Arkansas Blog

I remember 2005, when the Senate was operated with near-German like precision and John Cornyn was leading the charge about judicial nominees receiving an "up or down" vote. He said the "up or down" vote was important to our democracy. I wonder if any of the villagers will ask them about that on today's shows?? I suppose arguing against the filibuster is so 2005.

Great job Blanche, by waiting to the last minute, you have shown that you are a thoughtful and deliberative person. I am sure that this will help you greatly with republican voters in Arkansas.

Wouldn't it be fun if some dem senator would say something along these lines: "...middle class Americans deserve an up or down vote..."

ONe more bit of snark...

We should thank Blanche's owners at Blue Cross Blue Shield for allowing her to make this vote.

She didn't have to be in this spotlight position. I suspect she avoided taking a position because she thought that something/someone would kill reform before she had to do anything, and so she could safely toss out teabagger talking points and stay in the good graces of the administration at the same time. That didn't happen, and now she finds herself torn between a rock (her major campaign contributors) and a hard place (men, women and children dying in her district for lack of health care).

I do remember Blanche said she had a problem with how to pay for the program. Certainly, that's an issue.
BUT.
There is the side issue which popped up about extending patent protection for drug companies so we can continue to pay the highest prices in the world. Why? So they can have enough money to create new drugs, of course.
Uh, like the drugs many are now creating that are but a combination of two of their existing drugs? Let's see. Ten bucks plus ten bucks (a figure pulled out of thin air, I'll admit) -- what you might pay for two existing drugs as generics -- equals $150 or $200 for the "new" combo drug? SAY WHAT?
Then there are a myriad of other protectionist schemes aimed at the medical establishment, primarily in my opinion, the insurance industry.
No doubt there are plenty of similar instances. Like how come hospital personnel will automatically order a CT scan for the same thing a clinic doc orders a plain vanilla x-ray?
Seems to me there is a BUNCH of gravy that could be spread around.

If health insurance companies were around back in the day, can you imagine what Jesus would've said?

Legally, like any corporation, they have to place the financial interests of stockholders first, which in this case is the life-and-death of their policy holders.

I accidentally saw most of Lincoln's speech last night on C-SPAN. She sounded pretty good, for someone telling me she's still not going to vote in my interests. She rose a tiny bit in my estimation.

I didn't hear her speech, but she is quoted as saying, "Rather than create an entirely new government-run health care plan to compete with private insurers, I support health insurance reform that focuses on changing the rules of our existing employer-based health insurance system."

It seems to me absolutely, fundamentally what is wrong with our healthy insurance system that it is employer-based -- when there can be no connection between employment or non-employment (for whatever reason) and the need and right to basic health care. And it seems to me that, if you take the position that government-run is always inferior to private, investor-owned, profit-making enterprise, no matter what is to be produced, you cannot logically ask voters to make you part of government. So, whatever Ms. Lincoln does from here on out, she has lost my vote for any public office.

Snapback,

Click for the speech. Grab a barf bag.

Mom doesn't follow politics really, she sees politicians on the 6 pm news and that's it. She thought both senators Lincoln and Pryor were Republicans. She was shocked when I told her they are officially Democrats.

I missed her speech, too, but with dial-up there's no hope of hearing it that way.
Remember when papers ran the complete text of important speeches? Oh, never mind, that's another issue beaten to death. Rightly.
Soooo, I guess I'll go look for it online. Got my Wally World bag ready -- no holes in it that I can see so I should be ready.

Remember the reason Miss Blanche is in the hip pocket of the insurance companies is that her husband is a physician who makes a lot more money than she does. Living expenses are high in our nation's Capitol.
If she filibusters, the true Tea-Party (Doctor's Wife) in her will have won out. She won't get my vote, my family's vote nor the vote of anybody who'll sit still while I explain how she kicked the poor to the side - all for money.
Lt. Gov Halter looks better every day.

Thanks, government cheese, for the link to the speech -- and for the warning that I would need a barf bag!

Ok, let's say I have a line of credit. I go out and buy a house I can't afford, furnish and decorate it a la Southern Living, buy a car I can't afford, take a vacation to the Caribbean, and then head to the most expensive clothing store and buy a complete wardrobe. Following that I need to go down to Walgreens and buy my kid a prescription.

Which of these made my debt excessive? The prescription?

