An Open Letter to My Neighbor, Gov. Haley Barbour

Dear Governor Barbour,

As I sit here at home during this noon hour, gazing out over the manicured lawn of your ceremonial home, I can't help but ponder the monumental strides we as a nation made last month with the passage of health care insurance reform, and your subsequent response.  It deeply troubles me, and I'll explain why.

Growing up, I was fortunate enough to have parents who could protect me with health insurance coverage.  That insurance coverage gave me access to health care that, on two separate occasions, saved my very life.

This morning, I spent some time at Callaway High School here in Jackson. As I spoke to the children assembled there about making responsible choices in life, I could not help but think of the high likelihood that most of them would benefit greatly from the passage of health care insurance reform.  Afterwards, driving back through Jackson towards my office, I considered how some of the children I laughed with this morning would no doubt face medical problems that would now be addressed adequately only because of the legislation Congress passed last month.  And I was grateful.

Shortly after I returned to the office, I received word of a T.E.A. Party rally in Tupelo, at which a reported 1,500 people gathered to complain about taxes and the loss of their "freedom."  This growing movement of people dissatisfied with what they perceive to be unnecessary taxes fueled by wasteful government spending is no doubt appealing to you as an aspiring 2012 GOP presidential nominee.  I do not begrudge you that.  I do, however, take issue with you fighting the health care insurance reform that will forever improve the lives of the children I met with this morning.

As leader of one of our nation's most impoverished states, it must be troubling to you to be forced between taking positions that are best for Mississippi, and those that are popular within your party.  Health care insurance reform is undoubtedly a blessing for our fellow Mississippians.  It is equally certain that supporting it would damage any hopes you have for national office.  I truly empathize with you, and wish that you were not forced to choose between your personal aspirations and the good of your people.  However, my empathy, and almost certainly the compassion of history, fades when you choose poorly.

Governor, I ask that you not make the poor of Mississippi blood sacrifices on the altar of your presidential campaign.  End your threat to join the Florida lawsuit, and support the program that ensures our fellow Mississippians will have access to the medical care that will save their lives.

AG Jim Hood to Gov. Haley Barbour: Cool your jets, man

Immediately after passage of the new health care insurance reform legislation, Gov. Barbour issued an ultimatum to AG Hood, telling him to file suit against the federal government on behalf of the State of Mississippi by noon today, or else Barbour would go ahead and file it himself.

There are, of course, a couple of problems with this.  First, the bill's about 1000 pages long, so no one can say for certain what portions of it would be subject to legal challenge.  Second, the "fix" bill hasn't yet been passed, meaning that the legislation's still a moving target, which would make legal action premature at this point.  Third, the "legal" arguments put forward against the new law aren't very strong thus far.  In fact, they border on pathetic.  (Will Bardwell's got a great set of posts on this, here and here.)  Which brings us to the fourth point: Barbour's supposed to be against frivolous lawsuits, right?

Anyway, Hood says he needs more time to study the legislation and make a determination.  In a letter to Barbour today, Hood tells Barbour this.  In addition, and perhaps most interestingly, Hood tells Barbour that Barbour is not authorized to file suit on behalf of the State.  What happens if Barbour thumbs his nose at Hood and files suit anyway?

h/t Clarion-Ledger for the copy of the letter

State Rep. Steve Palazzo wants something unconstitutional done to fight unconstitutional healthcare reform

Here's something rather, umm, odd, from WLOX.  State Rep. Steven Palazzo thinks that the version of health care reform passed by the United States Senate on Christmas Eve is unconstitutional, and he wants AG Jim Hood to "take legal action."  He, of course, doesn't explain what he thinks is unconstitutional, nor does he tell us exactly what legal action he would have Hood take.  I'm pretty sure he fails to explain it because he simply doesn't know what would be unconstitutional about it, nor does he know what action Hood could take.  In fact, Palazzo's the one who is seeking something unconstitutional.

