”

I asked a couple dozen incumbents and some 2018 candidates what they think of the new controversy Ben Ray has blindly and stupidly stumbled into. I mean can you imagine how fast Ryan would fire NRCC chairman Steve Stivers if he announced they are going to start recruiting and funding progressive pro-Choice candidates? The first coherent response I got was Paul Perry, a progressive Democrat running for the PA-07 seat in the Philly suburbs currently held by Pat Meehan (R):

Yesterday, the DCCC stated publicly that it would compromise women’s reproductive freedom in a misguided attempt to win elections. This is dangerous nonsense. A woman’s right to bodily autonomy is not a bargaining chip; it is a fundamental part of what should be every Democrat’s commitment to economic justice and healthcare for all.

Therefore, in order to transform words into actionable solidarity, I am using my resources to support the Women’s Medical Fund, an organization that provides financial assistance to economically vulnerable women seeking reproductive care in Philadelphia, Montgomery, Chester, Delaware, and Bucks counties-- and I am encouraging my supporters to do the same. If elected to Congress, I'll ensure that programs like this have the necessary funding and support to provide full access to quality care for all women.

Because access to quality, affordable care for women should not depend on their financial circumstances nor the whims of party leaders. Period.

#TrustWomen #WeWon’tGoBack

Mary Ellen Balchunis was the Democratic candidate for PA-07 last cycle and the DCCC sabotaged her race. Sh'e thinking about running again next year. This morning she told me that "I understand supporting candidates crossing the finish line in the primary. If I had the support of the DCCC after my huge primary victory, I believe that I could have gone much further. However, I disagree with supporting candidates who win the primary and do not support the Democratic platform. As a Political Scientist, I believe if the DCCC goes through with this, you will see numerous women and Progressive men supporting Independent candidates. The DCCC may be giving several victories to Independents; and if the Independents don't win, the DCCC will be giving the election to the Republicans. In either case, the Republicans will maintain their majority. Haven't we learned anything from the 2016 election? The people want candidates who help them with jobs, wages, healthcare and education. It is why Sen.Sanders had such 'huge' support!"

The next post to come in was-- surprise, surprise-- from a woman candidate, Katie Hill, running against GOP crackpot and Trump rubber-stamp Steve Knight in CA-25, an evenly split district leaning blue.

I have spent my whole life in one of those long-held Republican districts that Democrats have to flip next year in order to get back a majority in the House. A Republican has been in the seat for 42 out of the last 50 years. The instinct among Democrats at the national level that we need to be talking to people in those districts differently to be able to win them over is absolutely correct. But that does not mean we should compromise or go backwards on some of our most fundamental values, including women's rights.

Many members of my community have strong religious ties that affect their views on abortion. However, the vast majority of them-- including members of my immediate family-- acknowledge that, while they may not agree with a woman's choice to have an abortion, it is not their place or the government's place to get involved in one of the hardest decisions a woman will ever make in her life. They also almost universally agree, in my experience, that the best way to prevent abortions (and/or the devastating cycle of kids entering the foster care system) is by preventing unplanned pregnancies. So education and access to birth control are absolutely key in that. There is national polling and research that shows that 80% of people support a woman's right to choose, if not morally, then at least from the perspective that it's not a decision that the government can be making for her. We need to be appealing to that overwhelming majority of people-- not the 20% or less who want to strip away the rights we've worked so hard to protect.

A woman's right to choose is something that our party, and progressives in general, have been fighting to earn and to protect for generations. We cannot give that up because of a mistaken belief that this is somehow the way we will win over conservative voters, and more conservative-leaning districts. As a woman, and someone who fundamentally understands the culture and the dynamics of purple districts, I can say with utter confidence that this is the wrong tactic.

The best Democrat running in IL-13, David Gill, is a stalwart, no-nonsense progressive. I knew the DCCC announcement would sound unpleasantly familiar to him. Last night a good feminist Democrat was complaining on twitter that "liberal men" were willing to throw women under the bus and back Lujan on this. Well, not any of the liberal men I know! Dr. Gill sure had a different perspective than that too! "I would have no way of knowing what the DCCC is doing all around the country," he told us, "but I am intimately aware of their actions here in IL-13. I lost this seat in 2012 by three-tenths of ONE point (with the handicap that year of having a liberal independent on the ballot who was expressing all the same views as myself), after defeating the moderate DCCC-backed candidate in the primary (despite being outspent 5 to 1). Subsequent Democrats have lost the seat by 50 to 60 times as much as I lost it by, and Senator Durbin lost in this district by 20 times as much as I lost it by. But in spite of the fact that I have so vastly outperformed other Democratic candidates, I am unable to interest the DCCC in getting behind my 2018 campaign. I suspect that they do not like the fact that some of the main planks in my platform are driven by my 25 year membership in Physicians for a National Health Program (a leading single-payer advocacy group) and my 20 year membership in Physicians for Reproductive Choice. I also speak frequently and passionately about the need for true campaign-finance reform, and the need to end the corporate ownership of our politics and government. These are the issues which have resulted in my relative success here in the district, and yet these same issues seem to keep the DCCC from embracing my campaign. There will not be a liberal independent protecting the Republican who squeaked by me in 2012 this time around (Illinois' bizarre ballot access laws only make that a realistic possibility in years that end in a '2'), so I intend to make up that 0.3% next year and get to Congress, whether the DCCC likes it or not. Of course, first I will have to defeat another moderate DCCC-backed candidate in the Democratic primary next March, a candidate who has not expressed any public support for single-payer or tuition-free public universities or a $15 per hour minimum wage."

