ProgressOhio

Looks like Jim Jordan still thinks the George Bush Health Care plan will work. Someone needs to tell him that we won and we need to move on. Here is his response to a letter I send him and my reply via a letter to the local papers.

June 2, 2009

Dear Steve:

Thank you for contacting me regarding health care. I appreciate you taking the time to share your concerns with me. 

The issue of health care is one of the most vital public policy debates today. One of my top priorities in Congress is to ensure that there is an environment in place that will allow affordable and accessible health care to our citizens. 

The Federal Government's current system of paying for health care results in, at times, an inefficient patchwork of subsidies and payments to providers. I believe one of the answers to rising prices and inefficiency is a move to market-oriented, patient-centered reforms.  Improving access to health coverage that individuals and families choose, thus empowering them through a consumer driven system, will better help people meet their health needs at a price they can afford. 

I have advocated a few initiatives that I believe will allow for better access to affordable care. Health Savings Accounts (HSA) are an innovative proposal, combining consumer driven ideals with individual responsibility, as a means to fund health benefits. HSAs are special accounts in which contributions are used to pay for current and future medical expenses. The accounts are owned by individuals, not employers, therefore, if the individual changes jobs, the portability of the HSA permits the individual to retain their same account. 

Another reform I favor is the Association Health Plan (AHP). These plans allow businesses the opportunity to band together and form large regional or national groups that can purchase health insurance for their employees. AHPs would create bargaining power with providers, uniformity of plans, freedom from costly state-mandated benefit packages, and lower overhead costs. AHPs represent a valuable tool for providing care to the rising number of uninsured Americans. 

In addition, Community Health Centers (CHC) are the country's single largest primary health care system with a strong reputation for providing stable medical services for patients who are otherwise unable to access primary health care. CHCs serve all residents regardless of their insurance status or ability to pay for their healthcare. I support the mission of community health centers and applaud the outstanding medical services they provide.

I hope you will find this information helpful. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any other concerns or questions you may have. You can reach us by phone at (202) 225-2676, or by e-mail through our website at http://jordan.house.gov. 

Sincerely,

Jim Jordan
Member of Congress

My reply

Dear Editor

Recently I wrote to my Congressman Jim Jordan about Health Care, he responded and I wanted to share my reply.

First thank you for your response to my concerns about Health Care Reform. I agree with you that Health care is one of the most vital public policy issues facing us. All of the polls show  this so your recognition of this issue is not surprising.

However I disagree with about everything you say will be the answer to moving forward. You attack the Federal  Government as being an “inefficient patchwork of subsidies and payments”. You must be talking about Medicare and Medicaid which are the primary sources of payments from the Federal government. You are wrong about this. Medicare and Medicaid are the most efficient and cost effective systems in the Health Care delivery system. Studies have shown that administrative costs in public plans are far lower than in the Private sector and public plans do a better job controlling costs than do private plans.

You advocate for HSA’s and AHP’s yet both of these options have been around for years and consumers are not flocking to them because they don’t work. HSA’s provide limited coverage and high deductibles which force consumers to go into bankruptcy or otherwise shift the cost of health care to the public. They work best with healthy individuals who don’t have high health care costs or pre-existing conditions which HSA plans limit coverage. AHP’s  have similar problems and take away public protections that consumers want and need.

Your solutions are not new and resemble the Bush Administrations answers to our problems, privatize  the profits and socialize the problems. This is not new and it is not responsible.

Finally, you say that you support the mission of the Community Health Centers, yet  when a recent bill was being considered which increased funding for these Centers, you voted against it.

 America is experiencing a health care crisis. Health care premiums have increased 73 percent over the last five years while wages have increased only 15 percent. Large manufacturers and neighborhood small businesses are struggling to remain competitive while paying for their employees' health care coverage, while 46 million Americans go without coverage of any kind.

Your solutions are not solutions at all but passing the buck and not engaging in this debate in a sincere way. Shame on you.

Steve Chaffin

1671 Weiss Ave.

Marion, Ohio 43302

The marketplace of ideas is being strangled.

After one year of service to the progressive community of Central Ohio--with virtually no warning and despite enormous support, Monday, December 22 will be the last day of progressive broadcasts at WVKO.

Six companies own 80% of our media outlets, but the majority of people "they serve" are not buying the conservative stations' rhetoric. Latin Catholic masses and other Catholic programming will replace WVKO programming.