I assume most readers of this blog are familiar with the concept of ripeness and the prohibition of advisory opinions.  For those who are not, the doctrine of ripeness says that there has to actually be a controversy before a court can hear a case.  In essence, you can't have a lawsuit over something that may or may not happen in the future.  With respect to health care reform, no law has been passed.  (Surely Palazzo would understand how a bill becomes a law since he's in the legislature and all.)  In addition to ripeness, our U.S. Constitution prohibits advisory opinions by our federal courts.  Since no health care reform package has been enacted into law, any opinion by a federal court in this matter would be merely advisory.  So, what Palazzo is asking Hood to seek is, in fact, unconstitutional.  Oh, the irony.

But that's not all.  Palazzo goes on to say "We've all seen several Senators get paid off for their votes in exchange for hundreds of millions of dollars."  Really?  I must have missed that episode of Glen Beck.  Now, what I find truly interesting about that statement is that Palazzo's largest contributor (aside from himself and his family), is the Mississippi State Medical Association.  (The campaign finance reports with their contributions can be found here and here.)  In all, Mississippi State Medical has donated $6,000 to Palazzo, with $5,000 of that coming during the month leading up to the special election in 2006 in which Palazzo first won his seat.  Why is that important?  Well, Mississippi State Medical has been staunchly opposed to health care reform, and even recently decided to "de-unify" from the American Medical Association over that issue.

And Mississippi Republicans wonder why they can't gain a majority in either house of our state legislature, despite their overwhelming majority in statewide elections.  The bench apparently just ain't that deep.

Baby, What a Big Surprise! (Not)

While the health care reform debate is still raging, we should take a look at the financial backers of the "Party of No." Take Mitch McConnell, for example. OpenSecrets.org has compiled a list of the individuals and corporations that have contributed to the Senate Minority Leader's campaign committee and his leadership PAC (they do the same for all members of Congress).

In the 2010 election cycle, Sen. McConnell's leading contributor is . . . (drumroll please) Kindred Healthcare. Kindred was also McConnell's top supporter in the 2008 election cycle. Kindred describes itself as follows: "Kindred Healthcare through its subsidiaries operates long-term acute care hospitals, skilled nursing centers and a contract rehabilitation services business, Peoplefirst Rehabilitation Services, across the United States."

Kindred's disproportionate share of contributions is symptomatic of the outsized influence of health care and insurance special interests on the Senator's continued tenure. In the 2008 election cycle, Sen. McConnell's PAC received $590,835 from the health care industry. The insurance industry gave another $211,000.

Closer to home, Sen. Roger Wicker received $242,000 from health professionals, $170,200 from the insurance industry, and $75,550 from hospitals and nursing homes. That's a total of $487,750.

OpenSecrets doesn't have categories for "Americans with no health insurance because they lost their jobs," or "Americans with health insurance that has declined coverage when they needed it most." But somehow I suspect that Sen. McConnell and Sen. Wicker don't get nearly as much money from those folks . . .

Over The Line In The Health Care Debate

It's the Summer of Discontent for those who want to stop health care reform. Town Hall meetings for Representatives and Senators have been hijacked by protesters who have shouted any real discussion of issues into silence. Town Halls have turned into violent confrontations across the country. Death threats even forced the cancellation of a Town Hall in Vancouver, Washington.

While Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, says that criticizing the protesters shows that Democrats "don't want a debate over the merits," he has it exactly backward. The Town Hall Crybabies aren't wanting to discuss merits -- they use scare tactics (like Sarah Palin's infamous misrepresentation that "death panels" would decide if some one's elderly family member would receive end-of-life care) and refuse to allow anyone to respond to them, most often by shouting "Just Say No" during the discussion.

As we now know, these protests are not some "grassroots" explosion against health care reform. Instead, it is a coordinated, strategic attempt by conservatives to frustrate discussion:
Town Hall Action Memo



"Americans for Prosperity," an anti-health care group that should really be called "Prosperous Americans for Themselves," is organizing a bus tour to take protestors across the country. The "Patients First" group contends:

"We don't want legislators to come between them and their doctor. The relationship that exists between doctors and patients is sacred and should not be interfered with."