Doug Applegate, a former Marine Corp colonel and not someone who gets pushed around by political hacks told us that "the DCCC sets it's own policies and I set the policies for my campaign. Supporting women's hard-won right to choice is a core value of mine and-- a value shared by the majority of San Diego and Orange County voters-- and Beltway strategists aren't the folks I'm looking to for advise on the subject. Women who live in CA-49 are." Doug is likely to replace anti-Choice fanatic Darrell Issa in Congress. Up the road a bit Wendy Reed is running for a deep red seat held by Republican Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy. She's another candidate unenthusiastic about the DCCC's latest move. "Ben Ray Lujan's willingness to toss off a Constitutionally protected right of women for political expediency exemplifies the rotting of DCCC strategy," she told us. "Lujan seems to have passed his expiration date, and I stand with Tom Perez and Howard Dean on this. Only principles, platform integrity, and informed conversation will win elections in 2018."

Tom Guild is a progressive Democrat in exactly the kind of "red state," Oklahoma, where the DCCC wants to run anti-Choice Blue Dogs. Of course, they're wrong... and are unlikely to back Tom. He told us that "The progressive coalition is made up of many disparate interests. Environmentalists are often primarily concerned with climate change and the future of our planet. Progressive populists may be most concerned with raising the minimum wage, Wall Street Reform, and the reduction of college student loan debt. Women’s health issues are at the forefront of the concerns of many women and men in the progressive movement. Seniors may emphasize increasing Social Security benefits and protecting Medicare from being reduced to worthless vouchers, leaving older Americans without meaningful affordable health care. There is an abundance of other groups constituting the progressive movement and each has issues crucial to them. To undercut women’s health is offensive and is no more acceptable than the undermining of other values important to diverse elements of our movement. We need candidates who run the gamut and mutually support our progressive allies on issues essential to them. As Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. so eloquently said, injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere. If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together. We must support our coalition partner’s progressive causes, along with our own. Anti-Choice=Anti-Progressive. Together we win, and as Abe Lincoln, also eloquently, opined, a house divided against itself cannot stand."

Harley Rouda is one of the 40 or so Democrats running for GOP-held seats in Orange County. He wants to replace Dana Rohrabacher, an anti-Choice nut. "A woman's right to choose is non-negotiable. We can compromise on many things, but not on a woman's right to autonomy over her own body. I’m in complete agreement with 70% of Americans who, regardless of their personal feelings on abortion, recognize it is a woman’s fundamental right to control her reproductive decisions and that government has no place in deciding for her. I’m disappointed that the Democratic Party won’t stand up without hesitation and in unanimity on this very important issue."

Another Orange County candidate, Andy Thorburn-- who is eager to replace Ed Royce-- jumped into the race yesterday. He told me that "I'm 100% pro-choice, and I believe that the government should not tell a woman what she can or can't do with her body. I do not believe that the national party should actively recruit anti-choice candidates."

I asked a whole slew of Democrats in Congress. A few cursed out Pelosi and Lujan or told me off the record how angry they are and how divisive this is for the party-- but no one was willing to speak on the record except Bay Area progressive freshman Ro Khanna, who said simply and right to the point, "I believe being pro-choice is about gender equality and a core value. The DCCC should not support anti-choice candidates." BOOM!

Dotty Nygard is the progressive candidate taking on Jeff Denham in northern California. Again, clear and right to the point: "There is zero reason for our party to invest in fringe, anti-Choice candidates. Americans are tired of politicians who feel more compelled to regulate a woman's body than Wall Street corruption. 70% of Americans support safe access to abortion services, it's clear now more than ever that members of congress need to accurately represent our values and defend the health of Women."

And Derrick Crowe, the progressive in the Austin-San Antonio corridor district occupied by anti-Choice freak Lamar Smith sums up with all the candidates I spoke with said: "The DCCC should retract this statement, apologize to the women they were selling out when making this statement, and issue instead a new statement in which they make it clear that women's rights are not negotiable."

Rep. Kaniela Ing is the most progressive Democrat in the Hawaii legislature. He may not be running for federal office-- I hope he does-- but he's certainly paying close attention to what Pelosi and Lujan have been saying. I like his response a lot: "Embracing candidates who do not support every woman's right to choose is a huge step backward for our party, both morally and strategically. Roe v. Wade was nearly 45 years ago. So abortion should not be framed as a new fight between progressives and moderate Democrats. It's a pillar of what Democrats stand for. We can and should learn from Republicans, who have recently dominated American politics on every level by running unapologetically conservative candidates. People vote when they are inspired by candidates who stand for something. Our advantage is that more folks share progressive values and support our issues. We have dignity, fairness, and equality on our side. When we run on our values, and not from them, we win."

Want to watch some good ideas from the Democratic Party? This guy was speaking at Politicon in Pasadena this last weekend-- and there was nothing in what he had to say about taking away women's right to choice. One has to wonder why party leaders like Pelosi and Lujan aren't on the same page as this DNC spokesperson. They should be if they're serious about winning back Congress:




UPDATE: From Crowley's Opponent

Alexandria Ocasio is running or the Queens/Bronx seat occuried by the corrupt conservative Pelosi has picked to run the House Dems after she's gone, Joe Crowley. "The United States has the highest maternal mortality rate in the developed world," she told us. "Women across this country already suffer in their access to healthcare. The very idea of the Democratic Party compromising on healthcare for half of Americans is tantamount to becoming the very Republicans we are trying to overturn. Our focus should be on expanding healthcare to all Americans, not taking it away."

Does The Most Corrupt Man In Congress Really Support Medicare-For-All?

The Republicans in each house of Congress have voted literally dozens and dozens of times over the past 7 years to repeal the Affordable Care Act, a top priority of an avaricious donor class that doesn't like the idea of helping to pay for poor peoples' healthcare. In all those years the Republicans were voting in lockstep to repeal, there was either a Democratic-controlled Senate to stop it or a Democrat in the White House to veto it. Now the Republicans control the Senate, the House and the White House. So where's the repeal? Reality is a bitch! The repeal is the most massively unpopular bill in living memory. Something between 12% and 20% of Americans approve of it. Bush's TARP Wall Street bankster bailout was more popular with American voters than TrumpCare. Republican legislators can't deal with it and are panic-stricken. Ha, ha, ha?