I can barely perceive the [not-so] subtle message.

Congressman Pat Tiberi and David Robinson square off on the BAilout and Economy

*Note: NO! photo or video is available for this story. Please see “Pat Tiberi Seeks to Silence the Free Press” for details.

On Monday, September 29 Representative Pat Tiberi and Democratic challenger David Robinson faced off in their first debate. This was following at least four previously held events where “Our Congressman” had disappointed the 12th District electorate by being unable to attend while the Democratic challenger David Robinson maintained perfect debate attendance.

The Delaware, Ohio debate was held in a local vocational school. Tiberi flew in from Washington just hours after he went “His Own Way” and said NO! to the $700 Billion bailout package.

That evening, Tiberi confidently addressed the audience of approximately 150 Delawareans saying:

“We had a vote today that I told the President, 'NO!'

"Some say I can't tell the president, 'NO!'

"But I told my party leadership, 'NO!'

“Because at the end of the day, when I look into my daughter's eyes, it's about her.

"It's about the next generation of Americans. It's not about party. It's about doing the right thing.”

Based on his opposition to the bill, The Liberty Voice posted our support on our website saying, “We salute Pat Tiberi on this choice.”

The Delaware Gazette reported, “Tiberi felt the bill didn’t adequately protect consumers and was jammed through Congress.”

According to Tiberi on Monday, his NO! vote represented the will of his constituents. He said,

“Main Street wasn't protected in that bill. That's who I got the phone calls from.

"The phone calls from Central Ohio were AGAINST it!!!

“We've got to deal with the reality of what we can do, cause at the end of the day, guess who's going to pay for it--WE ARE!”

Economic collapse brings together the strangest bedfellows: Michael Moore and RINO Pat Tiberi. 

Despite Pat Tiberi's voting record which has handed taxpayer money over to no-bid contractors and often supported corporate welfare, Pat Tiberi decided to actually "go his own way" (despite a 93% lock-step record with President Bush).

This is ironically the same choice of Michael Moore.  We salute Pat Tiberi on this choice. I guess with $830,000 already in the Tiberi's WAR chest from financial and security companies over the past eight years, Tiberi would rather finally side with his voting block (and just in time for the election!) rather than again rewarding bad behavior.  It remains to be seen however if the voters of Ohio's 12th Congressional District will have amnesia of the trillions of no-bid appropriations and corporate bailouts Tiberi has already approved.

Here is an excerpt from Michael Moore's proposal:

The richest 400 Americans -- that's right, just four hundred people -- own MORE than the bottom 150 million Americans combined. 400 rich Americans have got more stashed away than half the entire country! Their combined net worth is $1.6 trillion. During the eight years of the Bush Administration, their wealth has increased by nearly $700 billion -- the same amount that they are now demanding we give to them for the "bailout."

Why don't they just spend the money they made under Bush to bail themselves out? They'd still have nearly a trillion dollars left over to spread amongst themselves! Of course, they are not going to do that -- at least not voluntarily.

George W. Bush was handed a $127 billion surplus when Bill Clinton left office. Because that money was OUR money and not his, he did what the rich prefer to do -- spend it and never look back. Now we have a $9.5 trillion debt. Why on earth would we even think of giving these robber barons any more of our money?

I would like to propose my own bailout plan. My suggestions, listed below, are predicated on the singular and simple belief that the rich must pull themselves up by their own platinum bootstraps.

Sorry, fellows, but you drilled it into our heads one too many times: There... is... no... free... lunch. And thank you for encouraging us to hate people on welfare! So, there will be no handouts from us to you.

Thelibertyvoice.com

“I, Pat Tiberi, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

 

Amendment I

“Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…”

 

As the publisher of The Liberty Voice, I had made preparations to record the September 29th public debate sponsored by the League of Women Voters, The Delaware Gazette and the Farm Bureau. This forum for local, state and federal candidates was held in a publicly-funded local school. As I am not able to write every word live, it is necessary that I record such events so that I may accurately transcribe what is said.

This was an especially important service to perform this evening, as “our Congressman” Pat Tiberi has repeatedly refused to answer our questions concerning his voting record which illustrates his gross and repeated violations of the US Constitution.

Lately, I have recorded similar debates sponsored by two of the above-mentioned organizations without incident, so what changed?

Incumbent Pat Tiberi was there.

