Thursday, July 23, 2009

Blue Dogs' Obstruction Proving Very Lucrative from Daily Kos

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/23/756865/-Blue-Dogs-Obstruction-Proving-Very-Lucrative

The Blue Dogs would have you believe that they're trying to slow the healthcare reform process down out of concern for their rural members' districts, out of a deep concern for the financial future of America, out of real principle.

The fiscal conservatives, members of the House Blue Dog Coalition, made their case for major changes in the bill at a White House meeting with Mr. Obama.

The chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California, canceled sessions of the panel scheduled for Tuesday and Wednesday so he could meet with Blue Dogs. They hold seven seats on the committee, a potentially decisive number, since the panel has 36 Democrats and 23 Republicans.

"The seven of us cannot support the current House bill," said Representative Mike Ross, Democrat of Arkansas, who is the point man on health care for the Blue Dogs. "Whether it requires a new bill or whether this bill can be amended, those are decisions, I guess, for the parliamentarians to help us make."

"We don’t need to box ourselves in with any artificial deadline," Mr. Ross added.

So seven Blue Dogs are having a hissy fit (and sounding exactly like the Republicans) on Energy and Commerce to drag this out, because they don't need "artificial deadlines." So what's in it for the Blue Dogs? Money, of course. Via Campaign for America's Future, we find out just how well the Blue Dogs are being rewarded for joining up with the Republican obstructionist effort.

The Blue Dog Political Action Committee has collected $1.1 million for the 2010 election cycle, more than any other leadership political action committee on Capitol Hill, according to CQ MoneyLine.

The total includes about $300,000 from health care interests, including $158,000 from doctors and other provider groups; $87,000 from makers of drugs and medical devices; and $50,000 from health insurance interests.

For the comparable period in the 2008 cycle, the PAC collected slightly less overall: $875,000, including $218,000 from health care political action committees.

Raúl M. Grijalva of Arizona, co‑chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and other liberal lawmakers have criticized Blue Dogs for not backing a top priority for Obama.

"Whose interest do the Blue Dogs serve if they vote no?" Grijalva said. "They should check with uninsured families and other interests that go beyond K Street."

Whose interests do the Blue Dogs serve? Obviously, the moneyed interests in this debate. And that includes their millionaire constituents. Nineteen major organizations, including the AARP and American Public Health Association have pointed that out in a letter to House leadership. The bill as written, the letter says,

...provid[es] sliding-scale premium subsidies to families up to 400 percent of the federal poverty line. This is particularly important in rural and other areas where most residents have modest incomes and need assistance for coverage to be affordable.With family health premiums now averaging close to $13,000 per year, premiums alone constitute a significant portion of income even for people at the upper end of this standard. That is why this provision in the House bill is so important.

That would be rural areas that the Blue Dogs say that they're looking out for. TPM's Beutler adds

Right now, one of the key sticking points in House negotiations between Blue Dogs and health care leaders is the question of financing--how to pay for the bill? Leaders had initially endorsed a surtax on high income earners to cover about half the bill's cost--but, under pressure from Blue Dogs, they're now walking that back. The original proposal had been to initiate the tax on families making over $350,000 a year, or individuals making over $280,000 a year. But now, they say, they might limit the tax to millionaires only.

But that creates a cost hole that needs to be filled. And Blue Dogs have suggested extracting it from working- and middle-class Americans. The bill, as proposed, would have provided subsidies for people living under 400 percent of the poverty line to buy health insurance--and Blue Dogs are suggesting that the line be lowered to 300 percent.

Right now, the average national premium for family coverage is $12,600--or $1,050 per month. Presumably, over time, reform legislation would lower that cost, but in the interim, it will continue to cost nearly that much. House legislation would help more middle-class people cover that cost--unless Blue Dogs get their way.

If you're represented by a Blue Dog, and you're not a millionaire, you might want to give your representative a call and let him or her know that you'll be remembering their efforts on behalf of industry and rich people come November, 2010.

No comments:

Post a Comment