So I set up a meeting with my Representative

[BanginJimmy]

So I set up a meeting with my Representative for this coming Friday. I used Obama's propaganda team's clout to get the meeting so we will see when they follow up with me to confirm. This is supposed to be to relay my support for socialized healthcare and they even sent me an itemized list of talking points but I accidentally closed the window before I DL'd it. Either way, I am sure I wont agree with it.

Instead I plan to mention my absolute opposition to this bill. I also plan to make my feelings known about Geithner's proposal to raise the debt limit. I figure that if the average American family should be forced to reduce spending when they lose income, the federal govt should do the same. For my wife, I plan to ask about getting pork money into this area for animal welfare programs such as spay and neuter campaigns.

I was wondering if anyone else from District 11 has any issues they would like to bring up with the Congressman. If you do, please post up or PM me. I will give you my email addy for you to send me a rundown of what you want. I will not limit this to republican or democrat. You write it, I will give it to him, regardless of my personal feelings on the subject. I only ask that you include your full name, address, and a way to contact you, whether it be phone or email.

BTW, if you do write something, please make it look at least partly intelligent and informed. Your cause will simply be ignored if his staff is forced to read 3 pages of misspellings, sentence fragments, and disjointed thoughts.

[jorgen]

Yea I got a few things.
How about the importance of auditing the fed?
How about the deregulation that allowed financial institutions to engage in fraud?
How about the fact that our jobs are being shipped overseas?
Globalization is EVIL. I have come to the conclusion that given complete independence as a nation, or globalization... well, its kinda obvious isn't it? WE DONT NEED TO GLOBALIZE!
Pelosi is a bitch and should be thrown out.
Obama has filled his office with crooks.
Let them know that revolution is coming, whether peaceful or violent, it is coming.

This healthcare reform is not about healthcare. It's about control. We all know that. I don't want the government deciding what kind of care I get. Do you want to be drug tested by the government to get healthcare? And lets not forget the cost effectiveness of euthanasia...

[Total_Blender]

Do you want to be drug tested by the government to get healthcare? And lets not forget the cost effectiveness of euthanasia...

Complete fucking hogwash. Let me shoot all this crazy "deather" bullshit down RIGHT NOW.

Page 424-425 of the "health care plan" :

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...3200ih.txt.pdf

‘‘(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list
13 of national and State-specific resources to assist con
14 sumers and their families with advance care plan
15 ning, including the national toll-free hotline, the ad
16 vance care planning clearinghouses, and State legal
17 service organizations (including those funded
18 through the Older Americans Act of 1965).
19 ‘‘(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the
20 continuum of end-of-life services and supports avail
21 able, including palliative care and hospice, and bene
22 fits for such services and supports that are available
23 under this title.

Basically what all this means is that for seniors having a health crisis, they can get a free consultation with medical professionals to discuss their options for continuing life support, creating a living will, etc etc. Such consultations are completely voluntary, it is the patients choice to have one or not.

Something like this would be useful in preventing families from getting into a 'Terri Schaivo" situation in the event that their insurance/medicare/VA/etc won't cover such a consultation. Not only does it make it easier for families, but think about how much is spent on legal battles over stuff like this and the costs that can be saved.

This addition to the bill was introduced by Georgia's own Republican Senator Johnny Isakson, then taken waaaaaay out of context by 527's and advocacy groups owned by the insurance and drug companies.

My family has dealt with a few terminal diseases over the years (my mother is fighting ALS now), and its always hard trying to decide what you think someone wanted because that person wasn't able to make their own arrangements before they passed. This addition to the health care bill will help people live and die with the dignity and respect they deserve. I'm all for it

[BanginJimmy]

Please refrain from injecting your conspiracy theories into my threads. Maybe I will start a conspiracy theory thread for you and prefered duck so you 2 could feed each other's baseless fears.

[preferredduck]

Please refrain from injecting your conspiracy theories into my threads. Maybe I will start a conspiracy theory thread for you and prefered duck so you 2 could feed each other's baseless fears.

wow it's a conspiracy. answer this. do you really think the insurance companies and pharma companies are gonna just "conform" to the gov't because of a bill. hmm i don't think so. so let me explain my statement. the same people will still be making tons of money even on healthcare reform just as they have made record profits over the last 20 years. hello i just saw a commercial where the insurance companies were endorsing this to happen. record profits or healthcare reform. . .how about both and guess who gets screwed. Us.