Tell me again why we can't afford to provide basic health care for all our citizens?

You democrats making excuses or looking for good reasons Blanche held out for the best deal big insurance and pharma could garner reminds me of a teabagger talking about how intelligent Sara Palin is.

You are just starting at an impossible place.

Lincoln refused to discuss the issue on merit all year... trying to twist her tiny talking points into meaningful politics or twisting this bill into being worthy of passage misses the real point.

We are the most expensive in the world with the worst levels of health in our overall population now... and we will be the worst with skyrocketing prices far into the future if this bill passes.

Thanks be to every AR politician.

Throw them all out!

Sen Blanche nailed one point really well-

"The Republicans have sought to revive their political party by opposing any real solution to our nation's
healthcare crisis."

.

"...Blanche held out for the best deal big insurance and pharma could garner"

Please do tell...what deal?

There are no restrictions on profits for big insurance and pharma... there are no negotiating powers in government plans.. even pharma and big insurance have promised to continue raising prices. All these subsidies for po and middle income folks will go to private insurance and pharma... paying the highest prices in the world. Read the Baucus bill (Lincoln's committee).

We are rewarding and increasing the monsters who got us here.. what good can come of this?

Under this bill you will find we are paying the criminals to keep looting us.

Do you know what turns a rabid Rwinger into a pussycat the fastest?

I have about 4 old friends who turned 65 in the past year. All were staunch wingnuts.
One immediately had his long-postponed heart surgery because under his private insurance he knew he
would have been canceled after having it and having paid $2000 month for his private insurance.

Another old rw friend had is postponed neck surgery to relieve unbearable headaches. His wife's work insurance company had refused to cover the $50,000 procedure. Medicare covered it.

I'm waiting on others to fall in line as they too see the benefits of gub-mint sponsored, single payer insurance. It sure makes a body peaceful to know you won't lose your hearth and home because of one surgery.

None of my four acquaintances ever read Ronald Reagan's numerous speeches about the evils of Medicare. That's the Democrats' fault. They should have been mailed to every household with 50+ residents every year in 1980.

So now, Max Brantley freely hands real Democrats the bottom line they should ask Blanche and Boozman and Ross every year before every election: Do you support Medicare or do you support the ideas of Reagan?

.

So...what we have is the Baucus Bill?

Mandating the purchase of coverage by most individual, create insurance exchanges through which certain individuals and families could purchase coverage, in some cases with the help of federal subsidies.

Significantly expand Medicaid eligibility, substantially reduce the growth of Medicare's payment rates for most nonphysician services, and eliminate the 21% cut in the Medicare physicians' fees that would otherwise take effect January 1, 2010.

Reductions in physicians' fees scheduled for future years are left untouched by the bill - including a 25% cut slated to take effect January 1, 2011.

It's not really possible to fully understand what's wrong with Blanche Lincoln, but most of us know something is wrong with her and rather than try to fix her.....we need to boot her.

We don't need to replace her with the mental midget Republicans who have lined up. What we need is Bill Halter to the rescue. Look what he's accomplished in his usual do-nothing job as Lt. Gov. Imagine what he could do with a real job....like Senator from the state of Arkansas. Bill Halter '10!

Would Blanche support Medicare if she were around in 1965?
Absolutely not.Her husband is a physician.
The physicians back then were even more against Medicare than they are against this health care bill today.
What was the result?
Physicians started buying vacation homes, fancy cars, big houses and starting other businesses from all the money they made off the program from business they either didn't get before or were uncompensated.
This bill will also be the retirement plan for physicians that they don't have now.
They're just too greedy to recognize it.
Yesterday's free clinic in Little Rock shows that people are going without basic health care because they can't afford it.
If I were a physician, I might start thinking about my eternal retirement plan. You know what the Bible says about a rich man.

Big L, in addition to asking Ross, Lincoln and Boozman the question "Do you support Medicare?" a natural followup would be "Are you aware that Medicare is government run?".

bejeeus, re proposed cuts in physicians' Medicare fees- I read recently that since 2002 Congress has refused to lower such fees as required by previous legislation. So every year when Congress votes on this, the cumulative total going back to 2002 is the amount physicians' fees would decrease unless Congress votes once again to waive that requirement. In other words 21% represents 7 years of decreases, none of which has been allowed to take effect. It's turned into kind of a game in Congress.