Senator Watch – Page 11

Slamming it down our throat

Apparently the die is cast in the Senate, and it appears by Christmas they’ll pass a health care bill that no sane person wants. (Obviously my friends over at Progressive Delmarva are probably jumping for joy.) But how are they getting it passed? Good old pork and special interest politics.

If the 2,074 page original bill wasn’t good enough, how about 373 more pages dumped on an unsuspecting public in the middle of the night by Harry Reid and company? It features early Christmas presents like the federal government picking up the tab for Medicaid expansion in the state of Nebraska (to buy Sen. Ben Nelson’s vote) and a new university hospital in Connecticut for Sen. Chris Dodd – who’s up for re-election next year – courtesy of you and I. Makes you wonder whether any goodies were placed in the bill for Maryland and Delaware – probably not because our Senators are Democrat hacks who swallowed the Kool-Aid early and were already behind this measure.

And it’s probable that the final product will look more like the Senate bill than the House one because changing too much supposedly risks that precious 60-vote majority in the Senate – at least that’s the conventional wisdom.

But let’s face facts here – the House has plenty of votes to spare on the Democratic side so they can afford to lose a few ‘Blue Dogs’ along the way. They will fall in line with the Senate version – some will do it kicking and screaming, but it will be done. Democrats face the same dilemma that conservative Republicans faced with President Bush when he wanted budget-busting entitlements in that it’s hard to go against the titular leader of your party even if you don’t agree with him. And Bush didn’t play Chicago-style politics like Obama and Rahm Emanuel do.

So it’s likely that 2010 will dawn with the passage of this so-called major achievement, for which I’m sure historians will someday see as another milestone on a once-great republic’s road to ruin. Democrats and the CBO can claim this bill will be “deficit-neutral” all they want but common practice in Washington is throwing that out the window – after all, now we’re paying one state’s Medicaid, another state’s hospital, and assorted other bribes for affirmative votes.

It tells me that the only principle Senate Democrats have is the principle of selling out taxpayers to buy votes. After all, they don’t have to live with the system they’ll create.

A message for Virginians

Since I’m sitting here on the Eastern Shore of Maryland, perhaps this means that Vince Haley at American Solutions attended the Tim Kaine School of Geography, but I suppose we could imagine him talking about Senators Mikulski and Cardin. Wait, no we can’t.

The fate of government run healthcare may be decided by your Senator, Jim Webb.

So far, many of the worst parts of the Senate’s health bill have been defeated, as the public option and Medicare expansion now look to be dead.

However, the Senate bill is still a government takeover of the health system, and Senator Webb must continue to hear from you and every other Virginian, that a government takeover of healthcare is unacceptable.

So you can stay informed and share information with your family, friends and neighbors, here are 5 facts that you should know about the current Senate healthcare bill (H.R. 3590):

Medicare Cuts. The bill would cut Medicare by $500 billion, and millions of seniors would lose access to Medicare Advantage plans.

Higher Health Insurance Premiums. As confirmed by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the bill would result in non-group premium increases of $300 per year for individuals and $2,500 per year for families.

Higher Healthcare Costs. The current Senate bill, like the one passed by Speaker Pelosi in the U.S. House, would increase healthcare costs, not lower them.

Lost Coverage. As confirmed by the CBO, up to 10 million people would lose their employer-provided healthcare coverage.

More and More Spending. Actually, $2.5 trillion worth, in its first 10 years of implementation, increasing our national debt even more.

If you think that these 5 facts added together would create a worse future for you and all Virginians, make sure you let Senator Webb know that he should vote against the health bill, including, and especially including, voting against the procedural motion known as cloture which will end debate on the bill.

The cloture motion to end debate is a critical procedural vote that requires 60 votes. If Senator Webb votes in favor of such a cloture motion vote, that would mean he is effectively voting in favor of the bill no matter if he votes against the bill on the vote for final passage (which requires only 51 votes for passage). With his support on cloture, he would allow this terrible bill to advance.

Don’t be fooled and please be sure that Senator Webb and his staff hear clearly from you on this point. If you don’t want Senator Webb to support this bill, be clear in your phone call to tell his staff that you want him to vote against the vote on the cloture motion to end debate.

Yeah, I guess we in Maryland could substitute Cardin and Mikulski for Webb, although I doubt it would do nearly as much good.

What’s wrong with Medicare Advantage? Oh, that’s right, that actually invokes choice into Medicare. And those CBO numbers the left likes to tout, well, what do they have to say about the numbers American Solutions cites? Is it a case of one set being right and the other being wrong? Must be that 10 years’ worth of taxation to pay for six years’ worth of service.

There’s no question both the House and Senate bills should be killed, and at this point I really don’t care if their death is quick and painless or gory and gruesome. Just do it.

Message to TPX3: don’t forget Delmarva

Having interviewed one of the main protagonists not once, but twice as a result of cross-country bus tours, I probably have a little more insight than the average person on what the goals of the Tea Party Express were and continue to be.

That’s why I’m a little disappointed with the first look at the route planned for next March and April as TPX3 rolls across the country once again. The route covers 27 states and does briefly run through Delaware and Maryland (via I-95) on its way to the final stop in Washington D.C.

But unless they’re planning a whistle stop somewhere in the northeast corner of Maryland they’re forgetting about a vulnerable Democrat freshman who voted in favor of cap-and-tax, and wouldn’t necessarily pass up a chance to support Obamacare and restoring the death tax if certain conditions were met (I refer to them as his thirty pieces of silver – needless to say they come at taxpayer expense.)

With the looping path being taken already, I don’t think it’s all that difficult to spend an afternoon (most likely April 14, the eve of the next major taxpayer rally in Washington, D.C.) traversing the Delmarva because there’s a lot at stake in the 2010 election in our neck of the woods, too. We’ll have two freshman Democrats (Kratovil of Maryland and Nye of Virginia) running for re-election as well as an open Congressional seat in Delaware as Mike Castle tries to move to the Senate – most likely against Joe Biden’s son Beau, the First State’s current Attorney General. The Democrats already have a pretty strong candidate eyeing that Congressional seat, former Lieutentant Governor John Carney. The “Delaware Way” doesn’t have to be the only way.