Imagine that. I guess Prosperous Americans have never had to get their health care pre-cleared by their insurance company before going to the hospital.

At Y'all Politics, the focus has been on Rep. Travis Childers, who has yet to declare himself on the President's proposal. And this time YP has gone too far. The two-minute video attack on Rep. Childers' visit to Israel is -- yes, I will say it -- Anti-Semitic. What else do you call an ad that plays Jewish music in the background, tells the Representative to "get a souvenir yarmulke" on the trip and shows pictures of orthodox Jews juxtaposed with Americans at Town Hall meetings? (Note: I am attacking the ad, not the website or its owner.)

Sid Salter finds a "liberal double standard" at play in the criticism of the Town Hall Crybabies.

Sorry, folks. This is not just "protest." Lest we forget, disruption of public meetings was part of Hitler's original strategy to undermine democratic debate in Weimar Germany. That's exactly what the "Brown Shirts" were formed to do:

Hitler also organized the Stormtroopers (S.A. or the Brown Shirts) to protect the Nazi meetings and disrupt the meetings of other parties, for example, the Communist Party.

See full article here.

You want a full debate on the merits of health care reform? Let's have one. Let's talk specific logistical issues of delivering high-quality health care to every American. Let's ask how many people have had some or all of their health care costs denied by their insurance company. Let's ask how many people have had to seek pre-clearance of a specific health care procedure by their insurance company. Let's ask how much of an average person's health care invoice is increased in order to pay the hospital, doctor, etc for the uncompensated treatment of uninsured Americans.

You want to scare people by calling health care reform "socialist" or playing Jewish music? Then the word for your tactics is un-American. Sometimes Nancy Pelosi is right.

Won't Be Fooled Again?

The Kaiser Foundation, started by the founders of the first HMO in America (and builders of the hospital where this writer was born) studies issues regarding delivery of health care in America. The Foundation has released a study of the history of the struggle for health care reform in the U.S. The report is facsinating, because it shows how many of the heroes of 20th Century American History (TR, FDR, Truman, etc) fought for universal health care, and how the special interests kept it from becoming a reality.

Now some of the same special interests (the AMA having seen the light) are trying to scare the American people into rejecting the Obama Administration's attempt to -- finally -- give the American people a right to health care. Will we be fooled again by slick marketing that tries to convince Americans that the current HMO and health insurance controlled health care system gives us "freedoms" that a government controlled system would take away?

How is it that Americans have a right to a lawyer, but not a right to a doctor (or nurse, medicine, etc)? If I had to choose, I'd take the right to a doctor any day. But why do we have to choose?

This report is worth pondering as we enter a month-long ad campaign to sink health care reform:

History of Health Care Reform (Kaiser)

Is the Opera Over Yet? Who Is This Canadian Woman Whining On TV?

My evening's enjoyment of Larry King's interview with Joe Jackson was disturbed by a commercial featuring this carping, whining Canadian woman claiming that she would have died if she had stayed in Canada after being diagnosed with a brain tumor. The woman, Shona Holmes, apparently went to the Mayo Clinic in Arizona and loved the treatment there. (She might have benefited from some bariatric surgery while she was there. Oh well.)

Turns out that the word "Big" in "The Big Lie" can modify both the speaker and the message. Daily Kos quotes the Mayo Clinic's press releases on Ms. Holmes' treatment:

"Dr. Naresh Patel, neurosurgeon, diagnosed Holmes as having a Rathke's cleft cyst (RCC). The rare, fluid-filled sac grows near the pituitary gland at the base of the brain and eventually can cause hormone and vision problems. Dr. Patel joined forces with Drs. David W. Dodick, neurologist, and Michael D. Whitaker, endocrinologist, to work on Holmes' case."