-also straight out of everybodies mouth is you will have to pay for your gov't insurance. most of the uninsured can't afford it even if it were $10 a month so it defeats the purpose.

-no conspiracies here just simple logic.

-have you watched the non scripted town hall meetings. i am going to mine locally on the 16th and i am taking my camcorder. i will attend the one you go to also and you will see most people are outraged and there will be a big turnout i promise.

-do you not find it the slightest bit funny that this 1100 page bill was supposed to be passed 24 hours afer it was released right before summer break. sounds like the bailouts (and every other obama/bush bill) in recent years.

-also there really is no plan yet, just money being borrowed for a cause that has no roadmap because how many specific things have been set in stone on this plan.

--look at the financial sector and all that mess and then think healthcare.

Also you can let him know you want all elected officials on the same plan as us, not the super health plan they get for them and their families for life that covers things that our best insurance won't cover.

[zspeed24]

I'd like to question all of this but im sure they are the same kind of questions that you have as well...

(BTW stole this from a yahoo finance article.)

Page 30, line 23: There will be a government committee that decides what treatments you get.

Page 50, line 152: Health care will be provided to all non-U.S. citizens, illegal or otherwise.

Page 59, lines 21-24: Government will have direct access to bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.

Page 110, lines 13-18: An excise tax will be levied on all goods from companies not offering government health care.

Page 239, lines 14-24: Government will reduce physician services for Medicaid. (Does this hurt the poor and elderly?)

Page 304, lines 17-19: Government does not have to protect your private information.

Page 427, lines 15-24: Government mandates programs for orders for end of life.

Page 429, lines 10-12: "Advance care consultation" may include an order for end-of-life plans.

Page 438, Section 1236: The government will develop a patient decision-making aid program that you and your doctor will use.

Page 660-671: "Doctors in Residency" -- the government will tell you where your residency will be

[Total_Blender]

I'd like to question all of this but im sure they are the same kind of questions that you have as well...

(BTW stole this from a yahoo finance article.)

Most of that stuff isn't any different from health care under a private insurance company. Committees that determine what treatment you get, access to bank account for EFT's, etc etc. Private insurance companies do stuff like that every day.

I didn't find a lot of the content from specific lines you posted in the text of the bill. The one thing I did find worth commenting on was this:

"Page 427, lines 15-24: Government mandates programs for orders for end of life."

Which I posted about above. Its a voluntary free consultation for health professionals to discuss life support/living will options. THATS ALL. Any "orders" are orders that the patient decides and are carried out in the event of a life support situation. Also, read the whole paragraph where it talks about state laws, etc

Alot of the stuff in the bill sounds crazy when you cherry pick one or two lines and read them out-of-context. Thats what the various right-wing 527's and "advocacy groups" are doing, just trying to scare people.

[zspeed24]

Being a small business owner that cannot afford to provide healthcare for my employees im still concerned by the penalties i will face because of this...

[bu villain]

congrats on taking action on your beliefs (although a little less so for doing it under false pretenses) but why would you ask for pork? I'm assuming you are opposed to it... or was that a joke. Anyways, good luck.

[BanginJimmy]

congrats on taking action on your beliefs (although a little less so for doing it under false pretenses) but why would you ask for pork? I'm assuming you are opposed to it... or was that a joke. Anyways, good luck.

Ever try to get a meeting with a congressman without having your overly fat checkbook wide open? It is nearly impossible. Then this opportunity opened up and I thought I would take it.

As for pork, that is my bit of hypocrisy. I am against pork in all forms, but hell, everyone is is doing it right?

[jorgen]

If Pelosi can call me a Nazi for not understanding, or opposing healthcare reform, then WHY shouldn't I be afraid? The correct statement would have been "These people just don't understand the bill, and in time, we will try and clear these misunderstandings"
Not calling Americans Nazi's.

"Government mandates programs for orders for end of life"
I'm sorry, just fucking read that a few times and tell me it doesn't scare you.

