Insurance That Doesn't Insure

The New York Times basically goes where Michael Moore went in his film SiCKo, finding that the problems with the health care system are just as bad for those who have insurance as those who don't. Insurance companies have the financial incentive to deliver as little on their promises of coverage as possible - it's as simple as that:

Health insurance is supposed to offer protection — both medically and financially. But as it turns out, an estimated three-quarters of people who are pushed into personal bankruptcy by medical problems actually had insurance when they got sick or were injured.

And so, even as Washington tries to cover the tens of millions of Americans without medical insurance, many health policy experts say simply giving everyone an insurance card will not be enough to fix what is wrong with the system.

Too many other people already have coverage so meager that a medical crisis means financial calamity.

The real stories in this piece will break your heart. Families forced into bankruptcy because insurers found a way to exclude their medical treatment from their coverage. Insurers selling coverage that is essentially worthless. Plans that cap reimbursement for an operation at $5,000, when most operations cost several times that at the very least.

The crack solution from Republicans and conservaDems to this issue of insurers issuing worthless insurance is to create a monopoly for their industry, pay subsidies to people to funnel over to them, and not allow any public insurance option to compete for fear that it would actually lower prices for consumers. That's literally their concern:

(Lieberman's) two key objections are:

"If we create a public option, the public is going to end up paying for it."

"My fear is...[health care providers] would end up getting levels of reimbursement from the public plan...comparable to what they get today from Medicaid."

He thinks that Medicare/Medicaid bargaining rates are insulting to providers, but rising health care costs are OK for working stiffs. Lieberman, by the way, promised universal health care during his 2006 campaign for Senate. Of course, in practice, he's tried to kill universal health care ever since 1993. And insurance companies dominate Connecticut.

This is part of a general strategy by Republicans and moderates to reward the very people who caused the problems that "reform" legislation seeks to solve. It makes sense for the corporations pulling the strings, but nobody else.

Chris Dodd Comes Around To Supporting Gay Marriage

Chris Dodd's running for Senate re-election in a state that has already legalized gay marriage, in legislation eventually signed by a popular Republican Governor. So him coming out in support of gay marriage probably has a political significance. But he frames it on the level of wanting to properly meet the call of history.

While I’ve long been for extending every benefit of marriage to same-sex couples, I have in the past drawn a distinction between a marriage-like status (“civil unions”) and full marriage rights.

The reason was simple: I was raised to believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. And as many other Americans have realized as they’ve struggled to reconcile the principle of fairness with the lessons they learned early in life, that’s not an easy thing to overcome.

But the fact that I was raised a certain way just isn’t a good enough reason to stand in the way of fairness anymore.

The Connecticut Supreme Court, of course, has ruled that such a distinction holds no merit under the law. And the Court is right [...]

My young daughters are growing up in a different reality than I did. Our family knows many same-sex couples – our neighbors in Connecticut, members of my staff, parents of their schoolmates. Some are now married because the Connecticut Supreme Court and our state legislature have made same-sex marriage legal in our state.

But to my daughters, these couples are married simply because they love each other and want to build a life together. That’s what we’ve taught them. The things that make those families different from their own pale in comparison to the commitments that bind those couples together.

And, really, that’s what marriage should be. It’s about rights and responsibilities and, most of all, love.

Even with gay marriage a reality in Connecticut, among those in the middle who would decide his re-election, this stand probably doesn't help all that much, although I'm not sure it hurts either. Dodd's simply trying to get this right. So good for him; others in the Democratic Party who probably share his views are afraid to speak out this way. And the rest of those lagging behind Dodd ought to catch up.

Cracks In The Facade

I guess not EVERYONE is enamored of comity and bipartisanship as a cover for backstabbing and despicable behavior. First, Patrick Leahy announced his opposition to Joe Lieberman keeping his committee chairmanship.

Money quote #1: "I’m one who does not feel somebody should be rewarded with a major chairmanship after doing what he did.."

Money quote #2: But I felt that some of the attacks that he was involved in against Senator Obama .... I thought they went way beyond the pale, that they were not fair, that they were not legitimate, that they perpetuated some of these horrible myths that were run about Senator Obama

Money quote #3: I would feel that had I done something similar that I would not be Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the next Congress.

That's the key. You can look at the committee assignments as basically the spoils for the victor. Lieberman lost. He ran against the nominee of the party and some of its Senate candidates. And yet somehow, people want to reward him for that behavior with a committee chair.

Not Leahy. And not Bernie Sanders either.

"To reward Senator Lieberman with a major committee chairmanship would be a slap in the face of millions of Americans who worked tirelessly for Barack Obama and who want to see real change in our country," Sanders in the statement sent our way by his office.

"Appointing someone to a major post who led the opposition to everything we are fighting for is not 'change we can believe in,'" Sanders continued. "I very much hope that Senator Lieberman stays in the Democratic caucus and is successful in regaining the confidence of those whom he has disappointed. This is not a time, however, in which he should be rewarded with a major committee chairmanship."