In the past four debates–all of which had invited “our Congressman” to come, he never bothered to make an appearance. However, it was anticipated that this would be a widely-attended debate, so there was great pressure for him to make a showing. Judging by what happened later in the evening, as a condition for Tiberi’s long-awaited participation in the debates and unbeknownst to me, Tiberi pressured the sponsoring groups to forbid the use of any recording devises–without exception granted even to the press.

As I was setting up my equipment before the debate began, I was asked to put my video recording devise away, as it was an event rule that all involved had agreed to in advance. When I challenged this, the organizers–in order to “prevent making a scene” –which most definitely did make a scene, reluctantly agreed that I could record.

Central Ohio residents were treated to yet more of the Columbus Dispatch Printing Company’s (CDPC) ‘fair and balanced’ judgment; Pat Tiberi, a republican currently holding the 12th Congressional seat at the People’s House, has gotten the local daily printing company’s endorsement for Congress.

Hopefully, CDPC readers will remember the past ‘judgment’ of the company’s endorsements–including George W. Bush for president in both 2000 and 2004, when shortly before the 2004 election, even the CDPC seemed to know better. In the midst of this latest fill-in-the-blank-shock-and-awe crisis, that presidential endorsement has shown where the loyalties of the Wolfe family media empire really LIE. Much like Washington serves its lobbyists, the CDPC likewise serves the corporations who pay for thier ads.

The fact that a local printing company’s public informational monopoly would find it within their job description to endorse a candidate before even informing the population of where all candidates stand on the issues that affect them most, is discrediting to not only to the endorsement, but raises questions as to the credibility of the CDPC itself.

The CDPC wrote, “Tiberi [is a] moderate Republican, reasonable in [his] approaches to policy issues and capable of the nitty-gritty legislative work that’s required.”

The most glaring omission in this statement is that Tiberi has never sponsored and passed even one piece of legislation in his nearly eight years of [dis]service.

By this same CDPC standard, Tiberi’s voting record indicates that he is as “moderate” as he is “capable”!

Let’s look at his “moderate” and “reasonable approach” from his congressional voting record, for as even the CDPC noted, “most candidates are fiscal conservatives during the campaign season; the proof is what happens when they get to Capitol Hill.”

Exactly.

The question is, why didn’t the CDPC look at that “proof” and relate that to their readers? The [t]reason is that Tiberi’s record is far from moderate.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121969145343270091.html?mod=hpp_us_inside_today

Published August 26, 2008, by The Wall Street Journal.

Walk into almost any hotel here this week and you can find an odd sight: Liberal Democrats starting their day by lobbying moderate and conservative Democrats.

The lobbyists are members of the Progressive Democrats of America, an activist group working to keep the party true to liberal priorities, and they have been assigned to every hotel housing Democratic convention delegates.

"At breakfast, where they go to get their talking points [from the national party], we will be there," says Tim Carpenter, a veteran of Democratic campaigns and national director of the PDA.

The fact that Mr. Carpenter and his cohorts feel compelled to buttonhole other Democrats to push a liberal agenda is a sign of a quiet tension lurking within the Democratic Party. That tension is a potential complication for Sen. Barack Obama now, and it is certain to be one for him and his party if he is elected president.

Progressives--the term of art for the party's liberal wing--contend, with some justification, that they have provided much of the fuel that could propel the party to win control of the White House and both houses of Congress for the first time in 16 years. They have contributed and raised large amounts of money, fired up their troops on the Internet, and generally are thrilled at the prospect of a Democratic sweep.

Yet they aren't sure the party they think they are leading to victory is really following them. Sen. Obama has been essentially nonideological in his campaign, has made much of his desire to reach across the ideological spectrum to Republicans, and spent several weeks this summer moving away from the left and toward the center on issues ranging from warrantless wiretaps to abortion to gun control.

More than that, liberals realize that if the party expands its control of the House and Senate, it may do so by electing moderate and conservative Democrats who vanquish sitting Republicans. Thus, while Democratic control in Congress could expand, liberal influence may not.

So the progressive wing of the party has gathered in Denver uncertain whether to celebrate or fight for its due.

"The party doesn't get it," says Mr. Carpenter, who worked on the presidential campaigns of Jesse Jackson, former California Gov. Jerry Brown and former President Bill Clinton. "That's why organizations like the PDA have to organize and energize."