[Total_Blender]

"Government mandates programs for orders for end of life"
I'm sorry, just fucking read that a few times and tell me it doesn't scare you.

I read it, along with the entirety of the section on consultations. The particular phrase above is NOWHERE in the text of the legislation. Those are your words (or Limbaugh/Billo/Hannity/Beck/Alex Jones's)... not the text of the bill.


These are just consultations, and voluntary ones at that. As for whether the elderly get dropped from coverage... how is that different from private insurance? People get dropped from private insurance all the time.

Are you guys really that much in love with the insurance companies? Do you really think that insurance companies are squeaky clean do-no-wrong organizations that never deny/limit treatment to anyone?

[Tracy]

"Government mandates programs for orders for end of life"
I'm sorry, just fucking read that a few times and tell me it doesn't scare you.

I read pg 425 about 50 times after my friend called me to tell me about this above quote. I never found it. They already have the counseling available, it will just be paid for now.

[David88vert]

Here is a question.
If we are taxed in order to support government healthcare, will the government program cover abortions? If so, we are essentially funding it, and doctors that refuse on personal grounds could possibly be subject to government sanctions.

Another question.
If the program runs low on funds in the future (trimming of budget, etc), and a 95 year old is diagnosed with cancer, who determines if she should be given treatment. Could treatment or testing be denied by the government? Would the "end of life counseling" be biased in any way to favor a recommendation of non-treatment?

[preferredduck]

Here is a question.
If we are taxed in order to support government healthcare, will the government program cover abortions? If so, we are essentially funding it, and doctors that refuse on personal grounds could possibly be subject to government sanctions.

Another question.
If the program runs low on funds in the future (trimming of budget, etc), and a 95 year old is diagnosed with cancer, who determines if she should be given treatment. Could treatment or testing be denied by the government? Would the "end of life counseling" be biased in any way to favor a recommendation of non-treatment?

sadly the answer is the same with all insurance companies and hospitals in the current system. it comes down to the bottom line and trust me we have people who die before getting treatment in our wonderful healthcare system and if the gov't takes over i don't see it changing. maybe it would be worse. who knows.

[BanginJimmy]

David both of those questions are similar in content to questions I already plan on asking. Right after I ask if he has read the entire bill

[Total_Blender]

David both of those questions are similar in content to questions I already plan on asking. Right after I ask if he has read the entire bill

Ask him how much money him and his PACs are getting from pharma and the insurance companies.

Edit... its a lot :

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicia...760&cycle=2010

http://www.votesmart.org/finance.php?can_id=17644

Top Sectors

Health $434,931 Finance/Insur/RealEst $202,000 Other $126,450 Misc Business $116,200 Lawyers & Lobbyists $72,699 Construction $68,950 Communic/Electronics $47,050 Ideology/Single-Issue $46,972 Transportation $35,199 Defense $34,500 More from OpenSecrets.org
Top Industries

Health Professionals $359,281 Retired $107,350 Real Estate $82,950 Lawyers/Law Firms $59,799 Insurance $41,950 Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $41,400 Republican/Conservative $38,550 Commercial Banks $37,150 General Contractors $31,950 Computers/Internet $29,700

[BanginJimmy]

Ask him how much money him and his PACs are getting from pharma and the insurance companies.

Edit... its a lot :

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicia...760&cycle=2010

http://www.votesmart.org/finance.php?can_id=17644

Top Sectors

Health $434,931 Finance/Insur/RealEst $202,000 Other $126,450 Misc Business $116,200 Lawyers & Lobbyists $72,699 Construction $68,950 Communic/Electronics $47,050 Ideology/Single-Issue $46,972 Transportation $35,199 Defense $34,500 More from OpenSecrets.org
Top Industries

Health Professionals $359,281 Retired $107,350 Real Estate $82,950 Lawyers/Law Firms $59,799 Insurance $41,950 Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $41,400 Republican/Conservative $38,550 Commercial Banks $37,150 General Contractors $31,950 Computers/Internet $29,700

Now look at your site and look at the money liberals are getting paid by unions and trial lawyers. Both sides are equally corrupt

[Total_Blender]

Now look at your site and look at the money liberals are getting paid by unions and trial lawyers. Both sides are equally corrupt

I'm not saying anyone out there in politics is clean in their campaign finances. Pelosi and Frank have heir hands in the cookie jar of the insurance money too.

The thing is, the unions and trail lawyers aren't backing 527's that are encouraging citizens to be rude/disruptive at their town halls. Some of these groups go as far as to distribute instructions for town hall participants to be rude and confrontational. These are the same "advocacy groups" that are just fronts for big pharma and big insurance.

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/9481224/...on-Memo-Sample

Conservative talking heads like Rush and Hannity are pretty much encouraging people to be disruptive.

Hannity: "Now, so far at these town hall meetings, you're doing terrific." [Fox News' The Shawn Hannity Show, 8/3/09]

"It doesn't matter to me one way or the other [if the protests are coordinated]. The people who are showing up are genuinely angry. And if their transportation is being facilitated -- about damn time. You've got to take these people on the way they play the game. The aggressor sets the rules in a conflict." [Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show, 8/3/09]

The goal of the conservative interests here is simply to block reform at all costs, not to offer any solution of their own. The longer the process is stalled, the more money the puppet-masters behind the drug and insurance companies can rake in. Rising costs be damned, the Republicans just want to sabatoge the whole works and maintain the status quo.

[jorgen]

Look, I do agree that healthcare should be reformed to benefit everyone.
But do we really need to rush the first thing that comes our way in? And do we really need to do it this fast? If they had their way, this would have happened already.
What is wrong with slowing down, and looking at ALL options?

[BanginJimmy]

Blender that entire post was right out of the liberal talking points handbook. You love to bring up context when someone makes a liberal look like a fool, yet you use a single line out of what was probably a 5 to 10 minute monologue. Especially in the case of Hannity's quote. He could have been talking about the respectful ones that are asking very pointed and specific question. And no the goal os conservatives is not to block reform, it is to block run away spending and socialized healthcare.

How about that dem from Douglasville that was yellinh at a constituant. He was more worrieds about a road than defending his position on healthcare.

[Total_Blender]

Hannity and his buddy Dick Morris pretty much praise the people disrupting the town halls here. Listen as the lady disrespects Arlen Specter (she didn't really have a question, she was just ranting) and Dick says "we gotta sign her up".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsImVGsFlmA

I read the full monologue from Rush, and he is praising the rowdies. Theres really not much of a context past what is spelled out in the quote.

[preferredduck]

Hannity and his buddy Dick Morris pretty much praise the people disrupting the town halls here. Listen as the lady disrespects Arlen Specter (she didn't really have a question, she was just ranting) and Dick says "we gotta sign her up".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsImVGsFlmA

I read the full monologue from Rush, and he is praising the rowdies. Theres really not much of a context past what is spelled out in the quote.

people are angry because we are fed up with trillions being spent and being lied to many times. we dont want to see another trillion dollar bill just get rubber stamped through congress to be our law because we all know they don't follow the same rules as us, or tax codes for that matter. the country is at a breaking point and taxes will go up somewhere in this equation.

[BanginJimmy]

I don't see it as disrespect, I see it as telling the plain truth. She was correct on EVERY point she made. She did have a question though. She asked what he was going to do to bring us back to the original scope of the Constitution.

[Total_Blender]

. She asked what he was going to do to bring us back to the original scope of the Constitution.

There are enumerated powers and implied powers. The elastic clause, the commerce clause, and their interpretations are too much to discuss in a town hall format. Whose to say what the "original scope" of the constitution is... like any good governing document, it adapts and evolves with changing circumstances. The fact that its had 27 amendments is testament to that. The lady was just trying to be condescending.

[geoff]

i would like to know how in the world bigger government and giving them more power helps the american peopel

[BanginJimmy]

Well I got there for the meeting and it was a waste of time. Should have gone the hard route. My "meeting" was never scheduled with the congressman.

[zspeed24]

Thats BS!

[David88vert]

This is why Congressman David Scott was able to say that no one ever met with him. He doesn't allow it, neither do other Congressmen. They just want power without responsibility.

[BanginJimmy]

I completely agree they are just in it for the power, but there are a very few good people that do manage to make it into office. The problem is, they either get sick of the corruption and quit or a typical politician using typical political tricks spends more money and beats them.

[David88vert]

I completely agree they are just in it for the power, but there are a very few good people that do manage to make it into office. The problem is, they either get sick of the corruption and quit or a typical politician using typical political tricks spends more money and beats them.

The funny part is that pelnty of people can name the corrupt ones, but people have trouble naming honest politicians......

[bu villain]

That's sucks that you didn't get to meet with him. Obviously its impossible for a congressman to meet with every constituent and I honestly don't know if there is a realistic and feasible way for every individual to be heard. It's unfortunate but that's why we do need lobbies (although their downsides are pretty obvious these days).

[David88vert]

That's sucks that you didn't get to meet with him. Obviously its impossible for a congressman to meet with every constituent and I honestly don't know if there is a realistic and feasible way for every individual to be heard. It's unfortunate but that's why we do need lobbies (although their downsides are pretty obvious these days).

It is obviously completely possible for every single Congressman to have an open town hall meeting with his constituents once a month, with a different topic each month. Unfortunately, not one Congressman takes his job seriously enough to do it. Why would a Congressman need to listen to any lobby then?

[zspeed24]

Aren't these politicians in congress supposed to be our REPRESENTATIVES? I mean i understand they can't agree with every constituent but they should at least make a concerted effort to represent the people in their districts. Although some of the districts are drawn in such a way that it is nearly impossible or at least improbable that this would happen.

[Total_Blender]

Phil "Gangrene" Gingrey was on Hardball yesterday, pretty much encouraging people to bring guns to the town hall meetings. I know its a second amendment right and all, but why would you need to be visibly armed for a debate? What kind of message does that send... "agree with us or we will shoot you in the motherfucking face?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWqAWTIdLuU

I'm considering buying a gun myself to protect myself from all the wingnuts/militias/McVeigh wannabees, etc out there.

[bu villain]

It is obviously completely possible for every single Congressman to have an open town hall meeting with his constituents once a month, with a different topic each month. Unfortunately, not one Congressman takes his job seriously enough to do it. Why would a Congressman need to listen to any lobby then?

I completely agree with everything with the last sentence. I wasn't saying that representatives shouldn't try to stay in touch with their constituents, only that I don't know what the best way to do it is (although I'm sure 1on1 meetings is not the answer). But I think you'll agree that not every constituent can fit into a town hall meeting and certainly there isn't enough time to each give their opinion. Also, there are more than 12 topics that people care about. That is why lobbies are necessary, because they can represent a large group of people who have a common interest.

Aren't these politicians in congress supposed to be our REPRESENTATIVES? I mean i understand they can't agree with every constituent but they should at least make a concerted effort to represent the people in their districts. Although some of the districts are drawn in such a way that it is nearly impossible or at least improbable that this would happen.

Agreed. I didn't mean to imply they should do nothing...see my response to David above.

[David88vert]

IBut I think you'll agree that not every constituent can fit into a town hall meeting and certainly there isn't enough time to each give their opinion. Also, there are more than 12 topics that people care about. That is why lobbies are necessary, because they can represent a large group of people who have a common interest.

Of course not, but they can address most of the major questions. They currently don't even attempt to make an effort though.

Lobbies typically represent special interest groups. Should special interest groups determine the governing of the majority? Do we need that?

[bu villain]

Of course not, but they can address most of the major questions. They currently don't even attempt to make an effort though.

Once again...agreed. You seem as if you are taking my uncertainty about the best way to do it as meaning that I don't think they should bother trying...that's not the case.

Lobbies typically represent special interest groups. Should special interest groups determine the governing of the majority? Do we need that?

Lobbies by definition always (not typically) represent special interest groups (NRA=gun rights, ACLU=civil liberties, etc). Should they be the only voices that politicians listen to? Of course not, but they are important in a democratic society (especially in one as large as ours).

[zspeed24]

No need for armed panthers outside of polling places either... just saying

[Total_Blender]

No need for armed panthers outside of polling places either... just saying

Yeah, when the Panthers show up with clubs everyone has a fit, but when the militia wackos show up with both pistols and long guns, they are just "exercising their rights".