Perhaps a good way to convince them to work our way is to show them the money. But I’d rather do it through a simple application of logic because we’re not a people of vast means.

They have the opportunity to influence four different races (if you count Maryland’s U.S. Senate seat which is up for election and held by Barbara Mikulski) in a few hours’ work on a peninsula which too often feels shut out of the political process. So that’s my bid and hopefully they’ll listen.

Cardin: GOP “not playing fair” on health care

Well, that was a fun 40 minutes. Earlier this moring I listened to a conference call with Maryland’s Senator Ben Cardin promoted by the folks at Organizing Against America. It was sort of like sneaking behind enemy lines.

Host Jason Waskey (the State Director) briefly went through the history of OAA, which changed over from an organization to help President Obama get elected to a “special project” of the Democratic National Committee. One of his tasks, Waskey said, was “to make sure plenty of people were at the events” like town hall meetings and such where the subject of health care would come up. But what he was “most proud” about was helping to defeat Michael Steele – isn’t that a touch racist?

Anyway, Waskey concluded his introduction by stating Maryland’s Senators were “very confident” about the bill and “they’ll be great supporters.”

Senator Cardin then jumped on the line and immediately referred to Waskey’s comment on Steele by saying having him as RNC chair was a “plus for Democrats.” (Of course, he can get away with saying such a thing in this crowd.)

But the Democrats in Congress were taking on “the challenges of our time,” which included the “difficult” subject of health care – to the Senator health care was a “moral issue.” Cardin also dismissed the GOP as “they say the status quo is fine.” (And for about 80% of the people the GOP is correct in saying so.)

Then Cardin had some interesting contradictions. In one sentence he said that Majority Leader Senator Reid has “total support to get the bill done,” yet in the next breath he noted “three or four Democrats are uncertain.” And while he considered the Congressional Budget Office “a thorn,” he was all too happy to cite their figures in making some of his claims.

There were several points the Senator claimed would be addressed in the bill:

The health care bill would provide affordable health care and insurance for “all Americans.” (Even though the CBO numbers say that would be an additional 31 million, bringing it to 98 percent.)
The bill would bring down costs – Ben claimed that 90% would see a decrease or leveling off of premiums.
Passing health care would reduce the deficit – we’ve “always exceeded CBO numbers,” said Senator Cardin.
It “saves Medicare,” and Cardin blasted Republicans for trying to restore the cuts in provider compensation, saying you can’t control costs by cutting Medicare.

On the last point, Senator Cardin questioned the fiscal conservatism of Republicans, daring them to put up an amendment to end Medicare altogether. (Hey, if it were properly written in such a way to wean people off it, I’d vote for that. It’s not like Medicare will be solvent when I reach that age anyway.)

Most of the Medicare savings, though, come from ending the “corporate welfare” of Medicare Advantage (although Cardin didn’t refer to that by name.) Ben predicted in answering a later question that we would save if everyone were on Medicare, as opposed to having some seniors on Medicare Advantage.

One claim made by Senator Cardin that left me scratching my head was that costs would be saved by having fewer people use the emergency room because they were insured. But a key component frustrating many physicans who oppose the health care bill is dealing with both paperwork and the limited compensation insurance companies tend to provide, so if fewer physicans are practicing would that not force people to use the ER for services anyway?

The Senator concluded his monologue by telling the hundreds listening in that this was “not a perfect bill” but “we will build on this in the future.” A slippery slope indeed.

Then some lines were opened up for questions – since I didn’t hear a method of chiming in with my two cents, my suspicion is that the questions were prearranged. While they weren’t softballs, they were akin to sending a high school pitcher out to face the Yankees.

Karen from Bethesda asked when Americans would feel the full effects of the bill.

The immediate effects would come in reforming the insurance industry, said Senator Cardin, with provisions allowing children to stay on parents’ policies through age 26, eliminating the restriction of pre-existing conditions, and coverage caps beginning pretty much upon passage. Setting up insurance exchanges for each state would take more time. (Cardin forgot to mention the taxes would also start immediately, too. I think that answers Karen’s question better than Ben did.)

Delegate Tom Hucker was next, and he queried the Senator about the impact on the state budget and the fairness aspect – states like Maryland with overgenerous Medicaid programs wouldn’t benefit as much as other states which are more prudent. (No, Delegate Hucker didn’t put it in those terms, I did. Of the Delegates I’d love to see voted out – aside from my own – Hucker is number one on the list.)

The federal government would pick up the Medicaid costs, answered Cardin, but the “bottom line is you” at the state level. This bill, though, would “finally get the federal government to acknowledge its responsibility,” said Ben. Returning to his love of the CBO, Cardin confided that they may not be able to score that aspect of the program.

Stephanie, a doctoral student in public health at Johns Hopkins, asked about procedural issues – specifically, is there any merit in working with the GOP on compromise amendments?

It was on this answer that Cardin was his most testy – not at Stephanie, but at Republicans. He asked why, if we’re not getting cooperation, are we allowing the GOP’s “message amendments” to be voted on? “They’re not playing fair,” complained the Senator. But he also admitted that they don’t have the 60 votes quite yet because one member of the caucus seems to want to hear all the amendments before he or she makes the decision. (Obviously it’s an important one.)

Cardin also revealed that a manager’s amendment is in the works, so the bill may get more work done before the final Senate decision.

The discussion then turned to the Stupak Amendment, which, according to the Senator, would “violate the unwritten rule that health care reform is neutral on abortion.” And Senator Cardin was “very, very confident it will be rejected.”