Joe Lieberman is an unpopular figure in Connecticut, too, not just among Vermont Senators. His re-elect number is only 35. Ned Lamont would crush him if the election were held today. What Markos said:

So Lieberman can threaten all he wants to caucus with Republicans if he doesn't get everything he wants. Fact is, he's in shaky electoral territory, and it would only get worse if he decided to become a Republican.

Call his bluff. Give him another committee chairmanship in an area where his ideology matches up with the Democratic Party. He won't leave the Democratic caucus. It would be career suicide.

No one likes Joe except for Republicans, yet there are the Senate Dems, once again ready to capitulate. Apparently, old habits die hard.

But maybe they'll prove us wrong and do the right thing.

At least two of them will.

Marriage Equality: A Movement In Search Of A Campaign

The numerous issues inside the No on 8 campaign, and their disappointing mismanagement, has finally bubbled up into the traditional media (we were talking about it a week ago). The SacBee writes about the trouble at the top:

Key staff members – including the campaign manager – were replaced in the final weeks as polls turned dramatically against the No side. Their replacements say they found an effort that was too timid, slow to react, without a radio campaign or a strategy to reach out to African Americans, a group that ultimately supported the measure by more than 2 to 1.

Gay marriage supporters are looking to the courts to overturn the decision. But if another political campaign is waged, said Dennis Mangers, co-chairman of the No on 8 Northern California Committee, "we'll have to do better."

No on 8 campaign manager Steve Smith was shoved aside three weeks before Election Day, after he was slow to counter TV ads in which the measure's supporters claimed that same-sex marriage would be promoted in schools if the measure failed.

And Smith was replaced by a committee - half the consultant class in Sacramento went through the revolving door of that campaign. And they set about to answer unchallenged ads from the Yes campaign and get on radio. But the message remained somewhat timid, and the campaign didn't put much effort into minority outreach or field operations. Late volunteers were told to go out on a street corner and wave signs.

What's remarkable is that the best activism and creativity I've seen from the LGBT community in years has come in the immediate AFTERMATH of this vote. The talent was out there, but wasn't channeled during the campaign. Activists are using wiki-based technology to set up a national day of action on November 15 called The Impact. A comedy troup in LA used the Yes campaign's own words to "advocate" for prohibiting divorce.

See more funny videos at Funny or Die

And Utah lawmakers are turning the tables on the Mormon church by using their alleged tolerance to make major advances for gay rights in the Beehive State:

Leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have said they do not object to rights for same-sex couples, as long as those rights do not infringe on the integrity of the traditional family.

Now, gay-rights activists and at least five Utah legislators are asking the Church to demonstrate its conviction.

The group Equality Utah says the Church made the invitation, and they're accepting it. "The LDS Church says it does not oppose same-sex couples receiving such rights as hospitalization and medical care, fair housing rights or probate rights," said Mike Thompson, executive director of Equality Utah.

These actions are useful to the future of marriage equality nationwide, and could be the backbone of a smarter, more grassroots movement. Why were they not tapped at all for the No on 8 campaign?

Yesterday, Connecticut granted marriage equality to all its citizens, offering a glimmer of hope. I am convinced that justice will eventually prevail. But you have to treat the campaign like a campaign, and use the assets at your disposal.

Long Arc of History, Justice, Etc.

I had heard that Connecticut was going to wait out a decision on same-sex marriage until after the elections to see what happened with Prop. 8. But the state Supreme Court couldn't wait.

HARTFORD, Conn. - Connecticut's Supreme Court ruled Friday that same-sex couples have the right to marry, making the state the third behind Massachusetts and California to legalize such unions.

The divided court ruled 4-3 that gay and lesbian couples cannot be denied the freedom to marry under the state constitution, and Connecticut's civil unions law does not provide those couples with the same rights as heterosexual couples.

"I can't believe it. We're thrilled, we're absolutely overjoyed. We're finally going to be able, after 33 years, to get married," said Janet Peck of Colchester, who was a plaintiff with her partner, Carole Conklin.

"Interpreting our state constitutional provisions in accordance with firmly established equal protection principles leads inevitably to the conclusion that gay persons are entitled to marry the otherwise qualified same sex partner of their choice," Justice Richard N. Palmer wrote in the majority opinion that overturned a lower court finding.

"To decide otherwise would require us to apply one set of constitutional principles to gay persons and another to all others," Palmer wrote.

You really can't claim to promote a freedom agenda while wanting to curtail freedom to select members of society. The concept of freedom isn't about freedom for everything you LIKE - it's about diversity and tolerance and mutual respect. This latest civil rights crusade allows people of good faith to be as true as the ideals they like to wear on their sleeves.

Otherwise, they can descend to the levels of bigotry.

Donate to No on Prop. 8 in the name of freedom and equality.

Proud To Be A Republican

I guess history will judge him better.

President George W. Bush is scheduled to be the guest of honor April 25 at a fund-raiser for State Sen. David Cappiello at the Kent home of former Secretary of State Dr. Henry Kissinger and his wife, Nancy.