Let's look a little closer to home-- right here in blue, blue California where the Governor is a Democrat and both the state Senate and the state Assembly have massive Democratic majorities. Both houses of the legislature passed single payer legislation-- TWICE-- in the past-- when there was a Republican governor to veto it-- and now...

Tuesday, Lydia O'Neal and David Sirota, reporting for the International Business Times, points to similarities that Republicans in Congress and Democratic in Sacramento face in regard to healthcare. "Democrats,' they wrote, "are facing allegations from progressive leaders that after a decade of promising to create a single-payer health care system, the party is now succumbing to the kind of corporate fealty that national party leaders routinely ascribe to Republicans" and the scumbag and traitor to all things American who has managed to slip into the White House.

As many Democrats enthusiastically promoted single-payer to Golden State voters, the party indeed engineered a complete takeover of the state’s government, giving them unprecedented legislative supermajority power to enact the legislation-- even over a governor’s veto. Yet, as health care industry money flooded into the coffers of the Democratic Party’s candidates for California office, Brown has turned negative about the idea, and late last month, California Democratic Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon halted a single-payer bill in its tracks, preventing it from being voted on by his Democratic supermajority before the legislature’s self-imposed July 14th deadline.

Amid calls for Democratic unity in the Trump era, the party’s move in a deep blue state to block a health care initiative it previously supported has prompted labor movement protests-- and promises of primary campaigns or recall efforts to unseat recalcitrant Democrats. More broadly, eight years after Barack Obama mounted a populist presidential campaign and then did not prosecute any major Wall Street executives, the episode has resurrected progressives’ allegations that while Democrats may talk a good game, they are not nearly as committed to bold action as their rhetoric suggests.

“Talk about fake news-- this is fake politics: stick it to the Republican governor but we’re going to leave dear old Jerry untouched so he doesn’t have to veto this bill,” said Democrat Gloria Romero, a former California Senate Majority Leader who helped pass the single-payer bills in 2006 and 2008. “Probably most of these Assembly members ran for office supporting single payer healthcare. But now that what they ran around promising the people actually has a chance of passage, they don’t dare do what they promised. This kind of thing undermines any integrity from the Democratic Party that is supposed to stand up for the little guy. It creates a disconnect and a distrust.”

In an era that has seen voters enthusiastically respond to populist crusades in both parties, Brown and Rendon have offered technocratic arguments. Both have raised questions about how the most recent single-payer bill, SB 562, would be financed in California, where one previously passed ballot measure constrains the state budget and another requires a set percentage of the budget to be devoted to education.

...[A]n International Business Times review of campaign finance data found that in the intervening years, health insurers and pharmaceutical companies substantially boosted their donations to California Democratic candidates in gubernatorial election years.

In all, donors from the health services sector and major health insurers gave more than $16 million to Democratic candidates and the California Democratic Party in the 2014 election cycle-- almost double what donors from those industries gave in the 2006 election, according to data from the National Institute on Money In State Politics. Donors from those sectors collectively donated more than $3 million to Brown and Rendon since 2010.

In light of that history, longtime single-payer proponents argue that this is a watershed moment for Democrats in advance of the 2018 election. They assert that the California fight will demonstrate whether or not Democrats in the Trump era are willing to use the power they still retain at the state level to defy their major corporate donors and enact the policies they tell voters they support.

“We’ve been talking about this forever,” said Jamie Court, the president of Consumer Watchdog, which has supported the legislation. “When there’s a Republican in charge, Democrats take action,” he said, and with ostensibly pro-single-payer Brown replacing Schwarzenegger, “now it’s time to put up or shut up.”

“It’s a litmus test for whether progressive Democratic politicians can talk the talk and walk the walk,” Court told IBT. “This is about the soul of the Democratic Party as much as it’s about health care.”

Kia Hamadanchy, a former Sherrod Brown staffer, currently running for the House seat Trump's pet congresswoman in Orange County, Mimi Walters, holds told us that "Top to bottom the Democratic Party is in the worst shape its been since right before the Great Depression. Whether its Congress, state legislatures, city councils, or school boards we've continued to lose across the board and across the country time and time again. Donald Trump does not become President of the United States without a massive institutional failure by the Democratic Party. Whatever we've been doing its clear that its not working and we need a complete rebuild from the ground up, with a focus on what we actually stand for and who we actually represent. And as a party how can we possibly win the argument and actually convince people to come along with us if we're constantly running away from ourselves and don't strongly stand behind progressive policy, whether its single payer or whether its anything else."

Dotty Nygard is the progressive nurse running for the blue-trending Central Valley seat held by 100% Trump backer Jeff Denham. She supported Bernie in the primary and is running on similar policies and values now. She told us that "one thing is clear: we need more union members, women, and people of color elected to Congress. These underrepresented groups can better relate to the struggles working families face every day, and as representatives they are more likely to recognize the insanity of winding the income inequality divide amongst Americans, both through messaging and actions. Democrats are supposed to represent the people-- fight for the people-- and lift them up... Leadership cannot idly stand by while only those with money are elected into positions of power within a system that champions money over grassroots support. As Democrats, we must proactively fund, endorse, and otherwise work to elect working-class folks if we want the public to engage in politics again."

So who's the most corrupt man in Congress and what's he got to do with all this? Yes, time to talk about Queens County machine boss, Joe Crowley, a Wall Street scumbag and "former" chairman of the corporately owned and operated New Dems who Pelosi and Hoyer have selected as the next leader of the House Democrats. Crowley has never had a contested election. He was given his seat by a legalistic trick/inside job pulled off by the last Queens machine boss, Tom Manton, as he suddenly resigned from Congress and handed off the prize to his sleaze bag protégée, Crowley.

Progressives have been trying to pass Medicare-For-All since Truman was president. This year, when John Conyers introduced the latest version-- H.R. 676-- in a situation where Trump is president and McConnell and Ryan decide what gets voted on in Congress-- there were 51 original co-sponsors, basically all fervent progressives like Partial Jayapal (D-WA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Katherine Clark (D-MA), Keith Ellison (D-MN), Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), Ted Lieu (D-CA), Mark Pocan (D-WI), Jose Serrano (D-NY), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ), Judy Chu (D-CA), Jerry Nadler (D-NY) and Matt Cartwright (D-PA). That was on January 24. As the months rolled on more progressives read the bill and signed on as well-- like Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Alan Lowenthal (D-CA) in February, Mike Capuano (D-MA) and Karen Bass (D-CA) and Nanette Barragan (D-CA) in March. By April, even conservative Democrats from the Republican wing of the party started smelling the roses and signing on as co-sponsors, even slimy characters like Gene Green (TX), Lou Correa (Blue Dog-CA), Darren Soto (New Dem-FL), Jim Cooper (Blue Dog-TN), Vicente Gonzalez (Blue Dog-TX), and then on May 5-- soon after a progressive primary opponent, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez jumped into the primary against him, Crowley signed on as a co-sponsor too. What a joke! No one in Congress thinks Crowley supports single payer, Medicare-for-All or anything else remotely progressive beyond what he needs to work on his personal goals wrapped up in naked careerism and grotesque opportunism. But Crowley's signal was quickly picked up up conservative New Dem Adam Schiff who has Dianne Feinstein's Senate seat dictating every decision he makes. Maybe this is the kind of sausage-making it's going to take to finally get this passed. Or maybe opportunists like Crowley and Schiff will betray America as easily as Rendon and Jerry Brown betrayed California.



Let's go back to Lydia O'Neal and David Sirota for a moment. They pointed out that Rendon's Democratic and corporate allies lauded him "for blocking the single payer legislation, even after fellow Democrats had previously passed it."

“I think Speaker Rendon gets a lot of credit for protecting his members from a very stupid idea and making them all politically vulnerable for something that’s not going to happen anyway,” political consultant David Townsend, who works for Democrats and insurance companies, told the Sacramento Bee.

Assembly Democrats have set July 14th as the deadline for policy committees to consider legislation this year, and CNA is continuing to stage protests demanding lawmakers allow the bill to be debated.

Whether or not it advances this year, the legislation faces persistent questions about Proposition 98, which mandates a set percentage of spending on education, and the so-called “Gann limit,” which limits overall state spending. A senate analysis of the bill asserted that those measures “would prevent the legislature from creating the single-payer system envisioned in the bill without voter approval” of exemptions.

Rendon’s move, though, has effectively prevented lawmakers from voting the legislation onto the ballot. Kuehl, meanwhile, rejected suggestions that lawmakers could not find creative ways to work within existing constitutional limits.

“That theory won’t fly,” she told IBT, asserting that there is likely breathing room within the Gann limit. She said after a decade of debate over single-payer, lawmakers should be able to come up with ways to deal with Proposition 98.

“I don’t think it would actually be a problem,” said Kuehl, who is now a Los Angeles County Supervisor. “You would craft it so that it would not be part of the state budget. It would create a separate state health plan.”

As for the political dynamics, Kuehl compared the Democrats’ refusal to pass a long-supported health care policy to Republicans repeatedly voting to repeal Obamacare but now having trouble passing a replacement bill under their own party’s president.

“It’s much more realistic when you’re faced with having something happen or not happen,” she said.

Fabian Nunez, a Democrat who served as Assembly Speaker when Kuehl’s SB 840 first passed both houses, said he believes single-payer simply is not feasible at the state level.

“You could do some things at the state level to improve the quality of care, but you need the cooperation of the federal government,” he said. “The only way to do single-payer well is at the federal level.”

Nunez’s position exemplifies the Democratic Party’s shift on the issue now that it has full legislative power. As Assembly speaker in 2006, he supported the California single-payer bill.

Some single-payer proponents in California say that after multiple attempts to pass a bill, Democrats themselves have become the major obstacle-- and the only way to get the party to restore its credibility and act on its promises is through threats of revenge at the ballot box.

“There have to be electoral consequences for these Democrats,” said Michael Lighty of the California Nurses Association. “The whole basis of their politics is pro-industry, pro-Wall Street. Those folks are driven by their donor agenda and not by popular demand. There just in general has to be a greater grassroots surge to hold these elected officials accountable.”

Primarying Anthony Rendon is an absolute must. Drafting state Senate president Kevin de León to run for Feinstein's seat-- and not Adam Schiff-- is just as important. This is California, not Mississippi and if we let the establishment, primarily Democratic careerists, get away with this kind of crap here, they will be emboldened to rub our faces in shit for eternity. And nationally... Crowley is a DEAD end for Democrats. Contrast his incoherence on healthcare policy with what Ro Khanna, who represents the Silicon Valley and parts of the East Bay, (see tweets above) told me today:

"When Republicans mislead voters into thinking that a single payer health care system costs $32 trillion, Democrats must point out that our current system already costs $49 trillion. A single payer system would actually save Americans $17 trillion. A single-payer system reduces administrative costs and will lower drug prices and hospital costs through bargaining. Ultimately, a single payer system would help reduce our deficit and ease the burden on both businesses and middle class families.

"For decades, the GOP has made economic arguments regarding health care and Democrats have made moral arguments. But we shouldn't be afraid to make the economic case. Expanding health care through single payer isn't just the right thing to do, it's the smart thing to do. Let's not let the GOP get away with fake math, Democrats must point out that a single payer system is fiscally responsible."