Adam from Potomac asked why no attention to tort reform?

This was another opportunity for Cardin to bash Republicans, saying they wouldn’t vote for the bill even if tort reform was included. (And he’d be right, because there’s too much bad to go along with the good tort reform would provide.) It’s more “rhetoric for Republicans,” noted Cardin, and claimed that “it’s not about tort reform, it’s about killing the bill” for Republicans. Actually, it’s about our freedom and way of life, but I’ll give Cardin a half-point for stating the obvious.

Cardin also said the bill addresses some aspects of defensive medicine by mandating electronic medical records, which would eliminate the need for some testing because various ailments would be ruled out by knowing the patient. Fair enough, so why not that as a stand-alone provision?

The final question went to Nina, in College Park. She asked about the public option.

It was “critically important” that the public option be included, said Cardin. It was being “misrepresented in a terribly irresponsible way” by Republicans, and, as Cardin explained it, the public option would create more choice – as it was, Cardin pointed out in an earlier response that 71% of Maryland residents were enrolled in just two insurance companies. (A beautiful argument for allowing insurance to be sold across state lines rather than creating a government-controlled “exchange.”)

Regarding the public option, Senator Cardin continued that it would also have the effect of nationally regulating the private insurance industry and forcing the insurers to open their books to show how much money was being spent on patient care (as opposed to executive compensation, as Cardin played the class envy card before a receptive audience.) “I’m for the strongest possible public option,” Ben said, even as the Senate version was “already compromised.”

I found it interesting that Senator Cardin compared the public option to how federal employees are served with a number of choices. Yet I don’t see him making a move to eliminate his gold-plated health care.

Worthy of note also is that Cardin praised his Maryland counterpart, Barbara Mikulski, for getting an amendment through that mandates coverage of mammograms and assorted other items. I thought I heard Senator Cardin mention “family planning” among them, which leads me to believe it’s going to cover the a-word.

At that point, Waskey returned to the phone and promised a follow-up e-mail to solicit volunteers to phone bank and call key Senators from a number of states, presumably Democrats who are waffling (although he did mention Maine, so Senators Collins and Snowe are presumed to be soft GOP opposition.) I haven’t received that yet, but it should be as amusing as hearing a partisan Democrat Senator speak before an audience he believes is friendly.

Rutledge joins chorus questioning stimulus numbers

Here’s an easy one, but you need to start someplace. It may anger the voters in Maryland’s 18th Congressional District but that’s the price paid for speaking out. Oh wait, Maryland has only 8 Congressional districts? Well then, carry on Jim:

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Jim Rutledge today called for a comprehensive independent audit of the trillion-dollar ‘stimulus’ program created and passed earlier this year by Congressional Democrats and demanded heightened accountability for taxpayer dollars spent to date on the government-run program.

Rutledge pointed to a report on the so-called American Recovery and Reinvestment Act released this week by the Obama administration that claims the program has “created or saved” 640,329 jobs nationwide as a result of $159 billion in government spending – a cost of $248,309 per job.

And more than half of the jobs claimed were in education, the government sector, despite the Obama administration’s earlier promises that 90 percent of the positions would be in the private job market, where this year alone millions of Americans have lost their paychecks and livelihoods.

“This Democrat-passed boondoggle not only blows a billion-dollar hole in the federal budget deficit through 2019 – further burdening our children and grandchildren with piles of government debt – but simply has not generated the number or type of jobs many Americans are desperately searching for right now,” Rutledge said. “It’s reckless and irresponsible and proves that the federal government has absolutely no business in the job creation business.”

For the state of Maryland, the depth of reckless spending appears to be even greater. According to the government Web site Recovery.gov, which tracks the program’s spending, the $3.1 billion of taxpayer funding doled out to date in the name of Marylanders has resulted in 6,748 jobs at a cost of $470,989 each. Well over half the jobs cited were in state government programs and agencies.

“Ms. Mikulski and her Democratic colleagues in the Senate should cease operation of this program and immediately initiate a comprehensive audit of every taxpayer dollar spent to date,” Rutledge said. “This program is an abuse of the public trust and should not stand.” (Emphasis in original.)

The so-called stimulus program has been a boondoggle thus far. In truth, much of the money has gone simply to prop up state budgets (just ask Governor O’Malley about that) so maybe that goes under “job saved”? But were those jobs worth saving?

Imagine this pretzel logic if you will. The federal government borrows billions of dollars – either taking them out of the private-sector economy or creating them out of whole cloth – in order to create jobs that would likely have been more efficiently made had the dollars remained in the private sector. So the net result is that pencil-pushers who produce little more than mountains of paperwork remain employed while those who actually use the capital to make things and invest in the American Dream watch the dollars get sucked out of their wallet while knowing those remaining will be worth less once the inevitable inflation hits. Inflation is great for a debtor but lousy for a creditor.

I’ve noted time and again that what the federal government calls “stimulus” does a poor job of promoting long-term growth. The direct payments made during the Bush administration simply went to savings or paid off individual debts (great for banking interests) while this Obama stimulus has made unemployment shoot right through the promised 8 percent ceiling.

So Rutledge is absolutely correct in calling for a premature end to the stimulus and accounting of that which was already spent. Keep hammering on that point, Jim.

Making a better point

While I’m often critical of U.S. Senate candidate Dr. Eric Wargotz this time he makes a great point.

Dr. Eric Wargotz, candidate for the U. S. Senate, criticized Senator Barbara Mikulski for derailing a proposal to require that the substance and cost of Democratic healthcare reform legislation be posted on the Internet prior to a vote.

The proposal, offered by Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY), would have required that the legislative language and a final, complete cost analysis of the Democratic bill be made publicly available on the Senate Finance Committee’s website at least 72 hours prior to any Committee vote.

Senator Mikulski used an arcane parliamentary tactic to block consideration of the proposal on the Senate floor. This can be viewed here.

“Millions of Americans have concerns about how this legislation will impact their access to quality healthcare,” stated Dr. Wargotz. “Greater transparency promotes better government. It gives citizens additional tools to educate themselves.”

As President and Countywide member of the Queen Anne’s County Board of Commissioners, Dr. Wargotz spearheaded measures to promote greater transparency in county government. “This is a responsibility of elected officials across all levels of government. I cannot understand why Senator Mikulski would want to take her constituents in the opposite direction.”

“Senator Mikulski has made healthcare reform one of her signature issues during her three decade political career,” Dr. Wargotz continued. “Now that the debate is here, she has been largely missing. I find it ironic that she would only break her silence to block a proposal to empower her constituents to make informed decisions. She is beholden to the shadowy Washington politics of the past at a time when people want change.”

This criticism works well for a press release at this stage in the campaign because this is a fairly black-and-white issue – you’re either in favor of transparency or you’re not. Wargotz is and Mikulski is not, and that puts Barb on the wrong side of the issue as far as the majority of Americans (including the President, supposedly) feel.

It also points out the “politics-as-usual” aspect of Congress, which is another item rubbing Americans the wrong way. So Wargotz makes plenty of political points with this salvo against Mikulski; the hard part will be getting her to explain her side. I’d also like to know how she was the one selected to object – perhaps they think she has the safest seat on the committee? (Granted, she could’ve come up with that herself but that makes it even more questionable as to why she would object.)

Like forgotten leftovers in the back of the refrigerator, Mikulski’s a Senator who’s hung around long past her expiration date. It’s time to restock the shelf next November.

Business as usual

I received this release a couple days ago from U.S. Senate candidate Eric Wargotz. While he uses it to hammer his opponent, the longtime entrenched Democrat Senator Barbara Mikulski, there’s more to the Sun story by Paul West that Eric cites.

“The Baltimore Sun reported that Maryland’s senior U. S. senator won $10.5 million in federal pork barrel spending for three of her most generous campaign contributors.

“During a time of budgetary crisis in Washington, it is irresponsible for Senator Mikulski to use her powerful position on the Senate Appropriations Committee to enrich her campaign supporters. Further, I find it appalling that she would hide behind the troops to justify her actions.

“The Pentagon didn’t ask for any of the funding requests (totaling $42.1 million, including the $10.5 million already referenced) the senator received. If Senator Mikulski thinks she knows better than the military does, she owes it to her constituents to explain why.

“Senator Mikulski should eschew the politics of the past and devote her energies towards participating in the healthcare debate raging on Capitol Hill. Despite more than three decades of involvement in this issue, she has been oddly absent now that the debate is here.

“Maryland’s taxpayers deserve Senator Mikulski’s advocacy more than her campaign contributors do.”

In looking at the Sun story, it’s apparent that not just Mikulski shared in the Maryland goodie distribution, and it was as bipartisan as it could be considering our Congressional delegation has just one Republican.

I’ll admit it’s good that Dr. Wargotz pointed this out, particularly since these projects went to companies who invested heavily in Mikulski’s election, but then the question will arise as to whether he won’t be equally as guilty if elected. While earmarks truly aren’t a large part of the overall budget, they make for feel-good press when the incumbent comes back hat in hand for votes at election time.

Unfortunately, neither party has made much of an effort to combat the practice and it’s noteworthy that President Obama, who claimed to be opposed to earmarks throughout his Presidential campaign (as did John McCain, who is quoted in the Sun story) hasn’t vetoed any spending package laden with earmarks. So to me this is business as usual.

While a number of critics wish to pinch off the campaign finance end of the equation, my better idea is to reduce the incentive for companies to shop for candidates willing to shovel lucrative government contracts their way by cutting the size and scope of the federal government. Perhaps this won’t work quite as well in the defense sector as others, but the first step is turning around the runaway train called federal spending run amok.

Wargotz takes the pledge

The subject today is a recent announcement from U.S. Senate candidate Dr. Eric Wargotz that he’s signing the Americans for Tax Reform pledge, vowing not to raise taxes. That part is good, but if you read through you’ll see where the announcement raises more questions for me than it answers.

Dr. Eric S. Wargotz, a candidate for the GOP nomination in Maryland’s 2010 U. S. Senate contest, has signed a pledge not to raise income taxes on citizens.

The pledge, a project of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), extracts a written promise from legislators and candidate for office committing them to oppose any effort to increase marginal income tax rates on individuals and businesses. ATR was founded in 1985 by Grover Norquist at the request of President Reagan.

“I first ran for office because I believed fiscal responsibility was not a priority of Maryland’s Democratic establishment,” stated Dr. Wargotz. “As president of the Queen Anne’s County Board of Commissioners, my colleagues and I succeeded in lowering the property tax rate on citizens, reducing the size of government, and implementing reforms intended to enhance efficiencies and transparencies in government.

“Now, with multiple federal bailout plans having been enacted and a costly federal healthcare scheme on the table, I believe it is time to stand up for Maryland’s taxpayers again. I hope other senatorial candidates will sign the same promise I did.”

Additionally, Dr. Wargotz also addressed a meeting of Americans for Tax Reform in Washington, where he discussed his candidacy.

Dr. Wargotz is an experienced leader and activist, a physician-businessman, fiscal conservative, and environmentalist. He understands what it takes to work as a team and to build consensus on difficult matters.

Eric is certainly correct that fiscal responsibility isn’t exactly Job One among Maryland Democrats (I’m thinking it’s about Job 63, if it rates that high) but I’m also a little troubled about another item I found in my research.

First of all, though, I checked and Wargotz was correct in stating that tax rates were reduced from a 2006 rate of 0.80 per $100 of valuation to 0.77 in 2007, where it remains. Yet the county misses an opportunity to reduce taxes further because the “constant yield” tax rate has dropped to 0.724 per $100 of valuation (look on Page 5 here.)