The big question, of course, is: Exactly what do progressives want? For many, the short answer is: Quick and unconditional withdrawal from Iraq, no parallel buildup in Afghanistan, a reduction in the military budget, a broad rollback of the Bush tax cuts, an increase in corporate taxes and a shift of those funds to social spending, a huge government drive for alternative energy sources, and a much bigger government role in providing health care.

Sen. Obama doesn't exactly oppose any of those impulses, but he hasn't fully bought into all of them, either. He'd roll back some but not all Bush tax cuts, for instance, and is a long way from backing the kind of government-funded universal health-insurance system many progressives want.

Rob Kall, a radio host and editor of liberal Web site OpEdNews, says flatly, "Liberals and progressives don't see him as liberal. Universally among liberals and leftists, they seem him as a centrist."

That may be fine with the Obama campaign, which likely calculates that victory hinges more on the candidate's ability to win over independents and former supporters of Sen. Hillary Clinton than the party's liberal base, which figures to go along for the ride. Still, Mr. Kall says some members of his Web site are drifting toward third-party candidates Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney or questioning how hard they want to work this fall.

The most likely campaign effect, though, is continued pressure on Sen. Obama through the fall to move left on key issues.

Here is what PDA has planned in Denver to help further the shift left:

PROGRESSIVE CENTRAL at the DNC CONVENTION

Join PDA and The Nation in the heart of Denver at the Central Presbyterian Church, 1660 Sherman St.--a progressive oasis, where like-minded individuals can meet to network, share ideas, learn from the country's foremost progressives, and help build the progressive movement.

Paid parking is located nearby; but we recommend public transportation, visit http://www.denver.com/transport/masstransit.html

Check back frequently for additions or changes to panels. Panelists are still confirming availability.

To volunteer, contact DNCvolunteers@pdamerica.org.

For more information or to make a hardship request, contact Denver@pdamerica.org.

Progressive Democrats of America-Ohio, a founding member of Citizens Save Our Sewers, a coalition of unions, citizens, and grassroots groups, is working hard to turn back a privatization "scheme" by Akron Democratic Mayor Don Plusquellic.  (PDA-Ohio's Mary Nichols-Rhodes, a rotating chair of SOS meetings, is in the green Citizens SOS t-shirt in the left of the picture). 

The mayor is hiding his intentions behind the smokescreen of providing education, but the smoke is a weak haze to those who follow the national movement to privatize local water and sewer infrastructure to multi-national corporations.  Being the former head of the U.S. Conference of Mayors (http://www.usmayors.org/), the Akron mayor as well as mayors from across the United States are lobbied hard by these multi-national corps to turn over their public assets to them.  The mayor's idea did not come out of a dream in the the middle of the night, though clandestine the way he is working to sell off the city's assets may seem like a night-time job. If anyone looks into the Kalamazoo plan the mayor heralds as an example of succes, he will see that the Mayor's plan is nothing like Kalamazoo's.  The mayor is maybe hoping no one will notice. 

Well, since the mayor uses a baseball analogy in the following article, we have to say that the mayor is flailing at what our coalition is throwing him. Strike one: we worked and got the petition on the ballot. Strike two:  the public is against the transfer, regardless of his smoke and mirrors game.

The voters will throw the third pitch come November. Now our job is to educate the voters as to the truth to our initiative against the confusion the mayor hopes to draw by adding two related initatives of his own on the ballot.

We of PDA thank Progress Ohio from following our work and publicizing it.

See article below:

http://www.ohio.com/news/top_stories/27120384.html

http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/2008/08/victorious-on-platform-progressive-dems.html

Note: Though the list of actions to put an article relating to "healthcare" at the Progress Ohio posting site  has one option, namely "Affordable Healthcare," we of PDA believe the word "affordable" relates directly to involvement of the insurance industry in health care delivery. Being for a "single-payer, doctor-patient run, publicly funded and privately run health care system" we seek the elimination of the grip that the insurance industry has over health care and would prefer that "affordable" be taken out of the posting list and replaced with simply the word "healthcare."  Just a friendly suggestion for accuracies sake.

Impeachment Weekend Update:
Taking Our Message to Denver

Dear Friend of Impeachment,

In case you missed it, Rep. Robert Wexler gave us a great shout out. Here's part of it:

Over the past 7 months, PDA and its members have been true leaders in our campaign to pursue impeachment. Many, many of you have supported my efforts by signing up on WexlerWantsHearings.com, and I am thankful that some of you have kindly contributed to my re-election fight.

