Some good news from Washington -- Max Baucus in Trouble with his Constituents over his Treatment of Single Payer Advocates!
Here is something that just might help to lift our spirits over here in TPM-Land: Max Baucus sent his staff to hear his constituents, and they got an earful!
Five separate accounts of the meetings, published in four different local papers, show Montana voters were downright hostile to Baucus' reform proposal. Baucus has been a staunch opponent of single-payer health care, a system in which the government would provide universal coverage.
Baucus has kept single-payer advocates out of negotiations and has yet to endorse a compromise proposal by Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) that would give Americans the option of buying into a publicly run plan that would compete with private insurers.
That stance put his staffers up against a wall, facing angry constituents fed up by what they viewed as a lack of courage in Washington.
"Majority wants single-payer health care," headlined an account in the Helena Independent Record.
But read the whole article. It will make you feel warm and fuzzy in this troubled time.
Good catch CVille. I particularly like this quote:
June 1, 2009 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for showing us this, Cville.
June 1, 2009 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks. It's wonderful to read that Baucus is reaping some of what he's sown.
June 1, 2009 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fascinating. I never would have guessed this in a million years. Montana?
Sometimes CVille, I think this country might really be ready for real change.
This looks like good news to me.
June 1, 2009 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
59% of doctors in this country favor single payer according to a poll done at U of Indiana. Over 62% of the American people do too. This is doable folks if we bring enough pressure to bear on our elected representatives. Write or fax (better than email) Baucus, Rangle, and the members of their committees. Conyers HR 676 is the way to go.
June 1, 2009 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you, C'Ville, for this spotlight on a potential light at the end of the health care tunnel. I am still wondering why Obama did not protest no seat at the table for single payer, and yet, still, I have faith that he has a strategy up his sleeve. Am I indulging in "The Year of Magical Thinking" as was Joan Didion? Maybe. But I hope not.
Thank you for tracking single payer efforts, and those who oppose it. I do not have the fortitude for it, and I am grateful that you do.
June 1, 2009 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
A reminder for all of us: Obama did not run on the "single payer" option. Yes, he said years ago that he believed in it, but he did not campaign on it. What I object to in the case of both Obama and Baucus is the fact that they are dissing single-payer advocates, all the while saying they are listening to everyone.
They are NOT listening to everyone, and that infuriates me. I am so glad Baucus, who was too cowardly to even attend these venues, was given an indesputable message. Of course he also has a message from the insurance companies who support him.
But guess what? Even insurance companies won't line his pockets anymore if he is defeated by the very people who want single-payer. What a dilemma! Gee! Maybe he should just do the right thing! Ya think?
June 1, 2009 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think.
June 1, 2009 8:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha! Me too!
June 1, 2009 8:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Even insurance companies won't line his pockets anymore if he is defeated by the very people who want single-payer."
I, for one, will be happy to throw a few bucks Baucus' way if we get true, progressive health care reform due to his leadership.
One of the most frustrating things about Obama and the Democrats so far is that they are still so beholden to monied interests. I had hoped that his small-donor fundraising model had changed that somewhat.
June 1, 2009 11:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
By preventively ruling out any discussion of more liberal, social welfare alternatives, they start the debate on the right (I refuse to call these conservative Democrats centrists) and we all know they'll compromise from there. This makes me wonder if they are serious about healthcare at all. I'm so furious about this because I think the fix has been in on it from the get-go.
June 1, 2009 8:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right, but Bluebell, the point here is that they are being CALLED on it! This is big, don't you agree?
Baucus can grandstand all he wants, but once he realizes that his "employers" call him on his BS, he will have to realize that all the campaign contributions in the world won't help if the voters realize he is not supporting them, and therefore they won't vote for him no matter how much money the insurance companies bestow (temorarily) on him!
June 1, 2009 9:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Right, but Bluebell, the point here is that they are being CALLED on it! This is big, don't you agree?"
It sure can't hurt!
June 1, 2009 9:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree! That's why I don't shut up even when I feel I'm a voice crying the wilderness. Having grown up in the rural midwest I believe Americans are teachable and reachable on these issues. But it requires effort. You have to sell! That's what Rush and Hannity and all the wingnut bozos have been doing the last 25 years. Baucus and Co. need to get off their behinds and start selling change not repackaging Republican policies.
June 1, 2009 9:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
This will probably be Max's last term. He just got re-elected in a landslide. So he doesn't care about his constituents. He shoves a bridge or a parking garage at them and they usually behave. But this time Montanans changed tactics. Go after his reputation and legacy.