More troubling in the fiscal regard was Dr. Wargotz’s support of a living wage for employees of Queen Anne’s County. Granted, this only affects a small number of employees but it’s the camel’s nose under the tent. Would he support such a measure for the thousands of federal employees or, worse, place a mandate on the states to do so? Doing so would just shift the dirty work of increasing taxes from him to local and state legislators – I’m sure he’s grumbled many a time about state and federal mandates affecting how Queen Anne’s County operates, and my idea of a good Senator would be having one who reduces or eliminates as many mandates from on high as possible.

(Needless to say, I’d also love more clarification on “environmentalist” because one of their favorite tactics for conformity is a mandate from the federal or state government. They don’t even give the restrictions in place a chance to work before demanding more.)

On the whole I’m glad Eric is vowing not to raise taxes – and he’s certainly promising to be an improvement over the Senator we now have – but I want the same effort placed in reducing the size of government too.

A growing prosperity

Tonight's AFP meeting had the largest crowd yet crammed into a meeting room at Adam's Ribs. Photo courtesy of Nick Loffer.

The current incarnation of Americans for Prosperity has a problem most groups would like to have – more people coming to their meetings than they have room for. It’s almost surprising that the fire marshal wasn’t called in once the people rolled into the crowded back room of Adam’s Ribs. Better still, about 1/4 to 1/3 of the people were new to the group.

Nick Loffer, representing the state AFP organization, began the proceedings by providing a quick update on health care, saying “it could die.” As he handed out a petition for each attendee, Loffer told the group that the Congressional leaders need to “focus on patients, not politics.”

Julie Brewington, who is the co-leader of the local AFP group (her counterpart Joe Collins is under the weather and wasn’t there tonight), chimed in with a quick history of the local AFP chapter, where things have been happening at a “fast and furious” clip. From a start involving all four lower Shore counties, Somerset County is holding their first meeting as a separate group tomorrow and Worcester County is in the process of scheduling their own meetings as well. Only Dorchester County was a little behind the curve. AFP had a goal to “become a force in local counties” and we were already having a “big impact” at Frank Kratovil’s events.

After a copy of yesterday’s Daily Times editorial regarding nighttime County Council meetings was passed out, Julie pointed out a number of other hot-button local issues AFP was keeping an eye on as well, including the prospect of speed cameras as a revenue generator and dropping Wicomico County’s revenue cap. The fiscal and accountability issues have drawn the attention of the local paper and District 5 County Councilman Joe Holloway, a supporter of evening County Council meetings who thanked the group for its interest on that topic. Brewington asserted that, “if we can’t get control of local government, we have no hope nationally.”

Getting back to more basic needs, Julie noted that the group still seeks a secretary and a committee for a chain to call members when quick action is required. They also wanted to hear comments from audience members, and several complied. It’s noteworthy as well that one couple are becoming quite the entrepreneurs by selling AFP T-shirts. Another mentioned his experience in Florida, where a local government tried to sneak through a $75 million bond issue but was foiled by public involvement – he told the group that “politicans learn the ropes at council meetings.”

The group is also getting together a bus for the 9-12 rally in Washington, D.C. – a prospect which interested many in the gathering.

Nick Loffer came back to speak on the state and national AFP situation and review tips for effective rallying.

As a state, Maryland’s AFP was “growing by leaps and bounds” (particularly on the lower Shore) and was a “force to be reckoned with.” Loffer opined that cap-and-trade was “almost a lost cause” based on who represents Maryland in the United States Senate but “we can kill” health care in the House. Nick related that “people are waking up”, citing a crowd of 400 for a Thursday night health care rally in Annapolis and 200 people already pre-registered for a health care forum in Timonium similar to one I live-blogged a few weeks back. Loffer vowed “we will play in the General Assembly” next year – opponents are already trying to discredit the group and its key personnel.

Turning to his appointed task of speaking on rallying, Nick told the group its message in any demonstration needs to be “clean, tailored, (and) crisp” because opponents will be on the attack if the message isn’t focused. In distributing a guide to effective rallying and going over its key points, Nick stressed in particular the importance of staying on message, being tasteful and courteous, and not trying to shout down opponents (or elected officials). Passion is fine but don’t let emotion cloud the message you’re trying to get across.

A few audience members checked in with their own advice. Steve Lind, who spearheads a successful AFP letter-writing campaign, related his opinion that “politicians have to face an informed audience” while another member who was at the Kratovil meeting in Mardela Springs passed along the opinion of a Wall Street Journal reporter covering the event who said their behavior was “exemplary.” Another lady told the group she thought “angry was not bad” when attending events. Nick stressed that we should “never give a free pass to any politician.”

One comment I made was to remind the group that not only should we hold politicans accountable but we should also ask tough questions of those who seek elective office as well (like I did last night.)

After Nick wrapped up, the meeting broke up into a social period, although a couple people tried to get the attention of attendees with various comments. It seems to be the weakness of dealing with such a large group.

Upcoming events AFP will be involved in include the next Wicomico County Council meeting the morning of September 1st, the Timonium health care forum that same night, the 9-12 rally in Washington, D.C., and the Defending the American Dream Summit on October 2nd in Washington. It promises to be a busy few weeks for the group, who didn’t schedule their next meeting yet – certainly I’ll be in the loop when the date is set.

WCRC meeting – August 2009

After a month’s hiatus, the Wicomico County Republican Club came back without missing a beat for its meeting this evening. We even had another candidate seeking to unseat longtime Senator Barbara Mikulski in Dr. Eric Wargotz.

United States Senate candidate Dr. Eric Wargotz patiently awaits his chance to speak to Wicomico County Republicans at their meeting, August 24, 2009.

First, though, we had to take care of our usual business, which was pretty much standard per previous meetings.