I am looking forward to being at Progressive Central in Denver to discuss this subject (and others). If you are in town, I hope you come and join the discussion. 

Reserve your space, here.

Join us for the whole week if you can, otherwise please make plans to join me on Thursday (scroll down) for a special day devoted to oversight, investigations, and impeachment. Rep. Keith Ellison will be joining me on the morning panel, and in the afternoon Rep. Ellison; Leslie Cagan of United for Peace and Justice; Steve Cobble, Institute for Policy Studies Fellow; and The Nation’s John Nichols will continue the discussion on constitutional law.

Your support and encouragement are inspiring. PDA is often under-recognized for its work on many different progressive causes, but many Members of Congress (especially those of us on the Judiciary Committee) are well aware of its contributions and leadership.

The Hill--the top "insider" publication for Members of Congress and staffers--picked up the story and echoed the shout out to us. Read the article here.

See all the details about "Progressive Central" and make your reservations to join us in Denver here.

Contact the national and local media: Demand they cover impeachment.

Show your support for impeachment: Order buttons, bumper stickers, shirts and ImpeachMINTS.

Yours for Accountability,

Tim Carpenter, PDA National Director
Joanne O'Neill, PDA New Jersey State Co-Coordinator
William Crain, PDA Montana State Coordinator
Mike Hersh, PDA National Staff

http://www.ohio.com/editorial/commentary/26899979.html

Who supports universal health care? Published on Wednesday, Aug 13, 2008  By Marie Cocco

WASHINGTON: Before the energy-price crisis, before the mortgage crisis, before the credit crisis and the banking crisis, there was the crisis in health insurance that is in reality a crisis in care. This crisis has deepened in recent years as the number of uninsured has climbed and out-of-pocket costs for those still with insurance have soared. It has become common knowledge that a serious illness — even among those with insurance — can plunge families into bankruptcy.

Though ''problems paying for gas'' topped the financial challenges people listed in the most recent Kaiser Family Foundation health tracking poll, ''problems paying for health care and health insurance'' ranked third — just behind job concerns but well ahead of paying for food, dealing with credit card debt and paying the mortgage.

So it is downright shocking that there was a tussle over what the 2008 Democratic platform would say about the party's generations-long, bedrock commitment to health care for all Americans. In short, presumptive nominee Barack Obama did not draft a statement keeping that pledge. He presented instead his plan as one that would provide ''access to'' affordable and comprehensive health care.

A coalition of liberal activists and Hillary Clinton supporters managed to negotiate a change so that the platform says the party is ''united behind a commitment that every American man, woman and child be guaranteed to have affordable, comprehensive health care.'' Inclusion of the word ''guaranteed'' was the crucial point.

On the surface, this may look like a victory for Clinton supporters or even for the far larger group — that is, millions of Democrats — who have long believed that the promise of guaranteed, universal health care is a fundamental principle of their party.

I am less certain, and it's not because I know that politicians can discard party platforms faster than they rid themselves of scandal-tainted donors.

It is because Obama did not campaign during the primaries on a plan that would achieve universal coverage, and indeed, excoriated Clinton for her proposal to mandate that everyone have it.

In fact, even some of those involved in achieving the small health-care victory take little solace from it. ''I'm not sure that Obama will actually pursue the same kind of idea that we had inserted in the platform,'' says Donna Smith, who lobbied the platform panel as a member of Progressive Democrats of America. ''I think we will have to pursue our congressional representatives to bring legislation forward.''

Smith is not a Clinton delegate, or even a convention delegate. She and her husband, Larry, were featured in the Michael Moore film Sicko because they were forced into bankruptcy and lost their home trying to pay the out-of-pocket costs stemming from her treatment for uterine cancer and his for heart disease. '

'Our purpose was not to attack the party,'' says Smith, who says she wants Obama to be elected and describes herself and her husband as ''good and loyal Democrats.'' But certain lines have to be drawn.

''To say you're going to provide affordable coverage to people is not the same as giving them health care,'' she says. ''Just because you have insurance coverage does not guarantee you access to the care that you and your doctor decide you need. And people with insurance understand that.''

 Most Democrats do, too.