Ro Khanna sounds like a credible leader, unlike Joe Crowley, who sounds like what he is: and opportunist and a careerist hack who will sell out the grassroots as easily as he yawns when a staffer tries explaining policy to him.

We've been mentioning that two of our old progressive friends, Mary Ellern Balchunis and Daylen Leach, are both running-- in a crowded field-- for the Democratic nomination to take on Ryan rubber stamp Pat Meehan in PA-07. But there's another excellent progressive in that race too, Paul Perry, a former Obama staffer and a school teacher. I was talking with him yesterday and mentioned that "It's deeply ironic that the DCCC released a series of stickers encouraging voters to 'look at the other guys' when our party would actually be best served by taking a good, hard look in the mirror and changing the cast of characters that we see in it. If we are to learn anything from this last election cycle, it's that Americans are hungry for a new generation of leaders to step up and take tough stances that deliver progress for Americans, like single-payer healthcare and tuition-free college. These are ideas whose time has come and we need the next class of progressive leaders to pave the way for this badly-needed change that most Americans favor by wide margins." Paul Perry knows something about messaging too. Just take a look at this incredible video:



Remind you at all of how Randy Bryce introduced himself? I have no double we're going too be hearing more from Paul as this cycle heats up.

TrumpCare 3.0 vs Medicare-For-All

Last night Bernie spoke about TrumpCare at the Pittsburgh Convention Center and this morning he’ll be doing the same at Express Live in Columbus, Ohio and again this evening at the West Virginia Civic Center in Charleston. You can get to the essence of his message by watching the short clip he released (above). Do you doubt anything that he says in his response to the Republican “healthcare” bill? All those assertions about what Americans want, for example? On Friday, the Pew Research Center released a new poll, senators might want to look at before they vote on TrumpCare 3.0. Top line: "a majority of Americans say it is the federal government’s responsibility to make sure all Americans have health care coverage. And a growing share now supports a 'single payer' approach to health insurance."

Currently, 60% say the federal government is responsible for ensuring health care coverage for all Americans, while 39% say this is not the government’s responsibility. These views are unchanged from January, but the share saying health coverage is a government responsibility remains at its highest level in nearly a decade.

Among those who see a government responsibility to provide health coverage for all, more now say it should be provided through a single health insurance system run by the government, rather than through a mix of private companies and government programs. Overall, 33% of the public now favors such a “single payer” approach to health insurance, up 5 percentage points since January and 12 points since 2014. Democrats-- especially liberal Democrats-- are much more supportive of this approach than they were even at the start of this year.

Even among those who say the federal government is not responsible for ensuring Americans have health care coverage, there is little public appetite for government withdrawing entirely from involvement in health care coverage. Among the public, 33% say that health care coverage is not the government’s responsibility, but that programs like Medicare and Medicaid should be continued; just 5% of Americans say the government should not be involved at all in providing health insurance.

The issue of the government’s responsibility in ensuring health coverage remains deeply divisive politically, according to the new survey, conducted June 8-18 among 2,504 adults. More than eight-in-ten Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents (85%) say that this responsibility falls to the federal government, while about two-thirds of Republicans and Republican leaners (68%) say it does not.

Still, most Republicans (57%) say the government “should continue programs like Medicare and Medicaid for seniors and the very poor.” Just 9% of Republicans say the government should not be involved in providing health insurance at all.

Among Democrats, 52% now say health insurance should be provided through a single national insurance system run by the government, while fewer (31%) say it should be provided through a mix of private companies and government programs. The share of Democrats supporting a single national program to provide health insurance has increased 9 percentage points since January and 19 points since 2014.

Nearly two-thirds of liberal Democrats (64%) now support a single-payer health insurance system, up 13 percentage points since January. Conservative and moderate Democrats remain about evenly divided: 38% prefer that health insurance continue to be provided by a mix of private insurance companies and government programs, while 42% favor a single-payer approach.

Overall, support for a single-payer health insurance system is much greater among younger adults than older people. Two-thirds of adults younger than 30 (67%) say the government has a responsibility to provide health coverage for all, with 45% saying coverage should be provided through a single national program.

Among those 65 and older, 54% say the government has a responsibility to provide coverage for all, with 30% favoring a single payer approach.

Both parties are divided by age in views of the government’s role in health care. Fully 66% of Democrats and Democratic leaners ages 18 to 29 say government health coverage should be provided through a single national system, compared with 48% of Democrats and Democratic leaners ages 30 and older.

Among Republicans, a greater share of those younger than 30 (39%) than those 30 and older (28%) say the government is responsible for providing health coverage for all; more young Republicans than older Republicans favor single payer (22% vs. 10%).

And the Senate bill certainly doesn’t do anything that Trump or the Republicans promised it would do-- like making medical coverage much more affordable or protecting people with bankruptcy-inducing “preexisting conditions.” More affordable, easier and cheaper for consumers? Not this bill!

Reed Abelson in yesterday’s NY Times stripped the bride bare:

[M]illions of Americans will pay more for an insurance policy that comes with a much steeper deductible under the new Senate plan, according to some health economists and insurance experts. It could also make it much harder to find a comprehensive plan covering various conditions ranging from heart disease to depression that would not be prohibitively expensive.

“This is going to be a very unstable market” where only the very sickest people resort to buying coverage on the federal exchanges at much higher prices, said Paul B. Ginsburg, a health economist and the director of the Center for Health Policy at the Brookings Institution.

Those likely to suffer the most under the Senate plan are people who would not be eligible for any remaining subsidies, he said, because they could be priced out of the market. Most worrisome to those opposing the Senate bill is that states could give insurers leeway to offer skimpy plans that cover a lot less and exclude people with certain illnesses.

…If the Senate version becomes law, insurers could increase premiums for individual coverage by at least 20 percent more than the double-digit increases already under consideration. By 2020, other changes are likely to result in plans with much higher deductibles. People now getting tax credits that allow them to purchase a policy with a deductible of $3,500 would get subsidies for a plan where the deductible would nearly double, without any funding to pay their out-of-pocket costs.