Having dispensed with that brief introduction we got a quick Young Republican report from Marc Kilmer, who was called into duty because the state Young Republicans are also having a meeting this evening. The news Kilmer related is that Salisbury has the inside track on hosting the state YR convention next year, which should attract statewide candidates to our area and be a feather in our cap.

Bob Miller gave the Crab Feast report, which basically consisted of a plea to “sell the tickets” and donate silent auction items – that’s the key part of the fundraiser since we never know how much crabs will cost. (Most likely the $25 cost for an adult ticket doesn’t cover the price of crabs, let alone the other good food we’ll consume September 26th.)

The Central Committee report was actually deferred to the end, but in the interest of making this a better post I’ll note that County Chair Dr. John Bartkovich praised the recent Wicomico Farm and Home Show as a “good venue” for our table there, the GOP booth at the Autumn Wine Fest will need volunteers, and as always we’re looking for good 2010 candidates for “the current (Wicomico County) leadership is not running the county the right way” and 2010 is an “opportunity” that “will be good for us.”

We also had two events plugged – the Republican Women of Wicomico County are having a membership tea at noon Wednesday, September 2nd (at the Main Library in downtown Salisbury) and there will be an Andy Harris fundraiser on September 25th at the residence of Mark McIver, with slated special guest Ellen Sauerbrey.

Those announcements also happened after our featured speaker left the podium.

Actually, Eric didn’t speak from there very long, choosing instead to spend most of the 45 minutes or so we had him on the hot seat answering questions from the 30 or so present.

Dr. Eric Wargotz, candidate for United States Senate, males a point while speaking to the Wicomico County Republican Club, August 24, 2009.

Dr. Wargotz did note that he began working at the age of 9, asking neighbors about odd jobs he could do to make a few cents. As he stated, he “started learning good old family values at an early age” as he came from a working-class background.

Regarding the upcoming race, while he had all due respect for Senator Mikulski, the race was “not about partisanship…(but) about choosing leadership.” Over the last two terms Mikulski had become “ineffective” and “not demonstrated leadership”, instead becoming “one of the problems” Maryland had to overcome. It came down to the choice between a career politician versus one who had experience dealing with fiscal, land-use, environmental, and business issues and their impact at a local level as a County Commissioner in Queen Anne’s County.

In relation to issues, naturally Dr. Wargotz was “concerned” about the health care conversation, and the topic managed to be the main subject of his overall presentation. But the first question he was asked was how he came to be a Republican.

Eric answered that he was an independent until the 1980 election, when he volunteered to assist Ronald Reagan’s presidential campaign, and that Republican principles “appealed to everybody.” Aside from a brief detour to the other party for political reasons in the early 1990s (which he admits to) Eric has remained in the GOP fold. He also used that question to state that “I criticize any physician who’s not a Republican” because of the Democrats’ position on tort reform. But he also blasted the current health care debate because it has no discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the current system; instead the debate seems to be how to start anew.

This led to a long question which eventually asked whether the health care reform was more about government intrusion and control, to which Dr. Wargotz affirmed, “unequivocally yes.” He continued, “the issue is not access to care” – since care is mandated by law – but the “question is coverage.” Eric revealed that there is a federal stipend to emergency rooms for coverage of uninsured patients, but not to physicians.

Staying on the health care subject, Eric was asked about how the hurried impetus to universal care will unfold. While he didn’t prefer to dwell on hypothetical questions, Dr. Wargotz did say that because the push to get health care through before the August recess failed, the debate would continue at least until he was installed in the Senate.

A pair of questions unrelated to health care came up next. Wargotz would not have voted to confirm the “disingenuous” Sonia Sotomayor, and, while he was “not happy we’re there” would stay in Afghanistan and Iraq until the job was finished and they had a stable government.

I asked a series of questions based on a handout Eric had from this press release. In addressing what he considered the three health care goals of reducing costs, shortening waiting times, and improving care, he had seven bullet points:

Keeping government and insurance companies out of the medical decision making process.
Tackling frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits by capping non-economic damages thus curtailing “defensive” medical practices and reducing waste, abuse & fraud.
Providing incentives in the health care system to attract more people to become health care professionals.
Maintaining Medicare, and expand Medicaid to cover those legitimately unable to cover their own costs of care.
Reforming the health insurance system: no denials based on prior medical conditions & eliminate out-of-pocket expense after fully paid premium; improved provider reimbursement.
Reforming Pharmaceutical industry towards fair, uniform medication pricing.
Portability of health insurance between states. (This didn’t appear in his original August 1 release.)

I have no problem with much of that, but desired clarification on some items such as the incentives to attract people to health care, expanding Medicaid, and the reform of Big Pharma.

He couched his answer on incentives to tort reform, asserting the the cost of malpractice insurance was discouraging young doctors from going into some areas of medicine such as OB-GYN. (In answering the last question, Eric also told us that there were plenty of qualified people out there, it’s just many choose to go into other fields like law.) That’s fine, personally I just didn’t want any sort of government bonus or tinkering with the tax code to produce desired behavior.

Expanding Medicaid was a thorny issue, and one which to me shows some political expedience at the expense of ideals. While he agreed with me that the federal government had no place in providing health care (as in Medicaid) that wasn’t truly realistic and expanding the existing program to all those eligible might only cost “a couple hundred million.” Truly, Medicaid is simply a transfer program to the states anyway. So his answer didn’t really satisfy the purist in me but very few people’s answers would (yet.) We did have a good exchange about Article I, Section 8 and the role of Congress where Eric agreed that Congress does exceed its authority in a number of ways.

In speaking to the pharmaceutical industry, Eric said the money they’re promising to Obamacare is really “protection money” but also decried the pricing of drugs in America, saying “their profit margin is approaching that of the retail jewelry industry.”

While answering that, Wargotz got on the tangent of illegal immigration, stating that it needs to be addressed at the same time as health care reform because the issues are entwined – a large number of the uninsured population is illegal. The other noteworthy comment in this stretch was insistence that government interference in personal choice is “a real problem” and constitutes a “dictatorial approach” we should avoid.