In 1992, the party's platform said everyone should have ''universal'' access to health care ''not as a privilege, but as a right.'' In 1996, a party chastened after the collapse of President Bill Clinton's health care initiative nonetheless committed itself to ''ensuring that Americans have access to affordable, high-quality health care.'' In 2000, the platform noted that ''for 50 years, the Democratic Party has been engaged in a battle to provide the kind of health care a great nation owes its people.'' In 2004, the platform said this: ''We believe that health care is a right and not a privilege.''

Securing that right is as important now as it was four, or even 50, years ago. When gas prices recede, when the housing market stabilizes and fears of imminent job losses ebb, there will still be an unconscionable gap between the glory of American medical science and the ability of millions of people to get the most basic care.

Obama avoided an intra-party brawl over the health platform. The unanswerable question is whether he will be as determined, as president, to take on the much larger — and excruciatingly harder — health-care fight.

Cocco writes for the Washington Post Writers Group. She can be e-mailed at

mariecocco@washpost.com.  

Question:  Do you want the Democratic Party’s platform for 2008 to reflect “real” change we can believe in? 

Question:  Would you like a bit of the audacity of truth to complement that bit of hope? 

Well, in Pittsburgh, PDA is working to make truthful change the center of the Democratic Platform.

Almost 300 Delegates have signed onto the “Guaranteed Healthcare for All” language to be added to the DNC Platform.  Guaranteed, comprehensive healthcare without financial barriers, that allows healthcare providers to make healthcare decisions based on what is best for the patient.  A healthcare platform that represents real reform that progressive Democrats can believe in.

PDA’s Healthcare Not Warfare Co-Chairs Norm Solomon and Donna Smith brought their message to the Cleveland DNC Platform meeting on August 1 and 2nd but were not given time to speak.

And on Saturday, the DNC Platform committee meets for the last time before the Democratic Party Convention in Denver (August 24-28)

Last Question: Will you join us in Pittsburgh at the national-state health care coalition press conference being held before the DNC Platform meeting?

http://www.michaelmoore.com/mustread/index.php?id=1028

---------------------------

Progressive Democrats of America are setting up Progressive Central in Denver during the Democratic National Convention.  This is a chance for Progressives to meet and participate in meaningful activities. PDA and Nation Magazine, are presenting the

“Nation Conversation Series”- daily conversations moderated by John Nichols with incredible guests such as Tom Hayden, Rep. John Conyers, Rep. Barbara Lee, Rep.

Lynne Woolsey, and many others.  Every afternoon, panel discussions include people such as Laura Flanders, Jeff Cohen, Norm Solomon, Medea Benjamin (CodePink),

Mimi Kennedy, Katrina vanden Heuvel, and so many more.  Join PDA in Denver August 24-28!

https://www.thedatabank.com/dpg/309/donate.asp?formid=meet&c=6468205

Introduction by Michael Carano

It seems that our drive for single-payer is being diffused by those pushing to get voters out for the Democratic candidate, Obama. Now electing Obama is a good thing, so don’t get me wrong, but my fear is that the Dems will be using the health care card in 2008 as they did the Irag Occupation card in 2006 in order to get votes.

In the process, as you will see by the two articles I post, one from a Labor Party writer whom I know and respect, and the other from a woman in Florida who has insight into what is going on and how it will confuse voters about what is the best solution for real health care reform (single-payer, specifically Rep, John Conyers H.R. 676) and the fuzzy incremental approaches as put forth by Obama and the new coalition mentioned in the articles.

Let us not be confused as to what the new coalition is proposing, and let us be clear as to why we support single-payer over these wishy-washy plans proposed under the guise of “Universal Health Care” and their real shortcomings, they being bandaids to the real problem that a true universal, single-payer health care plan will cure.

So let's start acting with a bit of honesty in the debate.   Since we tend to lead first then educate when possible, this for your consumption. Our hope is that you will start being honest brokers in the debate and begin dealing fairly with Progressive Democrats of America and quit--like your precursors--as seeing us as a threat.  We only are a threat to the those who will hold back real reform. Thus, this is a kind of request too.  Please don't undermine our work through co-opting it, and reference our lead when applicable, as any honest group would do, as in Rep. Suttons stop-loss work; our being a prime  mover behind of Citizens Save Our Sewers Coalition in Akron, and our consistent and unremitting anti-war work, as in our past March organizing.  We are the good guys, so please quite seeing us a threat.  We understand what you are about. We just expect you to be honest about it. We will always be honest with what we are about.  Thus, on with the education portion of our work:

By Miles Mogulescu
Huffington Post
July 10, 2008