Many people will face a Hobson’s choice, said Craig Garthwaite, a health economist at Northwestern’s Kellogg School of Management. They will have to choose between a plan with a premium they cannot afford or a plan with a deductible they cannot afford.

While lower premiums touted by Republicans could attract healthier people to buy coverage on the exchanges, other changes could still drive up prices, said Mr. Garthwaite, who is a registered Republican. “It could turn out to be higher premiums and higher deductibles,” he said.

One stark difference between the Senate bill and the Affordable Care Act is the decision to drop the mandate requiring insurance. That could inadvertently discourage the youngest and healthiest people from buying insurance, leaving a higher percentage of sicker people with expensive treatments on the exchanges, driving up insurers’ costs.

Thursday, conservative New Dem (former Blue Dog) Adam Schiff became the latest (and 113th) House Democrat to sign on as a co-sponsor of John Conyers’ Medicare-For-All bill (H.R. 676). The Blue Dogs and New Dems-- the Republican wing of the Democratic Party-- have tended to stay away from the bill but as election season approaches and the popularity of the approach, particularly among Democrats and independents-- becomes manifest, even conservative politicians like Schiff are jumping on the train. Schiff is interested in running for the California Senate seat Dianne Feinstein told him she would be giving up next year. No one’s going to win statewide office in California without being committed to single-payer.

Over the past several months, you’ve read how all the Blue America-backed candidates are proponents of single payer health insurance. Some, like Illinois emergency room physician, David Gill, have been working towards it for many years. Our newest endorsee, Randy Bryce, the progressive Democrat running for the swing district Wisconsin seat Paul Ryan has been in, did an interview with the New Republic and explained why he favors single payer health insurance. This morning he built on his statement by telling us that “our very health is literally under attack. I am outraged by what I see going on in our government. When our campaign made our first video, I felt it was important to address the issue of health. It’s an intergenerational issue that affects us from birth until the day we die. Health care is a right. I can’t believe that they’re working behind closed doors to find that best way to strip away our ability to be well just so that their richest donors can become richer. When I begin to work in Washington D.C. one of the first things I look forward to doing is adding my name to the Conyers bill that will make sure every American has access to health care. We need to stop looking for excuses as to why it can’t be done and start figuring out how to do it. I plan on being part of the solution.”

The two North Carolina Berniecrats Blue America has endorsed for 2018, are excellent examples of how grassroots activism-- even in “red” districts-- manifests itself in dangerous times. Matt Coffay is campaigning for the wester-most district in the state, flat up against Tennessee, currently held by TrumpCare godfather and Freedom Caucus chairman, extremist Mark Meadows. You’re not going to ever hear Coffay degenerate into a Republican-lite establishment shill. That’s not who he is and not why he’s running for office in such difficult circumstances. "One of my first acts in Congress,” he told us, “will be to co-sponsor HR 676, the Conyers ‘Medicare for All’ bill. This bill has been on the floor of the House since 2003 with little in the way of support; now, though, there is a real opportunity to pass this bill and create a universal health care system in this country. I intend to use my voice as a Congressman to elevate public awareness of the benefits of universal health care, and work alongside folks like Bernie Sanders to create a health care system that takes care of every single person in this country." Jenny Marshall is running for the central/western North Carolina congressional district anti-healthcare fanatic Virginia Foxx operates out of. Foxx, who started off as a fiery extremist, sold out to the establishment long ago and is now a Ryan rubber stamp. Jenny told us that the bill the Senate Republicans unveiled “puts millions of lives at risk” and threatens households vulnerable to economic hardships. “In the 5th district 1 out of every 7 people will lose their healthcare. It is simply unconscionable. The GOP stands on free market principles claiming everyone has access to healthcare under their plan. I disagree. There is no access when people cannot afford to buy healthcare insurance and cover the out-of-pocket expenses. There is no access when people wait for far too long to seek care because of the rising cost of doctors' visits, prescription costs and medical procedures. People have been priced out of the care they need, but the GOP has turned a blind eye. I on the other hand support moving to a single payer program that covers not only medical, but vision and dental care as well. That is why I would add my name as a co-sponsor of Rep. Conyers' Medicare For All bill (HR 676) when elected to Congress. We must step up and do what is right for the people of this country, standing strong that healthcare is a human right. Millions of lives depend on it.”

At any given moment at this time in the cycle, Blue America is vetting at least a dozen candidates. I’m happy to say that right now every single one of them has expressed an eagerness to co-sponsor Conyers’ Medicare-for-All bill. Marie Newman is a good example. She’s primarying of if the most conservative Democrats in Congress, Chicagoland Blue Dog Dan Lipinski, a committed member of the Republican wing of the Democratic Party. Lipinski, who tends to vote with the Republicans far more than any moderate Democrats, has adamantly refused-- even as other Blue Dogs and New Dems have signed on-- to co-sponsor Conyers’ bill. Last night Marie told us that “as a candidate so focused on fighting to expand health care for all, I would co-sponsor the Conyers bill in order to establish Medicare For All and put action behind the truth that ‘health care is a right'." You can support her tough primary battle against Lipinski here. We need more Democrats in Congress like Marie-- and far, far fewer like Lipinski.

Kia Hamadanchy worked as a Sherrod Brown staffer in DC before moving back to the Orange County district he was born and raised in. His opponent, Trump rubber stamp Mimi Waters, has repeatedly refused to move into the district and almost never goes there except to meet with wealthy GOP donors and for photo-ops. She was a prominent backer of Ryan’s TrumpCare bill, a bill Kia opposes. “At the end of the day,” he told us, “health care is a human right. No one should ever go bankrupt because a lack of health insurance, and every single person in this country deserves to have access to affordable health care coverage that's there when they need it. And while I don't want to see the Affordable Care Act go away and strongly oppose efforts to repeal the law, I also believe that enacting  single payer health insurance is the best way to ensure that we meet the healthcare needs of every single American. That's why when elected I will absolutely cosponsor John Conyers’ Medicare-For-All bill."