As Kos points out, Rathke's Cleft Cyst "is generally very treatable through minimally invasive surgery and is NOT a “brain tumor” as both Ms Holmes and Right wing hack writers contend. It's a fluid build-up and has nothing to do with cell division as occurs in Tumors."

And anyway, Ms. Holmes, NOBODY in Congress or the Administration is proposing a "Canadian-type" single-payer system of health care. What is being discussed is a "Public Option" that will allow currently uninsured people to CHOOSE to be covered by Government-subsidized health insurance. That, my dear, is a very different thing.

A recent editorial in The New York Post (which hasn't been accused of being liberal in at least a hundred years) explains:

But we do know that in many other sectors of the economy, government and private offerings happily compete and coexist. Well-established government options are available as backstops for millions of Americans, especially those without the money to afford any alternative - without denying customers who want to pay more for different or better services the right to buy what they want.

There's the government option in schooling. All across America, local and state governments, with increasing involvement by the feds (thanks to George W. Bush and No Child Left Behind), educate young people. All told, it costs us about $1 trillion a year. That hasn't kept 10% of students from enrolling in private schools and growing numbers from being home-schooled. Is government doing a particularly good job with its dominant market share? No - but the point here is that America is pretty comfortable with the powerful, effectively mandated, public sector role.

There's the government option in security. This one, like education, is in many respects a government-imposed monopoly. Keeping people safe has long been considered the quintessential public sector duty. That hasn't stopped businesses and individuals from supplementing government security with their own private providers.

There's the government option in shipping, the post office. The USPS is a quasi-governmental agency with special privileges. But that hasn't stopped FedEx and UPS from peeling away customers by offering premium services and greater convenience. Right now, the USPS, FedEx and UPS split the overnight delivery market share with about a third apiece. Cats and dogs, living together.

There's the government option in scientific research. Government agencies dole out most of the money seeding experiments in fields from basic physics and chemistry to energy and astronomy to biology. Through the National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation, in fact, government selects winners and losers. And by most accounts, it does a decent job.

There's the government option in travel. Amtrak has been propped up by the government for years; it competes with private sector planes and buses. Some Americans choose the train. Some choose other modes of transportation. The sky does not fall.

* * * *

There's the government option in retirement. We call it Social Security. To many elderly Americans, it's the only thing standing between them and poverty. None of this stifles private retirement plan innovation. And public-employee pension plans, run by government officials, regularly throw their weight around the private equity markets.

And, like it or not, there's already a sizeable government option at work in health care. Medicare, Medicaid and the Veterans Administration may be plagued with problems - just like, ahem, private health care - but, each in their way, do the job.

Thank you, New York Post. Not that single-payer systems are nearly as bad as Ms. Holmes thinks they are. After all, do you know any American women who have successfully delivered a newborn baby at age 60? I didn't think so.

Is the Opera over yet? Someone PLEASE tell the Fat Lady to stop singing. I want to go back to Joe Jackson trying to defend himself against the allegations of childhood abuse of Michael:

Asked about stories that he was abusive to his son as a child, Jackson said "Oh, that's a bunch of bull S. That's a bunch of bull S."

"You never physically harmed him?" King asked.

"Never. Never have. And I -- and I raised him just like you would raise your kids, you know? But harm Michael, for what? I have no reason. That's my son. I loved him and I still love him," Jackson said.

* * * *
While denying any child abuse, Joe Jackson's explanation did leave [open] the question of spanking:

"The media keep hollering about saying that I beat Michael. That's not true. You know what this beat started -- beat started in the slavery days. Where they used to beat the slaves and then they used to torture them. That's where this beating started. These slave masters, and that's where that come from. But, hey, there's a lot of people in America, Larry, a lot of people in America spank their kids, you know? They say they don't, they're lying. They're lying. Now, Michael was never beaten by me, I've never beaten at all."

Wow. Maybe Joe and Shona can hook-up. They'd be perfect together.