Another questioner asked about the insurance mandates such as the ones in Massachusetts. That experiment was “not working well” according to Eric, and leads to another problem if nationalized health care is passed – not enough manpower. “We have a health care manpower crisis”, noted Eric. Also regarding insurance, Wargotz also stated a preference of larger premiums but less co-pay as patients believe that having paid for the insurance they should have to pay nothing out-of-pocket – the write-offs come to thousands of dollars per year. Some in the audience disagreed, saying that the higher co-pays made consumers less likely to abuse the system; at this point Eric said he was “open” to that possibility too.

The next question came from an audience member who was at Rep. Kratovil’s town hall and was told by Frank he wouldn’t increase taxes to pay for health care – so what would Dr. Wargotz say?

First, Eric praised Kratovil for his work as a State’s Attorney but certainly he disagreed with Frank politically; this was no exception. It was quite simple – how can the government provide full coverage without a tax increase? (Well, Eric, they DO print money.) He pointed out that Frank, while a good man who he knew from working with him in Queen Anne’s County, had no previous legislative experience and may have been caught unprepared to be in this particular freshman Congressional class. Instead of leaving it to staffers to read the bill and give him the highlights, Eric pledged “I’ll read the bill first…every word, every page.” That could lead to a lot of reading, but being a doctor he was used to it.

After the question about medical school I alluded to earlier, Eric wrapped up his presentation but stuck around to talk further after the meeting – I left before he did so his dedication was apparent.

It’s clear that the GOP has at least two candidates who can present a credible alternative to the liberal policies of our state’s senior United States Senator. The question will become one of money and how receptive Free Staters will be to a conservative message given their blind loyalty to Mikulski for decades. It’s doubtful she would debate whoever wins the GOP primary so the message will have to be put out little by little to have any chance of success.

The key for Eric Wargotz (or Jim Rutledge) will be how many of the 30 people or so who came out to hear them speak will become their advocates and activists. That will go a long way toward what would certainly be an upset victory in 2010.

Observations on Cardin at the GraySHORE meeting

Guerrieri University Center was the scene of Thursday's GraySHORE meeting.

While about 40 people were protesting outside the meeting, there were just under 100 inside watching Senator Cardin spin his way through this meeting on health care.

The room, which could have held up to 400 people, was instead set up for about 100 with signing in required.

Each guest who was signed up had to check in at this table.

Obviously the event was geared toward senior citizens, with the local MAC (Maintaining Active Citizens) group well-represented.

The Maintaining Active Citizens group also maintained an informational booth at the event.

After a series of introductions and welcomes, the show finally got on the road about 11:00, or a half-hour late. Senator Cardin eschewed a slide show he had for the event in order to make a statement and answer a few questions.

Maryland's junior Senator spoke to a crowd of about 100 at Salisbury University last Thursday.

Originally the meeting was set up back in March and wasn’t intended to be a town hall; however, once the health care controversy blew up this became a hot ticket. The intention was to get the perspective of residents who are over 50 and live on the Lower Shore, and the ground rules were pretty strict. There would be no questions during Senator Cardin’s presentation, the ratio would be one question for a GraySHORE member for each one from a non-member, and questions would have a 30-second limit.

In the welcoming remarks, it was noted that the state as a whole is getting younger but the Eastern Shore is aging. While the state is a “net exporter of seniors” at least 7 of the 9 Shore counties are net importers. We are also older and poorer than the state at-large. The idea behind GraySHORE was to brief elected officials with policy recommendations.

Something I found intriguing was the mention of Senator Cardin’s career. He has been our Senator since 2007, but served in Congress since 1987 and was a member of Maryland’s General Assembly for almost two decades before that – he was first elected in 1966. Basically, Senator Cardin fits the definition of a professional politician and I thought that was worth mentioning before I got too far.

When Senator Cardin came up, he noted that he was skipping the slide show to get to the questions. He also commented that this size group was a “manageable” group for dialogue.

As he had on prior occasions, the Senator couched the health care question as one of “what happens if we do nothing?” Health care costs were rising faster than income and would double in the next decade. As well, Cardin gave that mythical 46 million uninsured figure as part of his case and claimed that it cost each of us “an extra $11,000 per year to pay for (those not covered).”

The idea behind reform was to bring down costs through wellness and prevention and through better recordkeeping, while creating individual and employer mandates through the bill. It would provide a “level playing field” for private insurers and remove the caps on coverage, but above all reform “must reduce costs and be paid for.” Cardin compared the idea to Medicare, which has worked “extremely well” over its lifespan and was put into place because insurers wouldn’t cover the elderly or disabled.

Something I found odd was Senator Cardin’s several references where he “(couldn’t) tell you with certainty what will be in the final bill” but also stating they’re “not going to cut Medicare” and “not going to reduce benefits.” “Most of the offset will come from the industry itself” said Cardin.

Also, if he couldn’t tell you what will be in the final bill, how is he “trying to get (the) facts out” with the “lots of misinformation” that some who are “intentionally misleading” are putting out?

I also had a hard time believing Senator Cardin’s assertion that if the bill is successful that companies are “much more likely” not to shift their healthcare costs to the government, with the federal program simply serving as a “backup plan.”

There were three questions that GraySHORE provided, with remaining questions provided by audience members. This will be a brief rundown because there were a number of people recording the event so the actual questions and answers should be available – one is shown below and posted here.

Chuck Cook of the local blog Two Sentz was among those recording the event for later posting.

The first GraySHORE question asked about protection for small businesses, and Senator Cardin asserted that small businesses, who had been “discriminated against”, could “get the advantage of large rating pools”. Cardin blamed the insurance companies for creating some of the problems.