Sam Jammal is considering running in another Orange County district, Ed Royce’s CA-39, the Republican-held district in the area that went most heavily against Trump last year. The DCCC has its own crackpot idea about selling the nomination to a rich lottery winner, but Sam is the progressive alternative to Royce and offers a coherent alternative to Royce’s reactionary and bigoted agenda."Ask any senior," he told us last night, "Medicare is great program. It makes sense to expand this for everyone. Imagine if a small business no longer had to budget in health care costs for their employees and could use those savings to hire more workers or a family knew that they wouldn't be at risk of losing their home just for getting sick. Our economy is changing and we need to take health care off the table as a political issue and focus on the economic benefits of getting everyone covered. If I were in Congress, I would be a co-sponsor of the Conyers bill."

 Although the DCCC is on the road to lose CA-10 again and give Jeff Denham an incredible run for a Republican in a blue district, grassroots Berniecrat Dotty Nygard, has different ideas. She’s not waiting around for another DCCC loser to run; she’s taking on Denham herself. She told us that when she makes it to Washington as an elected representative, she’ll "wholeheartedly co-sponsor H.R. 676, the Medicare for all Bill. As an elected I will have a duty and moral obligation to represent in the best interests of the people I serve, not in the interests of corporations or  Big Pharma. The American people deserve quality healthcare; they don't need insurance."

Elizabeth Warren took to the floor of the Senate to eviscerate the Senate bill. Brutal-- absolutely brutal:

Is His Serial Dishonesty Finally Catching Up With Central Valley Republican Jeff Denham?

We haven't spent enough time talking about CA-10, an important district that the DCCC has failed over and over again to rescue from Republican hands. A Central Valley district primarily in Stanislaus County, with a substantial part of San Joaquin as well, the district is represented by a knee-jerk Republican backbencher, Jeff Denham, an odd fit in a minority majority district. CA-10, just east of San Jose, gave Obama wins both times he ran and, albeit by a smaller margin, went for Hillary over Trump last year, 48.5% to 45.5%. The biggest towns in the district are Modesto, Manteca, Tracy, Riverbank and Turlock.

The DCCC has been running candidates who look "good" on paper-- at least in DC-- but who have been unable to dislodge Denham. The DCCC are trying to bum rush some their kind of guy in as the candidate-- Josh Harder, a wealthy venture capitalist and the local activists are lining up behind Tracy nurse and former Riverbank City Council member Dotty Nygard. Lisa Battista (no issues page on her website), David Byttow (no website) and Mateo Morelos Bedolla (website has expired) have declared their candidacies and there has been talk that the last 2 Denham opponents, Michael Eggman (2014 and 2016) and Jose Hernandez (2012) are considering rematches. Also former Riverbank Mayor Virginia Madueño may be planning on jumping in.

One reason 2018 may be Denham's Waterloo is his vote to repeal Obamacare and replace it with TrumpCare, a bill that would deprive 111,711 people in CA-10 of health insurance, over double the national average. But it wasn't just that Denham voted in lockstep with Ryan-- he always does-- but that he promised his constituents that he wouldn't. Early last March at a meeting with constituents Denham explicitly "agreed to not repeal the Affordable Care Act without a replacement that would protect people with pre-existing conditions, as well as allow people to stay on their parent's health insurance until the age of 26."

Two months later, when Denham flew back to the district, residents were angry that he had betrayed them and gone back on his word. His town hall meeting in Riverbank went badly.

"You voted against me," said one woman who said she depends on Medi-Cal for her healthcare.

"I voted for something that I thought would help my district," he said.

Denham had previously said that he would vote against the bill, but ended up voting for it, along with the rest of California's House Republicans.

He lied to his constituents about what TrumpCare would and wouldn't do but when he was cornered about his misleading assertions-- like a bogus claim that people would get cheaper pharmaceuticals-- he hemmed and hawed and claimed there will be "future amendments."

This truck can start rolling again the day Dotty Nygard becomes the Democratic nominee

Blue America has gone up against Denham once before. Two summers ago we ran a moving billboard campaign in two Central Valley congressional districts, CA-10 and CA-16, the former Denham's and the latter represented by Blue Dog Jim Costa. Both were enthusiastic supporters of the TPP reactionary trade agenda and both are mighty lucky that Congress has decided to write the laws in such a way that bribery in the form of "campaign contributions" is not considered bribery by the criminal justice system, a whole other deception worth taking time to think about. Denham was well aware that his Democratic-leaning district would not put up with a $700 million Medicare ripoff to grease the skids of the TPP, so he tried to disguise his support.

Modesto Bee reporter Nan Austin asked Denham's office for a comment on the rather blunt and unambiguous accusations against him that are being driven up and down CA-10 and into almost every city and town Denham represents. "Congressman Jeff Denham just voted to cut your mom’s Medicare by $700 million to finance a trade agenda that sends your job to China" was not what Denham wanted voters thinking about when they sat down to decide between him and Democrat Michael Eggman.

The Denham camp called the signs "disingenuous and misleading."

"Congressman Denham supported legislation to eliminate the Medicare cuts that were contained in the Senate version of TPA, and he supported legislation to increase trade and bring jobs to the Central Valley. This a disingenuous and misleading line of attack," said Denham Press Secretary Jordan Langdon, in response to a Bee inquiry.

Blue America, however, stood behind the Blue America Pac political ads, saying the message referred to an earlier vote that included the Medicare cut. Denham voted against that portion of what was then a two-part package, but the group called that a slight of hand.

"Costa voted for both halves. Denham voted for one half. But the clear intent of the House Republicans was to pass both halves," said a Blue America spokesman who would give only the pen name Gaius Publius. "Any vote for any piece was a vote for the whole package to succeed," he said in a phone interview Tuesday.

GOP Dysfunction And Failure Are Attracting Quality Candidates To Congressional Races

Back in February 34% of Americans were very confident that Ryan's plan to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act would make healthcare better. Does that sound like a small number of people? Since then, people have had a chance to see Ryan's concrete plans (TrumpCare) and according to the new Wall Street Journal/NBC poll that number has shrunk... to 8%. And a Washington Post poll shows something even more bizarre, namely that large numbers of Trump voters reject the actual core ideas around which the Republican health plan is premised. For example, a majority of these Trump voters-- just like normal people-- favor a national ban on hiking premiums on preexisting conditions. Turning this into a potentially even more toxic brew is the revelation that most voters in key swing states which Trump carried--Florida, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania-- now finally understand that Trump is a liar. Just over half of the Republicans in those states say he exaggerates the truth, while close to 70% of Democrats say he intentionally lies. Luckily for Señor Trumpanzee, most voters (84%) operate from an assumption that all Republican politicians lie and that he's isn't special in that way.

How many 2018 Republican-held House seats does this imperil? That same Wall Street Journal/NBC poll found that dissatisfaction with congressional Republicans in general and with Paul Ryan in particular is growing exponentially. Only 22% of voters now see Paul Ryan positively-- and nearly double that number have a negative impression of him. In February there was just a 1% gap between those who liked him and those who didn't. The gap is now 18%-- and not in Ryan's favor. Only one in five Americans think Congress-- completely controlled by the Republican Party-- is doing a satisfactory job.

Just in the last two days, more grassroots (as opposed to DCCC-imposed) Democratic congressional candidates have come on the radar. A progressive emergency room nurse, activist and former Riverbank city councilwoman, Dotty Nygard, tossed her hat into the ring for the CA-10 seat held by confused Republican Jeff Denham. The Central Valley district, which stretches from Tracy, Manteca and Riverbank in the north through Modesto and down to Turlock and Newman in the south, saw Obama win twice and Hillary beat Trump 48.5% to 45.5% while the DCCC screwed up the congressional races in this white minority district again and again and again. In her Facebook statement she said that "an elected representative should embody the ideals, strengths, and spirit of the people they represent. Equally important, they must understand the concerns and struggles we face as individuals and as a community. An elected official must show leadership and dedication to their constituents, rather than sacrifice our future to the highest bidder. Here's my pledge to you: I will bring back the caring, compassion, and community that is often lost in the mundane, indifferent, business-as-usual culture in Washington and our Political establishment. I am running for congress to say enough is enough on your behalf!"


NO MORE playing politics with our Healthcare,


NO MORE playing politics with our natural resources,


NO MORE playing politics with our children's education or our ability to earn a living wage and support our families.

"We deserve better! We need to preserve and protect the nation's leading agricultural industry here within our rich Central Valley soils. The future sustainability of our region hangs in the balance, and will be decided at the voting booth in 2018. We must embrace our diversity and respect the tradition of immigration at the core of our Nation's heritage. I will stand FOR you, and I will march WITH you! Our needs and values should NOT be lost in the political process but our voices should be heard THROUGH it."

Another crucial Central Valley race is starting to take shape due south of CA-10, down the 99 Freeway past Merced and Madera, you get to Fresno and Visalia, the two main cities in CA-22, Devin Nunes' district. The DCCC has never challenged Nunes but he's made such a spectacle of himself over Putin-Gate that interest in ending his career in Congress is now sky-high. Yesterday the first candidate to jump into the race was Fresno County prosecutor Andrew Janz, a 33 year old who told the Fresno Bee that he's "not a politician; I’ve never considered running for Congress until recently.

Republicans hold a significant voter registration advantage in the district-- 42.8 percent of voters identify themselves as Republicans, compared to 32.8 percent Democrats. But a significant proportion of the voters-- more than 19 percent-- listed no party preference on their registration as of February.

Janz said he’s undaunted and believes there may be some momentum building toward the 2018 election because of Trump’s volatile, confrontational style and proposals over health care and taxes. “I feel like I have a connection with the district,” he said. “I believe I share the values of a lot of the people in the district.”

While he’s a lifelong Democrat, “I’m not the type of person who votes the party line,” Janz said. “I’m willing to listen to anyone… I’m going to focus on building a coalition of progressives, moderates and people who share the values of the area.”

And Sunday, on the other side of the country, in western North Carolina, a potential Democratic superstar, Matt Coffay, announced his candidacy at a healthcare-focused town hall event in Waynesville. Matt, a leader of Our Revolution in North Carolina is taking on Freedom Caucus head man Mark Meadows in NC-11, a viciously gerrymandered district that is a prime example of what corrupted overly partisan legislators can do to undermine democracy. The district went for Romney 60.4-39.6% and then for Trump 63.2-34.0%. It was Trump's strongest score in the state. Coffay appears undaunted by the challenge.


At the event Sunday he told the crowd of several hundred that "America is at a crossroads. Our Republic is eroding into a country of partisan bickering and vast income inequality, with millions of hardworking people left behind by a changing economy. We need to sustain the activist energy that's emerged in Western North Carolina and carry it all the way through midterm elections. We’re going to build the biggest grassroots movement that the 11th District has ever seen, and that’s why we’re starting the campaign right now... I’m going to stand up to the health insurance industry and the pharmaceutical industry. I’m going to stand up and say that it’s time we raised the minimum to a living wage of $15 an hour, and that we need tuition free public college. We need infrastructure investment here in Western North Carolina, and we need the jobs that infrastructure investment will bring. With your help, we’re going to raise the money that we need, and we’re going to go all the way to Washington, D.C., to change the face of American politics."