The cost of attending the main reception is $1,000 per person and the cost of having a photo taken with Mr. Bush is $10,000 per photo.

Area Republicans and local town officials who have been invited to, or informed of, the president's visit to a small rural town known for its art galleries, chocolate and scenic beauty were told not to publicize or discuss the event.

The only place where George Bush doesn't have to be ashamed to be George Bush is in Washington, DC. That should tell you something.

...although even in some parts of Washington, they know Bush is full of crap. Not that Gilbert Arenas should be given a political analysts' job anytime soon, but this is funny:

It’s funny, those two don’t play the same position, but DeShawn told Caron that he’ll guard LeBron (sounds like a children’s nursery school rhyme) so that Caron can rest his legs. DeShawn was like, “I’ll run him around and play D on him and get the fouls so you can just go off on the other end.” So we have our own little gimmicks we’re brewing. With a team like the Cavaliers and a player like LeBron, all you need is distractions. We got to be Bush. We got to be Bush-league. We’re having everybody talking about the war, when we just want to get the oil. We’re Bushing it. That’s all we’re doing. We’re trying distract LeBron over here while we try to get some wins over there. That’s all we’re doing.

Obama's Connecticut Win, And What It Means For Our Movement

(the disclosure is I voted for Obama, but I would write this even if I was a Hillary supporter)

The one thing that didn't match up in last night's results, to me, was Barack Obama's victory in Connecticut. Hillary Clinton's leads in key northeastern states (Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York) all seemed to hold up - EXCEPT for Connecticut. He won despite exit polling showing that 59% of the electorate was female, and 30% was over 60. Why? What did this mean?

The New York Times thinks it has the answer.

Ned Lamont was not on the ballot, but his presence was nonetheless felt in Connecticut’s Democratic presidential primary.

It was the young, the rich and voters who called Iraq the top issue who helped provide the margin of victory for Senator Barack Obama in Connecticut, according to surveys of voters leaving the polls, narrowly defeating Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in her own backyard.

With 96 percent of the votes counted, Mr. Obama had 50 percent of the vote, compared with 47 percent for Mrs. Clinton. The exit polls, conducted by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International, showed Mr. Obama doing well among what some in that state might call the “Ned Lamont coalition.”

I am not trying to say that the Ned Lamont endorsement, which came late after Lamont went in strong for Chris Dodd, had an impact. No, I would argue it was not Lamont but THE MOVEMENT THAT LAMONT LEFT BEHIND that helped Obama the most. Bunches of new voters were energized by that campaign in 2006. It appears that they didn't go back to their couches and stew after the general election loss to Joe Lieberman, they stuck around and became part of a movement for change.

“The Lamont campaign was part of my political awakening,” said Bill Dauphin, 47, a technical writer who attended the Obama campaign’s victory party Tuesday night at the Sweet Jane Bar in Hartford. “That’s the thing that got me off the sofa and onto the street.” [...]

In a state where Mrs. Clinton consistently held double-digit poll leads until mid-January, Mr. Obama ran strong among voters who made up their minds in the last month, the last week and the last three days, the exit poll showed. Thousands of unaffiliated Connecticut voters joined the Democratic Party in recent weeks in order to cast ballots in the primary, and among the nearly 20 percent of voters surveyed on Tuesday who identified themselves as independents, Mr. Obama won 6 of every 10 votes.

My Left Nutmeg has a bit more.

While I actually have zero interest in linking Clinton to Lieberman, it must be said (as Scarce mentioned last night) that this primary cycle in CT cemented the realignment that happened in 2006 – Clinton's campaign in the state was made up of many of Lieberman's most enthusiastic post-primary Dem supporters (you know the list), and the results from last night showed their weakness.

That DeLauro and Larson joined up with Obama surprised me when I first heard of their endorsements – but in retrospect, it looks like they at least in part interpreted the political tides in a correct and savvy fashion. (That's why they're in Congress, and I'm just some schmoe. Ah well :)

Winning begets more winning. Ned Lamont, Don Williams, Chris Murphy, Rosa DeLauro, and John Larson are mainstream CT Democrats. I feel pretty good being in that coalition, personally.

It's frankly unfair to Clinton to link her to Lieberman; nothing could be further from the truth. But her war vote was probably a factor, as Iraq has been a galvanizing cause for the progressive movement.

This is why we have to keep fighting in these primary races. Real and vital infrastructure does get left behind every time we do a primary in one of these states, and it has residual effects. If we had a "50-state Ned Lamont strategy," the amount of activists and energy that would engender would be incalculable. It's a seeding strategy, where new leaders are cultivated.

Now, in a way there's a wistful quality to this, because Obama kind of screwed Lamont in 2006 by not going to bat for him completely. It's one thing to see a progressive movement defy odds, and another to direct where it channels itself. But over time, I believe those activists will get things right. I'm less concerned about who won and who lost here than the idea that a progressive movement borne from the ashes of a primary challenge can overcome structural disadvantages and win.