The second question asked what happens if a senior loses his or her job. This, noted Cardin, “will be an affordable option for those under 65” with federal help for people making up to 4x-5x poverty level. (As I recall that runs up to $80,000 for a family of four – hardly a poor family.)

GraySHORE’s third question asked about tort reform, something that Cardin is “open” to and “welcomes the discussion.” He holds insurance companies responsible for some of that problem though.

The first audience member to ask a question thought Senator Cardin was in a tenor of speaking to “uninformed” people but in reality he was the “uninformed” one. In essence, she was against the bill and Cardin assured her that he’s “not going to support a bill that doesn’t bring down costs or is not paid for.” (I’m just afraid of the “paid for” part.)

Next was a question about “dumping” patients and how the practice of insurance companies raising rates would be prevented. The “possible pool would be higher” noted Cardin, but the “overall reduction…and greater access should bring down costs” as much as 10 percent.

Our next questioner held up a copy of the Constitution and asked why the bill was so complex. The bill “requires us to be more specific with policy” and “insurance companies would make more information available.” Cardin also planned “to read and understand what’s in the bill” before voting on it. This also related to the next questioner, who asked where health care was in the Constitution and was told that “the ultimate decider is the Supreme Court”, which Cardin thought would support reform based on the “general welfare” clause of the Constitution. (Nothing like a broad interpretation!)

In being asked about a waiver the state has for Medicare, Cardin was “satisfied” the waiver was safe provided the state maintains a less-than-average cost for medical care.

Another audience member asked about tort reform and who the uninsured were, with the Senator noting that 300-400 people a day lose insurance in Maryland every day. The group of uninsured includes young people who don’t want it, unemployed between 50-64, and the 20 percent who could enroll in some public option but do not – he “did not believe” the number cited included illegals.

In speaking about the statements President Obama has made regarding single-payer health care, the next questioner noted that taxes were also going up faster than income – “this has to stop.” Cardin again stated that “I stand by the statement I made…I will not support or be inclined to go with a single-payer system” and admonished the debate to “stick to the facts.” Moreover, taxes as a percentage of GDP were level but health care costs were increasing, according to Senator Cardin.

Question eight from the audience asked about the skyrocketing costs from malpractice insurance and Big Pharma. Cardin stated “the majority of cost savings will come from those”, using the example of Medicare Advantage being “12-17% more expensive” and vowing to “bring the down the cost of pharmaceuticals.”

Calling the national plan a “false dichotomy,” the next questioner asked about Cardin opposing a plan backed by the National Federation of Independent Business. Cardin claimed that the Maryland General Assembly passed a similar bill and the NFIB-backed bill would be undone – passage would be “inconsistent with the policies of the state I represent” because the bill allowed cherry-picking of customers.

The final question concerned dental coverage, which “should be part of the prevention package” but isn’t in the bill yet. This was a passion of Cardin’s so he would attempt to get preventive dental care in the bill.

To wrap up, Cardin said “I believe in town hall meetings” and hoped the bill is bipartisan.

Personally I think that Cardin will be a reliable vote for whatever comes along the pike. It’s noteworthy to me that Cardin hasn’t seen the bill yet but assured us what would be in it. And it’s quite unfortunate that we won’t have another shot to discuss this with Cardin prior to Congress resuming their affairs after Labor Day.

Cardin protest in pictures and text

This is the first of two parts, with part two coming along sometime this weekend. In this part, which will mostly be pictorial, I’ll try to give a flavor to the protest outside the Guerrieri Center at Salisbury University yesterday. Over the weekend I’ll report and observe on the actual presentation by Senator Cardin as I was inside the room.

I actually arrived onscene about an hour before the event and there was nothing going on yet. I was, however, greeted by this sign:

This was a closed-door meeting, which is fine. But shouldn't the Senator also have scheduled another meeting for the public?

Finally about 10:00 or so the first protestors started to trickle in. They were promptly greeted by the gentleman in the nice suit with the folder.

A protestor pleads his case with the security staff at SU. Essentially the protestors were pushed back to Dogwood Drive, a couple hundred yards from the venue itself.

Undaunted, the protestors set to waving their signs. All told, there were about 40 at the peak of festivities.

These protestors were a few who occupied the east side of the entrance off Dogwood Drive.

A few chose to stand on the west side of the entrance.

A closer shot of the protestors standing on the east side of the driveway. Notice the signs are hand-printed so this isn't Astroturf.

Here's the tighter shot to those who held their ground on the west side of the entrance.

A couple pictures up I noted in the caption that the signs were generally hand-lettered. While I was inside some new signs arrived but they didn’t have a lot of takers.

The phone number is Frank Kratovil's office. But I don't believe that calling him would do any good - hopefully I'll be pleasantly surprised.

There were also flyers being passed out with a similar message and a nice bit of Photoshop.

As a guy who just got stuck with a couple needles last week, that picture makes me slightly ill just looking at it.

To me, the signage sometimes makes my day. Here’s one good example of a guy who doesn’t mind being blogged.

Given the end-of-life counseling in the House bill I'm not sure this isn't the overall intention. That's ONE way to save Social Security.

And this lady has some solutions which need to be tried before any further government interference in the health care market.

How about putting some of these ideas in the bill? Oh wait, the GOP has tried but they can't get the votes to do so. Democrats wouldn't even dream of giving up their cushy system by adopting the Fleming Amendment.

It’s not a sign but something tells me there’s someone making a small fortune off this image (and/or going to court soon on copyright infringement grounds.)

The new face of socialism - hey, at least there's no Nazi imagery or effigies. I just wish Obama were joking about his policies but unfortunately he's dead serious.

It was also good to see our protest getting its share of coverage from the two local TV stations.

This lady was taking video for Channel 16. I think their main reporter was inside with Senator Cardin at the time.

The other station, Channel 47, was actually doing interviews with the protestors. I didn't see the stories so I don't know what ended up on the cutting room floor, so to speak.