He comes from a wealthy ranching family. Went to Stanford. Would have been happy running in either party, but the Democratic slot was open 16 years ago. He will retire rich and probably wants an ambassadorship. So shaming him and his staffers and exposing their ridiculous propaganda is what we are trying to do. Rallies on Friday.
June 2, 2009 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was thinking the exact same thing. If you are seeking the indutry to compromise but leave your best weapon against them in the drawer, this pocket veto technique, then we have to question his intentions.
June 2, 2009 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I also think that by excluding single payer proponents from the table, the "middle" or "compromise" position that's ultimately reached will be that much further to the right.
If single payer folks were allowed into the discussion, any compromise would have to be pulled at least some degree in their direction.
June 2, 2009 2:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agree.
June 2, 2009 8:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
True. reminds me of the FCC backlash a few years ago. If enough people are pissed, then it doesn't matter what lines have been set. They can be crossed.
June 2, 2009 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's what I don't get. Yes, Obama ran on a particular health care proposal. But he also ran on a promise of a "bottom-up process" by which we were given to understand that the legislation that was ultimately introduced might be significantly different from the legislation officially advanced by the campaign. My interpretation at the time was that Obama wanted to enable a populist end run around the various powers that be that had stood in the way of health care reform during the Clinton administration, and was going to do this by devising a genuinely bottom-up process of public meetings and hearings, with all of the obstructionists and stakeholders dragged out into the sunshine, and forced to defend their views in the face of public scrutiny and advocacy.
So where is the goddamn national discussion? All I'm hearing about so far are White House initiatives to bang legislative and power-broker heads together. There was a big "summit" among 150 legislators and "stakeholders." That's not bottom-up change. That's the Clinton approach all over again. Bottom-up change starts at the bottom level.
I did get an invitation from Team Obama to participate in some sort of advocacy movement. But it sure seemed like this so-called movement was simply an ad hoc lobbying group organized by Team Obama to ram a pre-existing piece of White House-crafted health care legislation through the Congress - presumably one decide on during the summit. The message I got didn't ask me a damn thing about what I would like to see in the health care plan.
June 2, 2009 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
good find Cville.
Interesting to read the comments below that article you linked to.
June 2, 2009 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure where I found it, but there was one url carrying all the local newspaper accounts about the town hall meetings. After reading thru them all - mostly boilerplate with local exceptions - I came away with the opinion the only person in Montana that's not for single payer was Baucus. And what was really funny was Baucus wasn't in the state - he had his flunkys doing his work for him. And his intro to each meeting was that he worked for them and wanted them to tell him their issues. I'm sure ghe got an earful more than he bargained for.
June 2, 2009 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think Max Baucus needs to make something clear, right now.
Who elected him? His top corporate contributors through 2008, Blue Cross Blue Shield, New York Life Insurance, and Schering-Plough?
Or the 1 million residents of Montana?
June 2, 2009 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was Huffington Post article.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/01/baucus-battered-by-voters_n_209865.html
June 2, 2009 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes! Single payer has to be an option! The best option of being heard is the written word. Also, a written word to Senator Kennedy thanking him, if not for him this may not have been possible. Without the public option, who believes anything would really change? It will take us all.
June 2, 2009 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I hate to rain on the parade, but Baucus apparently did't learn much from that meeting- he's currently floating the idea of a "compromise" under which the public option wold kick in only a few years down the road and only if certain conditions weren't met- and you can be damned sure the language will be carefully tailored to make sure that doesn't happen.
The US Senate: World's Most Useless Bought-And-Payed-For Deliberative Body.
June 2, 2009 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
And I just heard that he has charged Dr. Rachel Flowers with multiple charges so she will have to have a trial. Just because she protested at his hearing.
June 2, 2009 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's send Rachel some money!!!!
June 2, 2009 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I will have Dr. Putsch on our radio show on Saturday at 3PM Mountain Time. at kmmsam.com.
He's been really helpful here in Montana. Big rallies at each of Max's offices are scheduled for Friday.
Oh and there would have been 5 stories but after the onslaught of we Montanans at the "listening tour", they moved the last one near Billings from 2PM to 10AM, so we single payer advocates showed up at 2PM to be told that it had been moved. Typical tactic.
June 2, 2009 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
important to talk about that. Moving the meeting behind your backs like that. Can you do a post about it?
June 2, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Encouraging news... for a change.
June 2, 2009 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink