The Public Option Is in the Mail...Just like the Check That Never Comes

After watching the Senate vote at 7:00 AM on December 24 on "Health Care Reform," and after hearing the President say this week that "I never campaigned on the Public Option..." I couldn't help but think about that old lie--"the Check's in the mail..."

Remember the euphoria that we felt when we gained a majority in the House and how optimistic we were when 60 Senators finally had a "D" next to their name and we thought we had a "filibuster proof majority?" Ha! The joke of the century....and it's on us.

And, just a year ago, there was our guy, a different kind of Presidential Candidate, elected by our hard work and above all odds because we listened closely and liked what we heard. Finally, there was someone who talked plainly about what was broken in Washington and what we needed to do to fix it. And boy oh boy, were We going to fix it! Yes We Can...

What a difference a year makes. Principles have been traded for principal.

Our Candidate, who indeed said repeatedly during the Campaign that he would not sign a health care bill without a government-run insurance exchange that all Americans could buy into, has been bought by the special interests that he once said that he deplored.

Monty Hall would not have made as many deals as this guy. Apparently, Monty Hall is a piker compared to Rahm Emanuel...

Let's see who the President (and his brain trust--Axelrod, Emanuel, et. al.) thought were worthy of his attention (largesse) and who should be the beneficiaries of his horse trading.

First, there was a huge giveaway to Big Pharma (followed up 2 weeks ago by support for killing a bill that would allow us--remember us??-- to import drugs from Canada--another campaign promise thrown in the trash). Then there was a mighty handout to the for-profit Hospitals. Next, he outsourced the entire health insurance plan bill to Max Baucus who promptly outsourced the writing of the bill to the highest bidders, the Health Insurance Companies, who wrote the language while crying about how bad it was. "Please don't throw me in that briar patch...."

And how about the ill-fated dating of Olympia Snowe, for the entire summer and most of the Fall? He must have been mesmerized by her widow's peak and couldn't (like the rest of us) hear the words coming out of her mouth... But, We all knew that at the end of the day, Olympia was never going to go to the prom with Barack. And indeed, on Dec. 24, as we knew would happen all along, I heard the Clerk of the Senate record Mrs. Snowe's vote on this watered-down insurance company written bill: "Nay."

Don't even get me started on Dick Liberman. I don't call him Joe anymore--and never will again. He's earned the "Dick" title, forever.

And, Ben Nelson? If he weren't in the Senate, he'd be arrested for extortion. So let me get this straight-- Ben Nelson holds up the entire process, supposedly because he's against the Public Option, but then he let's his vote be bought in order to get free Medicaid for Nebraska? I guess he's just against the rest of us getting cheaper health coverage, huh? Yet, everyone acts as if that's ok--the "normal" negotiation process in the Senate, they called it.

Did you see the Senators all patting themselves on the back after the big vote? Even the 39 who voted "Nay" were acting like buddies with the "D's." "Comity of the Senate," is what the commentators on TV called it. I think they misspelled it-- it should be "comedy" of the Senate--and a tragic comedy at that.

So, in the end, despite all the outsourcing and all the compromising and all the abandonment of anything that will save any money, I was left with one overriding thought at the "end" of this ordeal--these elite 100 people--our so-called "representatives"-- have absolutely nothing in common with us. As a group, they don't give a damn about anyone but themselves and their next election.

So, that leaves it up to us. Do your homework. Make a list of the Senators who don't get it. Support their opponents. Also remind them that we have our own Public Option. The Option to vote for someone else.

As for Barack, until his--"I didn't campaign on the Public Option" lie--I was willing chalk this health care debacle up to his naivety and his inexperience and the inability to find his testicles.

But now, to believe that Barack has not also been bought, would make me naive and blind.

So, when Organizing For America comes calling for my help in the next election, I'll just tell them.... the check's in the mail....

An Open Letter to the County Commission To Preserve Cone Ranch

To the Board of County Commissioners of Hillsborough County, Florida:

I am a 55-year old lifelong resident of Hillsborough County and a person who, like all residents of Tampa, relies upon the Hillsborough River as the sole source of my potable water.

Over the years, I have watched our local governmental officials continuously say “yes” to unbridled development, and as a result, we have, over the last 3 decades, casually caused the disappearance of our natural landscape. I am deeply concerned about the preservation of the Cone Ranch property, and I have been fully supportive of the County Commission’s decision to appoint the Cone Ranch Environmental Advisory Panel to study the issue of Cone Ranch and to make recommendations of what would be the best ways to administer this largest undeveloped contiguous parcel remaining in Hillsborough County.

The Cone Ranch Environmental Advisory Panel overwhelmingly recommended a straight forward, easy to understand, course of action to the BOCC “to direct the Water Resource Services Dept. to convey title to the Environmental Lands Acquisition and Protection Program (ELAPP) of the entire Cone Ranch property. We believe this is the best way to protect, preserve, and restore Cone Ranch in perpetuity.”

It is imperative that the BOCC now immediately adopt ALL of the Final Recommendations of the Advisory Panel, including the one that says: “Time is of the essence and the BOCC needs to take immediate action to transfer Cone Ranch to ELAPP; or if a decision is made in the interim to consolidate water utilities, that his Cone Ranch property will not be a part of that transfer….”

Stories have circulated that the BOCC may consider not following the recommendations of the Cone Ranch Environmental Advisory Panel. Those stories suggest that the BOCC may consider obtaining an appraisal for the Cone Ranch property, and only impose Conservation Easements on the property rather than convey the property to ELAPP where it can be restored and protected in perpetuity.

May I remind you that the citizens of Hillsborough County reauthorized the funding of the ELAPP program just last year in a referendum with the largest majority vote in the history of this County (79%)?

The citizens of Hillsborough County do not need an appraisal of this property. Why spend the money for an appraisal---which is nothing more than one person’s opinion of the value of this property? If you are looking for one person’s opinion of its value, let me give you my opinion of what the value of Cone Ranch is-- without spending thousands of taxpayer dollars for an appraisal—it’s Priceless!

Ask yourselves before voting to hire an appraiser: (1) Why are we spending taxpayer dollars on an appraisal? (2) What “Comparable Sale Properties” are there for the appraiser to use in coming up for his or her opinion of the value of Cone Ranch? There simply aren’t any properties which are comparable to Cone Ranch. It is unique.

And finally, in searching for wisdom in making your decisions as the guardians of our publicly owned lands, please be guided by these thoughts:

“We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children.” (Native American Proverb)

“We never know the worth of water till the well is dry.” (Dr. Thomas Fuller, Gnomologia, 1732).

“In our every deliberation, we must consider the impact of our decisions on the next seven generations.” (Great Law of the Iroquois)

And finally, please don’t make Ansel Adams’ words ring true. He said, “It is horrifying that we have to fight our own government to save the environment.”

Please vote to immediately transfer full and complete ownership and control of the Cone Ranch Property to ELAPP.


I've written and sent my letter to the Board of County Commissioners, now it's your turn.

Why Can't We Stop Funding The War?

As I watched the President's speech at West Point, this week, I couldn't help but think of how perfect all of the Cadets looked. Crisp uniforms. Sharply focused eyes. Fit and healthy. Committed and driven. And, oh my, so young.

As the Cadets listened intently to learn what their new mission would be, I could tell from the bewildered looks on their faces that they were hoping for more. So was I.

I was hoping that after all of his careful "studying" of the issue, that President Obama would recognize that there can be no "victory" in Afghanistan. I couldn't help but tear up as I thought of the members of his West Point audience who are essentially being sentenced to death with this horrible decision to escalate the war.

How many of those Cadets will lose limbs, or lose their sharply focused eyes? How many will suffer brain injuries and lose their ability to function normally for the remainder of their lives?How many will suffer that fate during the next 18 months? And for what? So we can keep troops near Pakistan when it hits the fan there? Surely that is the reason that our thinking President wants to keep troops there. Please tell me he doesn't really believe that we can train Afghans to defeat the Taliban in 18 months.....

So, I ask this simple question. If Health Care Reform can be stopped dead in its tracks, why can't funding for this War be stopped? Who will filibuster this?

The President knows we can't afford this war. He admitted so in his speech at West Point.

We can't afford the borrowed principal to fund the cost of one million dollars per soldier per year, or the borrowed interest payments on that ever-increasing national debt, or the loss of human life on both sides of the conflict, or the human casualties on both sides of the conflict, or the stress on the families of our soldiers.

Or the loss of our moral principles....if we still have any left...

Speak out and be heard. Stop this madness. Write to Congress today.

It takes courage to work for Peace. Think of the faces of those Cadets....

Shine The World's Biggest Spotlight On Them!

The more I watch the U.S. Senate, the more disgusted I become. The arcane "Rules" of the Senate are out of touch with the principles of Democracy and majority rule.

There are many instances of Senators abusing and misusing these rules for personal political gain or to hold something up until a project or an appropriation of money is given to his or her State.

Pardon my old fashioned values, but that sounds a bit like extortion. Don't call it "politics," it's extortion--especially if there isn't a bona fide cause for the hold.

As the health care bill torturously creeps through the U.S. Senate toward an up or down vote, we have all become front row spectators to the bizarre "cloture" rule that requires 60 votes to prevent a filibuster so that there can even be a debate on the Senate floor.

But what is an even more egregious Rule than cloture is the "HOLD" that any one Senator can place on anything that comes up for a vote or approval in the Senate. So, for example, if a position in the Federal government requires "Senate Confirmation," what it really means is that we have allowed our elected representatives to create a set of internal rules that allows any one Senator prevent a person's name from ever coming up for a vote by the entire Senate.

The Senatorial Hold has is being used right now by our recently appointed Senator George LeMieux to block the nomination of the next ambassador to Brazil.

So, for any reason, or, if he so chooses, for no reason at all, a man who was appointed by his best friend to a job that no one elected him to, can, for the next 18 months, decide that the United States should not have an Ambassador to the country of Brazil--and, he doesn't have to tell us the reasons why he has placed a "hold" on his nomination.

The St. Petersburg Times article on November 21, 2009, on this issue mentioned a former "hold" by Senator Larry Craig in 2003 that blocked hundreds of unrelated Air Force promotions until his state of Idaho received four C-130 cargo planes for the Idaho National Guard. I ask you again is that politics or extortion? It's clearly an abuse of public power by one person, but our system is so dysfunctional--by design--that it is considered acceptable behavior by Senators. Yet, how many people outside of Washington, D.C. think that is an acceptable system or acceptable personal behavior?

Someone from a small State with a tiny population (e.g. Wyoming), can decide the fate of the political process of the entire country-- and, the Senator doesn't even have to publicize it or give his or her reasons, unless WE do something about it.

For years, these types of things have gone on, largely unnoticed and often unreported because those who do the reporting are "embedded" with these politicians and are largely desensitized to the abuses (and think it's allowed because of these crazy rules, or they otherwise slough it off and label it as "politics" as usual). With the impending death of journalism and newspaper investigative reporting, I am concerned that there will likely be even less reporting of these activities in the future unless we force things to change.

It is time for us to SHINE A LIGHT on these Holds. Publicize them, blog about them, ask questions about them, and demand that these "rules" allowing one American to stop the Senate from acting, come to an end.

When I watch the actions of our Senators, I am reminded of a poignant line from the movie "Nuts" in which Barbara Streisand's character was facing a mental competency hearing in Court, and she was questioning the wisdom of having one particular Judge have the sole power to determine whether or not she was incompetent and unable to make her own decisions, just because her behavior was eccentric and outspoken. "Why does he get to decide what happens to me... What if he's just an asshole with power?...."

Why should any one Senator be able to stop our democracy dead in its tracks?

We must immediately publicize any Holds that are placed on any legislation or any appointments and SHINE A LIGHT ON THESE SENATORS TO EXPLAIN THEIR BEHAVIOR. There may well be valid reasons for their actions and if so, they should have to tell us and not keep their actions a secret, in the shadows.

Turn on your spotlights, people, and start looking for these "holds" and start reporting them on the internet. Seek out progressive investigative reporters and inform them of your findings. Write letters to the Editor. Demand explanations. Make Democracy work and stop this hostage situation from being routinely employed and accepted.

Wouldn't it be great if this "Rule" became an embarrassing thing that people in the Senate no longer use because there's just too much heat under those bright lights?

Remember "I've Got A Secret?" ....It's Back....

In the 1950's and 60's there was a TV game show called "I've Got a Secret." A mystery guest would appear and whisper to the Host what his or her secret was, and the celebrity panelists would play a game of "20 questions" to try to guess the secret. The audience at home would be clued in by a message on the bottom of the screen.

Flash forward to 2009 for the current version of the I've Got A Secret game. In today's version, we know what the "guest" does, we just don't know who the "guest" is. The celebrity panelists are the members of the Florida Legislature and the Governor. And, unfortunately, the folks watching all of this at home aren't being given any messages on the bottom of the screen.

The guest is an agent for undisclosed parties. The guest's name is Florida Energy Associates, LLC, a company formed by a Daytona Beach lawyer in 2008 to represent unknown parties who want to drill for oil off the coast of Florida.

It's not a secret that Florida Energy Associates, LLC has hired lots of lobbyists and is reportedly spending lots of money to try to convince the panelists to allow offshore oil drilling within nine miles of our beautiful Florida coastline. So far, however, this guest hasn't answered any of the important questions--the most important one being--EXACTLY WHO ARE YOU TRYING TO GET OIL LEASES FOR?

And guess, what? So far, according to a recent St. Petersburg Times article, Florida Energy Associates has refused to say who they are representing, and furthermore, they don't intend to disclose the names of their principals who will apply for the oil leases until after the law is changed. (Talk about putting the cart before the horse....)

In other words, Florida Energy Associates believes that it's none of our business. They've got a secret.

All we have is a pristine coastline that's at risk of being irreparably destroyed. So I say that it's high time that the panelists on this game show (the Florida Legislature) REQUIRE THE GUEST TO ANSWER THAT IMPORTANT QUESTION or get sent home (without a copy of the home game).

Don't the members of the Florida Legislature care if the oil drillers have the financial wherewithal to pay for the clean up of their spills?

Do we even know how much it would cost in cleanup costs alone if they (WHOEVER THEY ARE) were allowed to put "new, state of the art, safe drilling platforms"-- like the one that is presently leaking off the coast of Australia (and has been for weeks)-- within sight of our beautiful beaches?

How can the Legislature even consider allowing drilling without knowing the costs of cleanup, the potential loss of sales tax revenue from a spill, the loss of property values from a spill, and the identity of the drillers who would be responsible?

Don't the members of the Florida Legislature want to know if the drillers might be the Chinese, the Saudi's, Hugo Chavez, Bernie Madoff, Kim Jung Il, al Qaeda, or anyone else???????

Don't we care who is "setting up shop" right offshore from Clearwater Beach?

We've now seen the pilot show of the new version of "I've Got A Secret." It's time to cancel this show. Let's face facts, it's been a bad concept since the 60's. Although I hear it's still running in syndication in Texas. Let it stay there.

It's called Due Diligence, and our Florida Legislature needs to engage in it and needs to start asking LOTS OF QUESTIONS and DEMAND LOTS OF ANSWERS, UNDER OATH. Let this bill never hit the floor of either house, or let the hearings begin (and televise them)!

We're In Uncharted Waters, Only There's No Water

Eight years and counting. Twice as long as World War II, approaching the length of the Viet Nam War. No end in sight. No clear mission in sight. No end to the suffering of the soldiers and their families.

Our soldiers have done their duty. It is our civilian leaders who need to act like civilians and stop this endless war.

On this day when we honor our Veterans, what better honor could we bestow upon them than exercising sound judgment to preserve their lives?

Do we ask who is supplying the weapons and bullets being fired at our soldiers? Why don't we ask? Are we afraid we might discover that it is our own defense industry who has sold arms around the world that are now being used to kill our soldiers?

Do we ask how much this endless war is costing our nation in lives lost and borrowed dollars spent? Why not?

Do we discuss making the War "budget neutral" by paying for it with a War Tax (in the same way that we demand that health care reform legislation be "paid for")? Why not?

Why is there no concern that we are increasing the deficit with every bullet that is fired, every MRE that a soldier eats, every no bid contract that Halliburton receives? Why is stopping those discussions always "off the table?"

Why are we trying to build other nations while ours is in crisis and in need of repair?

Do we stop the Stop Loss program and the endless tours of duty that are destroying our troops and their families? Why not?

Do we consider the impacts of the mental illnesses being inflicted on our soldiers? Are we prepared for more Post Traumatic Stress Disorder incidents at home and abroad? Certainly, we don't expect these tragedies to decrease, do we?

When will we adequately fund the mental health needs of our Veterans when they return? We haven't yet. When will we begin to do so?

Why don't we provide health care benefits for all of our Veterans through the VA and not just those Veterans who have a service-related injury? Surely we owe them more.

It's long past time to honor our Veterans and our soldiers by ending these 2 wars and bringing our troops home where they belong. We can honor our active duty soldiers and Veterans through sensible policies and by finally giving them sufficient benefits. They have more than earned them.

After 8 years, it should be clear that we remain stranded in uncharted waters. Let's hope we can find our moral compass soon.....

One Year Later, Has "Yes We Can" Been Replaced By "No I Won't?"

November 4, 2008, was an exciting, historic day. Democrats and Independents answered the call of "Yes We Can" in record numbers, with a voter turnout never seen before.

Thousands gathered and cheered in Grant Park--many of whom had tears streaming down their faces, never believing they would ever live to see a black man elected as President of the United States. The Obama family was warmly greeted on that cool evening by that loving crowd, as a waive of optimism spread across our country and across the world for a new direction for America. Film footage of spontaneous celebrations from all around the world startled us all.

There was a great deal of optimism in the promises of Hope and Change. For the first time in a long time, there was a feeling that we were not only going to change directions as a country, but there were many transgressions of the previous 8 years that needed to be rectified.

"Yes We Can" was firmly rooted in Candidate Obama's promises of ending the war in Iraq; re-evaluating the war in Afghanistan; providing universal health care for all Americans and paying for it by ending the tax cuts for the richest 2%; closing Guantanimo Bay and providing real trials for those prisoners in which they would be apprised of the charges and evidence against them and not held indefinitely without knowing the charges against them; ending torture and rendition of political prisoners to black site prisons in other countries known to torture; ending warrantless wiretapping of Americans; ending Presidental "signing statements" and restoring the importance of the rule of law as the foundation of our democracy; regulating the banks and brokerage firms on Wall Street so that reckless investment schemes could not again bring us to the brink of financial collapse; creating green jobs for the future; recognizing the importance of science both in terms of stem cell research and in combating global warming; talking to our enemies and using diplomacy instead of bombs as a first option; advancing civil rights of all Americans regardless of race or sexual preference; practicing bi-partisanship and reducing the influence of lobbyists and special interest groups; ending the politicalization of the Justice Department; providing better care and treatment for our veterans; and improving the quality of our educational system so that we can compete in the world economy. (Just to name a few.)

Never before had a President assumed office with so many serious problems. The task was, and remains, daunting. There are few quick fixes.

I understand that there are severe institutional problems in not being able to control the legislative branch, but there are many things that can be accomplished through executive orders and choosing the right people to work in the exectutive branch. It's those things that the President can control--that he isn't charging quickly enough and aggressively on-- that make me wonder if I'm going to have to "keep the Change"....

For the Progressives and Independents who have been waiting a long time for the above mentioned Changes to occur, the bold assertions that "Change is Coming" and "Yes We Can" have been brushed aside.

It's hard to implement changes on Wall Street when you choose Timothy Geithner and Larry Summers as your agents of change. They were part of creating the problems that led to the financial crisis and they cannot be expected to point the fingers at themselves. "Too big to fail" is not a policy we can allow to continue. Yet, it has and will under the current administration.

In the area of ending warrantless wiretapping, rendition, and providing real trials for the prisoners at Guantanimo Bay, this might as well be the third term of George W. Bush. I see no policy Changes whatsoever.

When Barack Obama was a state senator in Illinois, there is film footage of him saying that he strongly supported a single payer health care system (and recognized it as the only way to provide health care for all and to reduce costs), but in order to accomplish that, he said that "we would first need to control the House, the Senate and the White House..." Well, guess what, that's what the American people voted for, and yet, notwithstanding the mandate provided by the electorate to the Democrats, President Obama promptly set his sights much, much lower.

First of all, the President outsourced the health care bills to Congress, refused to adequately use his bully pulpit and extraordinarily high approval ratings to hammer home real health care reform. To this day, the President refuses to clearly state what it is that he really wants in "his" health care reform.

Single payer could not even be debated? Passing it might not have been possible, but not standing up for the principle and talking about it is unforgiveable. If not now, when? Never even discussing single payer (and taking it off the table from the start) was a huge tactical error and a stab in the back to his base--and a betrayal of his own beliefs.

Despite the promises to end the business as usual with lobbyists and special interest groups, a back room deal was quickly struck with Big Pharma that prevents the ability to reduce drug costs through volume purchasing discounts (another often mentioned idea during the campaign). It didn't take long to sweep that noble idea under the rug in the Oval Office, now did it?

By the way he's acting now, I wonder if the President would sell his soul for one solitary Republican vote on the health care bill? While the ihe idea of bi-partisanship was noble, initially, how long do we have to watch the continuous "dance" with the party of "No" before we want to scream?

Olympia Snowe's one-time vote for a watered down bill that forces more purchasing of higher priced health insurance from the same unregulated companies that have brought us to this untenable place is not exactly the Change I was hoping for when I cast my ballot a year ago.

I recall promises about fixing "Don't ask, don't tell." Couldn't that policy be rendered unenforceable with an Executive Order? Don't ask.

Four years after Katrina, would we finally build a hospital in New Orleans? Perhaps as a useful expenditure of stimulus money? No We Can't. (He even did his own version of the New Orleans fly-over recently. The President would love to stay longer and talk about "rebuilding" New Orleans, but he's off to a fundraiser in San Francisco).

To hear Tea Baggers and some Republicans talk about the President (and how they want their country back, etc.), you'd think he was a raving liberal. Quite the contrary. To date the President has been conservative and slow to push for the Change that he promised in the Campaign. He has in many instances continued the policies of the Bush administration and has catered far more to Republicans than to his base.

Don't get me wrong. I'm thankful to have an intelligent, thoughtful, articulate man as our President. But, measured against the bar that he set in the election, his actions have not lived up to the hype--at least not yet.

And one year later, I'm wondering if real Change will ever come. Until I see some progressive changes, I'm off the Kool-Aid.

What were Pete Townsend's immortal words in The Who's classic song "Won't Get Fooled Again?" "Meet the new boss, just the same as the old boss...."

For the sake of our country, and my sanity, I sure hope not.

Charlie's Always Running; Too Bad He Can't Run Our State

Charlie Crist was born to run. He simply loves to run for office. Unlike most politicians who detest fundraising, Charlie loves to raise money to run for office.

Charlie loves to run so much that when he wins, he can't wait to leave that office and run for the next higher office.

He loves running around the State for photo ops and he loves running for exercise. He loves running to personal appearances at public gatherings where he can charm a crowd with warm homespun cliches about how "Florida is a shining state on a hill" or remind us how he is "the People's Governor."

Unfortunately, the only thing that Charlie doesn't like running is the State of Florida.

As Governor, Charlie hasn't done much, now has he?

Unlike Jeb, who was an agenda setter extraodinare (albeit not a good agenda, but there was never a doubt that it was Jeb's agenda nonetheless), Charlie is at the other end of the leadership spectrum. Charlie has adopted the role of a spectator, or perhaps a cheerleader, but not a leader. By the relaxed way that he acts, if you didn't know better, you'd think that Charlie has already fixed all of the State's problems (and that's why he's looking for another job).

But the last time I checked, we're experiencing a vast number of problems for Charlie to address right now (when he's not dialing for dollars for his Senate campaign).

Charlie, in case you haven't noticed, here is what is happening to our "Shining State on the Hill:"

1. We're still near the bottom of all of the states in the country in education funding and test scores (thank goodness for Mississippi);


2. We have an unemployment crisis, with no relief in sight;


3. One-fourth of Floridians under age 65 have no health insurance;


4. Home foreclosures are at an all time high;


5. Our Republican-controlled state government didn't balance the budget last year and had to rely on more than 4 billion dollars in Federal Stimulus Funds to "balance the budget;"


6. We still have a homeowner's insurance crisis with too much loss exposure being guaranteed by Citizens Insurance Company, while Charlie is driving private insurers out of the state (thank goodness we haven't had any hurricanes during the last three years);


7. More people moved out of Florida last year than moved into the State--for the first time since WWII;


8. Tourism is down;


9. Sales tax revenues are down, documentary stamp tax revenues are down, and intangible tax revenues are down;


10. Property values are down 50%, yet property taxes have not dropped appreciably.

Charlie promised us a lot of things when he was running the last time. Most of all, he promised us that he would be the Governor for an entire 4-year term if he was elected. Yet, two years into his term, he pulled a Sarah Palin, and basically quit to run for Senate. At least Sarah had the decency to give up the State salary while deciding what to do with the rest of her life. Charlie just plays Governor while he draws the Governor's salary and does his campaign fundraising.

Remember the campaign ads that Charlie ran which showed an "empty chair" and criticized his opponent, Jim Davis, for missing votes in Congress while he was running for governor against Charlie? I can't help but think about that empty chair that now sits in Charlie's office in the Governor's mansion. First of all, he's never in the chair--because he's busy running around the state running for Senate. But even when he's physically in Tallahassee, he's also figuratively "not in the chair" because he is AWOL as a Governor and is not proposing ANY solutions for the 10 things listed above that need to be worked on right now. The budget crisis isn't going away, and this year there will be no Stimulus Money to plug the holes.

While Charlie's chair (and his suit) are empty, I'm still waiting for my property taxes and homeowner's insurance premiums to "drop like a rock" as Charlie promised. Unfortunately, my property's value is the only thing that has dropped like a rock under Charlie's "watch."

And worst of all, Charlie is running away from his current job in hopes that he can get elected to the Senate before Floridians wake up and realize how badly he has performed as our Governor. He knows that if he served as Governor for 8 years, there would be no way for him to hide from his dismal record. He's counting on his charm as a retail politician and he's counting on Floridians' general sense of apathy to try to run away to Washington, D.C. before we wake up and realize what hit us.

Can someone give me a reason why we shouldn't be screaming for Charlie to do his present job?

And, for the life of me, I can't understand why we would want to give him a promotion....

A Failed Business Plan

I have to expand my business in another country. My business plan calls for continuous expansion. It's what we do. My suppliers need me to continuously expand so that they can all make lots of money.

There are a few significant problems, however.

First of all, I don't have ANY money for this expansion. I'll need to borrow every penny.

Secondly, I have serious concerns about the stability of the government in the country where I want to operate my stores. The government could fail at any minute and they may not want me to be there once I get my stores open.

Third, this is a very dangerous place to set up my business, but I can deal with that part. I'll heavily arm my employees and authorize my employees to kill anyone that they have to. My employees aren't exactly thrilled about my idea to expand our business into this country, but they are very loyal to me, and luckily for me, they are under iron clad employment contracts. They can go to jail if they refuse to go where I send them. And, fortunately for me, I don't have to pay them exorbitant amounts to send them there. But actually, in my business plan, costs don't really matter. All that matters is that we continuously expand.

If my employees don't have some of the skills or equipment that I need to set up my business, I can get other companies to do the work on an independent contractor basis, and my business plan doesn't require me to look at how much they are charging me. My bankers have promised to fund the loan for my business regardless of these impediments. I'm so glad I don't have that headache of balancing a budget for my business.

Another potential problem is that I'm not sure that the people in the country of expansion either need my product or want it. Yet, I'm not overly concerned with that. I've got a business to run and they'll eventually want me to be there, I'm sure. They just don't know how great I am and how much they need what I'm selling.

My managers keep assuring me that they can create a successful store if I'll just send the employees over quickly. They think they may be able to set up our stores if we send at least 40,000 employees, but it may take 10 years or more to get the stores set up and we may need several hundred thousand employees to set up our store.

In order to fill my staffing needs, I'm going to have to pull people out of other jobs here in the U.S. and send them over to my new stores for the next year or so. I'm sure their families will understand. I'm also sure that some of them may not come back in tact, so I'll need to plan for sending replacement employees and for dealing with the medical needs of those who come back home too injured to work in my stores. (Note to self: This is one area where our company may be able to save a few dollars. We'll need to appoint a subcommittee to study that).

But wait a minute, I thought you said that your bankers don't care how much things cost? Why wouldn't you just get your bankers to pay anything that you need to care for your sick or injured workers (or to take care of the families of those who get killed in setting up the stores)?

I can't believe you asked me that question. You obviously aren't a business person. You see, my business plan thrives on expansion of the business, and building the business, not taking care of its workers. You just don't understand this business. What's wrong with you focusing on the human cost of the business? You must be a Communist.

Did I mention that no outsiders have ever set up a store in this country over thousands of years? Don't worry....we'll get it done---we're different, we're special--they just don't know us well enough yet. We have the best stores in the world. Don't fret over the fact that our test store has only been open for 8 years. Sometimes it just takes a little while for people to understand how much they need our product.

If you were the Chairman of the Board of my company, would you think that I have a sound business plan? Are you ready to give me the green light to proceed full speed ahead?

Whatever you do, please don't "dither" or spend a lot of time thinking about it.

The only thing I really need your input on is where to put my stores. I've already got my sights set on Afghanistan, but I'm not ruling out Pakistan.

Many are saying that our stores in the U.S. are in need of retooling and reinvestment, but they just don't understand a great business model when they see one.

The Founding Fathers Wouldn't Believe Their Eyes

If the founding fathers were here today, they'd never believe the mess we've created in Washington. It's so bad that even George Washington himself would likely ask that the District of Columbia be renamed so he wouldn't have his family name slandered.

Would we have three separate, but equal branches of government if we were starting our country from scratch today? If you answer "yes" to that question, then you have to tell me the names of the people who would be able to draft the constitution today. And then tell me if it would look anything remotely like what the founders created. I think not.

Would we have a Bill of Rights if our founding fathers had been worried about their own personal political futures or their own personal wealth like today's politicians do? Thankfully, unlike the current cast of characters in Congress, our founders had a collective vision of something much larger than themselves. Today's leaders, um....not so much.

There aren't any Madison's or Jefferson's or Washington's in our Capital today. Not even close.

Unfortunately, today it is solely about enhancing one's own political career first, then parlaying that into making as much money as possible. And don't forget to throw in a big dose of extreme partisanship and hatred to make the entire place as disfunctional as possible.

Everyone in Washington is always looking ahead to the next election and the next fundraiser, and the next lobbying job when they leave public office so that they can really cash in.

As a result, it's no wonder that we have lots of problems, no solutions, and nothing more than a corrupt, bankrupt confederation of states. Yet, no one in Washington wants to admit it or try to do anything to address it. Instead, they are all too busy feathering their own nests and padding their own wallets to even notice or care.

Although it was nothing more than a gimmicky political slogan in the last election, it is high time that we all began to truly focus on "Country First." We'd better figure out how to build a strong middle class and restore a manufacturing economy in the United States or we are in for extremely tough sledding ahead. Remember the Roman Empire?

We also need to figure out a way for all Americans to be able to obtain quality affordable health care. Let's not wait for our present crop of Senators to fix our predicament. They don't care about us, and they don't have "the right stuff." They shouldn't even be mentioned as having the same title as our nation's prior great statesmen who were Senators.

Although there are many Senators who are worthy of criticism, today's rant will simply focus on two--Evan Bayh and Joe Liberman.

Joe Liberman and Evan Bayh wouldn't even make the farm team of the founding fathers. They couldn't even carry the water bucket for the team. They should be cut from the current team for not being able to discern when they have been completely "bought and paid for" and have had their integrity completely compromised to the point where they should no longer even have a vote in the Senate.

It sickens me that Evan Bayh hides behind his professed fiscal conservatism as his reasoning for "going slow" on healthcare reform, especially any creation of a public option. Evan, please, give us a break on the "fiscal conservative" hogwash.

In reality, we know that you are married to Susan B. Bayh, who sits on the Board of Directors of WellPoint, Inc. one of the largest health insurance companies in the country, and a company who strongly opposes a Public Option.

Is it fiscal conservatism that has Evan Bayh so concerned about the Public Option? Or, is it the fact that he and his wife's personal stock holdings increase every time he indicates that he is personally going to kill the public option, that is driving his convictions ? You aren't fooling us, Senator! You're a dog alright, but not a good dog, and not Blue one, either.

How can you threaten to filibuster a bill that contains a Public Option that is overwhelmingly wanted and needed by an ever-increasing majority of the people in your state and in the country?

Well, if your name is ol' "Blue Dog Evan Bayh" it's real easy-- you just keep your eye on your stock portfolio every time you vote in your own personal interest (and in the interest of your wife's company), and you simply tune out the cries and screams of the people who are suffering because they either don't have health care, or can't afford their ever-increasing WellPoint premiums.

And if you are the despicable Joe Liberman you first talk in your 2006 re-election campaign about how you are strongly committed to universal health care and that you should be re-elected because you have the power and the connections and the experience in the Senate to be able to achieve real universal health care reform, including reform of the health care industry-- if only the good people of Connecticut will just send you back to the Senate for another term.

Then, after you get re-elected, Joe, you turn your back on the voters without batting an eye, and boldly announce that you are a whore for the insurance industry. Prostitution is a crime, Joe, and so is your behavior. Stop the hypocracy and go ahead and join the GOP. We expect them to act this way.

It's almost Halloween, normally a scary time of year in and of itself. This year, it's extra scary, but not just because of the gools and goblins knocking on our doors for candy. This year, it's extra scary because we have 535 goons and hooligans in the House and Senate dressing up like Statesmen playing tricks on the voters and treating themselves.

It's time to unmask them, shine bright lights on their behavior, and hold them all accountable. Let's do it in honor of the founding fathers.

Check Your Insurance Cards At The Door, Please

I wonder how quickly we could achieve a complete make-over of our health insurance system if all Members of the House and Senate and their family members, and all employees of the White House and their family members, and all of their respective staffers and their family members would be required to turn in their insurance cards at work tomorrow. Just cut up their cards overnight. What if, starting tomorrow, they no longer had ANY health insurance coverage? Just think how motivating that would be!

If they all suddenly and unexpectantly joined the ranks of the uninsured, and had to obtain coverage on their own like those who are unemployed or those who are otherwise uninsured or uninsurable, perhaps then--and only then-- they would understand the real nature of the problem and the real urgency of this current crisis.

Yes, it is a crisis. Because health insures are unregulated, health insurance premiums will continue to increase at many times faster than the rate of inflation--because they can.

Most of all, it is scary not to have any health insurance coverage for yourself or your loved one. Those who have it, don't understand that fear.

Those who have health insurance and who oppose any reform argue about the estimates of the numbers of millions of uninsured as though it's some sort of impersonal exercise in counting items of inventory in a warehouse. "It's not 47 million, it's really more like 12 million..." How quickly would they look at it differently if they were instantly among those uninsured?

And also, while we're at it, let's add all the "talking heads" and "experts" on TV and radio to the list of the overnight uninsured, and let's give them all pre-existing conditions to boot. Let's let everyone who pontificates about this, without feeling any pain or fear about it, and without ACTING TO FIX IT to "walk in the uninsureds' mocassins."

And, here's the rest of my dream. That none of our politicians will get their coverage reinstated until they pass a new bill, and then, they have to accept the WORST option available for themselves. No longer do they have the best coverage, now they would get what the least of us has. Given those new "rules" I bet we'd have SINGLE PAYER overnight. But, alas, so much for my dream... they've taken it "off the table..." and my magic wand is on back order from Amazon.

In the real world outside of the Beltway where heath insurance companies are completely unrestricted, and enjoy an anti-trust exemption that allows them the most unlevel of all playing fields, health insurance for individuals and small businesses is increasingly unattainable, unaffordable, overloaded with high deductibles, and supercharged with exclusions from coverage. And, oh yea, it's going to cost more, for less coverage, next year, too.

Unfortunately, our politicians have it better than anyone, so it is easy for them to pontificate about their "concern" for the situation--but unfortunately, they aren't concerned enough to enact real reform. I'd love to be able waive a magic wand and make it personal to them, overnight. They need to feel some pain. Apparently, that's what it will take to light a fire under them.

Small businesses make up 40% of the insured under our present system. Unregulated insurance companies charge small businesses and individuals the HIGHEST premiums--because they can. Small businesses like mine can least afford to bankroll lobbyists like the big corporations, so our concerns aren't addressed.

Although we have coverage today, our premiums rise by double digits each year and our out-of-pocket deductible go up as well. I'm extemely concerned about the ability to continue to afford health insurance premiums in the years to come.

This is why I support a strong, immediately implemented Public Option so that small businesses don't have to wait until 2013 (which is one of the estimated phase-in dates) for another source of our health insurance coverage . I can't wait that long. Our premiums will double by then!

Just imagine the "surcharges" that the insurance companies' bean counters are already planning for next year's budget to "reimburse" themselves for all the lobbying money they are spending every day now to buy our politicians off! You know the insurance companies are angry that they are having to put this money in politicians' pockets rather than in their own pockets, and boy are they are going to take it out on us-- especially the smallest and weakest of us--because they can!

The Public Option is the only hope individuals and small businesses have to get on a level playing field with the big corporations. Yet, our representatives continue to ignore us.

We have a truly broken political system where the "Have's" dictate to the rest of us, in their secure bubble, always looking ahead to the next election and accepting unlimited campaign contributions from those who want this to stay the same.

It's up to us to stop this "because they can" maddness.

So, as I see it, we either SPEAK VERY LOUDLY and make them understand our plight and our fears--and FORCE THEM TO ACT FOR US for a change, or else we must vote them out of office.

Start today by applying pressure to the White House. The President and Rham Emmanuel are not being forceful enough in supportng the Public Option.

And the thought of even considering a "trigger" plan that will delay implementation to allow the health insurers to self regulate their behavior is delusional. The same goes for the plan of allowing the Public Option to be determined on a state by state basis. I don't need my choices for my small business being dictated by my State Legislature or my Governor. Where are those "anti-government intruding into my personal life people" in this discussion?

I look forward to the day when we no longer have to deal with dictates from private insurance companies "because they can" and instead hope I can look forward to a day when we can say that we fought and demanded real and substantial change, because we wouldn't take it any more.

Get busy!

Say Goodnight, Dick!

Those who remember the old 1960's comedy show Laugh In recall that the show always ended with co-host, Dick Martin, saying something really stupid and his partner, Dan Rowen, saying "Say Goodnight Dick." It was a weekly put down for Dick to shut up and not tell another lame joke or make another stupid comment. And then Dick would say stupidly, "Good Night, Dick."


So, last night, it was our own Dick--Dick Cheney, who once again opened his foul mouth to speak out about Afghanistan. Good God--just say NOTHING, Dick--ever! And especially, don't even think about telling us how to run a war.


His message was that the President was "dithering" and afraid to make the decisions to deploy more troops, so that we aren't doing what is absolutely necessary to support his General in the field to give him what he needs to "fulfill the mission." And of course, he had to say that the troops were endangered because of the dithering.


One man's dithering is another man's reflective planning.


It's the continuing struggle to figure out what the "mission" is after 8 years that makes Afghanistan so problematic. Yet, like Iraq, Cheney never met a Mission he couldn't morph. He also fails to understand that deploying troops endangers them much more than withdrawing them does.


Say Goodnight, Dick! We don't want to hear you any more--ever! You are the architect of the single largest foreign policy debacle in U.S. history--the Iraq War. You rushed us into that war, Dick, when some reflective "dithering" to allow those pesky weapons inspections to be completed would have been the prudent thing to do.


Dick, you need to go away and shut up. You have done enough damage in the world for several lifetimes. Your unpatriotic criticisms of the President and never-ending sage "advice" smacks of self-serving attempts to either re-write history or continued efforts to enrich your own wallet.


Let's never forget the millions of dollars that Dick has made for himself as a War Profiteer. When our soldiers go to war, Haliburton goes with them (thanks solely to Dick), and we pay its employees much more than we pay our soldiers, and we pay Haliburton many times the retail value of the cost of their goods and services, year after year, war after war. Remember the $10 Cokes that Haliburton sold to our troops? Dick does, he cashed the dividend checks. And all the while, Dick snears and gripes and criticizes all the way to the bank.


Perhaps I'd have some respect for Dick if he hadn't requested and received 5 deferments when it was his time to serve in Vietnam, or if he wasn't still thrilled to be a torturer, or if he hadn't lied about taking us to war in Iraq, or if he hadn't ignored Afghanistan for eight years while continually redefining the mission in Iraq to cover up his pre-war lies, failed strategies, and incompetence in running both wars.


And I might have some respect for Dick if he would quietly disappear from public view and disgorge all of the profits that he ever made from these wars. I might have some respect for Dick if he would sell all of his Haliburton stock and use the proceeds (and his disgorged profits) to create a charitable foundation for the sole benefit of the families of the soldiers who died in his wars, and to pay for the extraordinary medical expenses faced by those brave soldiers who have been wounded in his wars , and who will carry their physical and mental injuries for the rest of their lives.


When you stop cashing in, Dick, and when you help those whose lives you've ruined, Dick, or when you pick up a gun and go fight yourself, Dick, then you can talk again.


Until then, it's not a Laugh In, its a tragedy. Go Away. Say Goodnight, Dick.

Snowe Job

For months I've been sick and tired of all the attention being paid to Olympia Snowe, the Republican Senator from Maine who, for some inexplicable reason, has become the focal point of the health care reform debate in the Senate. I'm sick of the Democrats in the Senate and President Obama bowing down to Olympia Snowe and ignoring Progressive Democrats.

Barack has a thing for Olympia Snowe. First there was the courting and cajoling, soon followed by the waffling, then the capitulation on issue after issue to the point where the Finance Committee's bill has become so weak that even a Republican will vote for it.


Big deal--Olympia Snowe voted once for a watered-down bill WITHOUT A PUBLIC OPTION. In other words, she voted in a committee for a bill with absolutely no immediate or long-term cost-saving mechanisms that would have passed out of the committee without her vote.


Isn't COST SAVINGS one of the the major reasons to pursue health care reform in the first place?

Yesterday, the President praised Olympia Snowe--AGAIN (for her insignificant vote)--even though it is clear that she will likely never vote for the final bill on the Senate floor! Yet she continues to receive praise, attention, and anything she wants.


I've got a much better idea. Why doesn't the President praise Sen. Rockefeller who is actually fighting for real progressive health care reform designed to lower costs? Why all this fascination and love for the Queen of "No Thanks" for the Public Option?


Why is it that Progressives like me get no support from the President for what we want in the bill, while he does a double limbo for any Republican, especially Sen. Snowe, whenever they ask for something?


And today, Harry Reid continued the courtship by inviting Snowe to join the elite Senate group who will try to shepherd the bill through the Senate as it is merged. WHY ARE THERE ARE ZERO PROGRESSIVES ON THE COMMITTEE? This shunning of Progressives is the fault of the "leadership" in the Senate and a lack of leadership from the White House.

Unlike me, Olympia Snowe has never:

1. Voted for Barack Obama.

2. Canvassed door to door for Barack Obama to help him get elected.

3. Made telephone calls for Barack Obama to help get him elected.

4. Donated money for Barack Obama's campaign.


5. Held campaign signs on busy street corners during the election.


6. Acted as an official Poll Watcher to ensure that voters' ballots would be counted.

7. Favored a Public Option.


Why do Progressives who have done all of the above get completely ignored, while Olympia Snowe gets anything she wants?


I'm a Progressive that feels betrayed by the Blue Dogs and the President.


I'm already ready for CHANGE--from the top down.


I'm not falling for the Snowe Job any longer, and neither should you.

Why Won't McCollum Grant An Interview?

Why is Bill McCollum afraid to grant an interview on the issue of the influence of money and political contributions, and especially as they relate to investment advisory fees paid to investment managers of the State's multi-billion dollar nest egg?



It is troubling enough that the Trustees of the State Board of Administration are 3 elected officials (Charlie Crist, Alex Sink and Bill McCollum), all of whom are running for office and are in full fundraising mode to get there, while exercising fiduciary control over billions of dollars of investments of State and local government funds.

It is even more troubling that one of the Trustees is the Attorney General, Bill McCollum, the State's Chief Law Enforcement Officer who would be the person responsible for protecting the State's nest egg and bringing suit, if necessary, toward that end. The conflicts of interest are obvious.



It is even more troubling when Mr. McCollum won't answer questions on the subject, even when he knows in advance what the questions are, because they have been submitted to him in writing by the St. Petersburg Times.

Is it because he is too busy changing hats?



On October 11, the St. Petersburg Times announced that they have been asking Mr. McCollum to submit to an interview. They even went so far as to send him a list of written questions that they wanted to ask him. Again he played dodge ball.

I've written a Letter to the Editor of the St. Petersburg Times asking them to publish the list of written questions that the St. Petersburg Times provided to Mr. McCollum's campaign staff so we will know exactly what he is afraid to talk about--since he is obviously avoiding the issue.

I Am Against The Next War, Too

I saw these words on a T-shirt this weekend--I Am Against the Next War, Too-- and thought that it aptly states my new creed, when it comes to war.


What is it in the human psyche that makes us think that wars are an answer to problem-solving? Why do we prefer to opt for intractable wars of perpetual duration, rather than recognize an intelligent need to change direction?


What is it in the American psyche that makes us talk in terms of "winning and losing," as if those are even measurable concepts in the context of wars, especially today's wars? When are the Hawks going to realize that we are never going to achieve a surrender on the deck of an aircraft carrier from al Qaeda, the Taliban, or any of the other insurgents that we are now fighting, and so we won't have a clear indication of what a "win" looks like?


In insurgency wars, we have difficulty knowing who the enemy is, or where they live. We eventually become occupiers trying to win the hearts and minds of a group of people who don't want us to be there. Yet, we can't find it in our psyche to admit that we can't "win," so we don't leave. Guess what, the Taliban isn't going to leave Afghanistan--ever-- and will wait us out, if it takes 25 years or more. We cannot put enough soldiers in that country to kill them all. So they will wait until we run out of patience, soldiers or money (or all of them).


We don't admit that fighting an insurgency in someone else's country is not winnable. An insurgency has never been defeated in history. It's the nature of the conflict and its setting that makes it unwinnable, not the quality or quantity of our soldiers.


What type of ignorance or arrogance makes us think that we can afford the cost of continuous war--either in terms of the human loss of life or the financial cost to our country's treasury? Every dollar that we spend in Iraq or Afghanistan is borrowed. Yet, inexplicably, we remain unconcerned with the cost. We hire private contractors at exorbitant rates, because we don't have enough enlisted soldiers in our army.


Our soldiers and their families are paying a huge price which we can never repay in any way--other than by making sound decisions to stop putting them in life-threatening situations in nation-building experiments.


We refuse to talk about bringing the soldiers home without asking if it will mean that others who have died in those wars "died in vain." Stop asking that question. Instead, start asking if the next death is worth staying for. If you answer "yes," then be on the next plane there to fight yourself.


Would we view the prosecution of wars differently if we reinstated the Draft? You bet we would. Would we view the wars differently if we had to raise taxes to pay for them without any borrowing? Absolutely. So if that's so clear, what are we basing our policies on?

Do you think that the Romans realized that their empire was crashing around them while it was occurring, or were they too blind to recognize the need to change their course?

Why is it that we readily say "no to drugs" and "no to single payer health insurance for all Americans," and "no to raising taxes" and "no to welfare" "no to gun control," and "no to abortion" and "no to gay marriage" and "no to immigration" and "no to big government"--but we always seem to say "yes" to War?

Take Alan Grayson's Lead and Get Your Spine Out of the Closet, Democrats!

Kudos to Rep. Alan Grayson, a Democrat from Orlando, for using hyperbole to illustrate his point about the Republicans' complete absence of ANY health care plan. In case you missed it, Rep. Grayson said the Republicans' health care plan is: (1) Don't get sick, and (2) If you do get sick, DIE QUICKLY!


That policy goes hand in hand well with protest signs I've seen opposing health care reform: "I've got mine; you get yours!" But, considering the fact that those of us with health insurance now indirectly pay for health care for many who don't have health insurance and use the Emergency Room as their doctor, the "Die Quickly" plan would be a money saver (right, Rush, Glenn, Sean?)


Remember back in the spring when the Republicans in the House promised that their own health care plan would be released in a few days? (Psst.... we're still waiting....) Actually, they've released it--just without any fanfare. It's a really short plan. It goes like this--NONE. (But, the GOP plan has an instruction manual for its party members: make sure you act like you are in favor of reform, and even mention that you think that the current system doesn't work--but yet continue to propose nothing and to vote "no" on all Democratic proposals).


Rep. Grayson, through the use of hyperbole, FINALLY called the Republicans out and exposed their do-nothing obstructionist actions like no other Democrat has done. And better yet, when he faced criticism for his comments and calls from the GOP to "apologize" for his remarks, he embraced the opportunity and apologized "to the dead" on behalf of a Congress that has dragged its collective feet for decades and has done nothing while our health care system deteriorates and becomes increasingly unattainable and unaffordable.


How many people have died needlessly over these decades because we have no leadership in Congress on this issue?


And yes, it's time to call out the Democrats on this issue. We all know the Republicans are not going to do ANYTHING. Just like their staunch opposition to the passage of the Medicare legislation in the 1960's, the Republicans cannot be counted on to solve this problem. It is clearly up to the Democrats to do it.


Those Democrats who vote (NO) with the Republicans on health care legislation need to look for another line of work. We are not going to put up with it any more.


This is a problem that Democrats can fix, but only if they will vote together in a united block.


So far, they haven't. If they won't, we need to show them the door.


In the meantime, perhaps Rep. Grayson will take his fellow Democrats to the closest X-ray machine and show them that they too, do indeed, have a spine--and he can tell them how liberating it is to stand tall and firm on principles.


Perhaps then they can get things done.

We've Fallen And We Can't Get Up--Why Health Care Reform Can't Wait

I heard Olympia Snowe, Senator from Maine chastise her fellow Senators for moving too quickly on health care reform. "Why do we have to move so quickly," she asked? Perhaps she would feel a sense of urgency if she lost her health care coverage like thousands of Americans do every day while Congress continues to drag its feet.

I'd like Congress to be forced to give up their excellent health insurance coverage for themselves and their families until they get this mess fixed. And then, I'd like them to have to accept the worst insurance plan that they pass in Congress. Then, and only then, they might think like us and pass a sound bill.

Until then, we need to organize, and speak out. If you need some talking points, or bullet points, try these:

The present situation is intolerable. There are no cost controls and way too much power in the hands of the health insurers and drug companies. The health insurance companies donate huge amounts of money to both parties to maintain the status quo. They win, we lose--year after year.

None of the proposed bills are “GOVERNMENT RUN HEALTH INSURANCE.” That would be single payer, “Medicare For All.” However, most people who have Medicare are satisfied with it and would fight like hell if we got rid of that government run program. Veterans and government employees are also very happy with their single payer insurance.

Private health insurers are raping us today (and will tomorrow unless we regulate the hell out of them). Their profits have skyrocketed. Premiums have risen by double digits at a time when wages are stagnant or falling. All the major companies are in collusion with each other when it comes to setting rates. There is no real competition. They own us. We let them by continuing to elect politicians who won't stand up to them and stand up for us.

If you like health insurance coverage that you have today, that doesn’t mean you’ll have coverage that you like tomorrow—or ANY coverage, for that matter. Not under our present system where the following are standard practice: pre-existing conditions are not covered; rescissions of policies for “misrepresentations or failure to disclose medical history—including conditions you didn’t know you had”; yearly maximums; exclusions of certain illnesses; and other insurance company gimmicks specifically designed to limit coverage and maximize their profits.

The need for health care reform isn’t only about providing insurance for those who don’t have it now. It’s about making sure that small businesses and individuals can afford it tomorrow and 5, 10, and 15 years from now.

Health insurance companies should not be “for profit” companies because the only way for them to make profits is to continuously raise premiums and deny benefits to those who paid. The original health insurance companies were nonprofit. As insurance companies became for- profit the practice of medicine changed. My wife saw this happen over the 20 years that she practiced nursing. Decisions are made based upon insurance reimbursements - not what is best for the patient. This is the main reason she no longer works in her chosen profession as an RN. She had too many sleepless nights worrying that she might have done something to harm a patient because she was constantly given more responsibilities and expected to function with less staff on longer shifts.

Drug companies sell the same drugs in other countries for much cheaper, because we let them. They are making profits overseas, too—just not as much as the off-the-charts profits we allow them to make in the US. I’m tired of it.

If my choice is a for-profit health insurance company employee who is denying my coverage to get a bonus for herself (or for her boss), or a government employee who won’t deny my coverage because she won’t get paid a performance bonus for denying me (especially if the bill is submitted by the doctor to the government for reimbursement like Medicare), I’ll take the latter every time.

I have to fight my health insurance company for coverage all the time. My doctor recently told me she is on the phone fighting with the insurance companies up to 15-20 times a day. They want her to prescribe a cheaper drug EVERY TIME. She will present them with studies that show the more expensive drug works better. They will require her to call another number to obtain "peer approval" from an insurance company paid doctor even though it might be a pediatrician who has no knowledge of adult practice or no knowledge of the particular drug. Ridiculous! My doctor admitted she never has this problem with her Medicare patients.

I encourage you to go to the website for Frontline (a PBS show known for its independent investigative journalism) and watch the following videos. Sick Around America tells the story of the health care crisis we now have in this country. Sick Around the World examines health care delivery systems in five democracies around the world and how they have managed this problem. Most of their citizens are happy with their system of care.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundamerica/view/

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/

I am not saying there are easy answers, but clearly we need immediate, meaningful, radical, health care reform. I wish the Republicans (who are heavily funded by big insurance, as are many Democrats) would stop their fear tactics and come up with intelligent, sound ideas about how to reduce the rising costs of health care, bring down premiums, and provide coverage for every American. It will be a member of their family that becomes uninsurable or bankrupt some day soon. It's not a question of IF, only a matter of WHEN.

It is unfathomable to think that I live in a country where people have to lose all their life savings, lose their home to foreclosure, and file bankruptcy because of medical bills for an illness suffered by a family member. Most of these families are hard-working people who went to college, or work in trades that are the backbone of our society, owned their own home, and HAD health insurance.

What do we say to the surviving family members who mourn those who DIE needlessly because they have no access to health care? (Google "number of people who die every year because of no insurance." It's estimated to be 45,000 people!!!!) That's way too many funerals. It's unacceptable. Not in America.

Take some action. Together we can insist upon REAL REFORM.

Paying For Health Care Reform--It's Been There All Along

Remember a year ago during the Presidential campaign? How many times did you hear Candidate Obama emphatically say that he would not raise taxes on the middle class--and in particular, those Americans making $250,000 or less would not see one dime of increase in their taxes?

Every day before the election, he talked about the need to repeal the Bush Tax Cuts--those income tax cuts that gave major tax reductions to the upper 1%. There was great populist support for that concept among the remaining 99% of Americans. After all, the previous 8 years had resulted in the accumulation of enormous personal wealth for the upper 1% and a corresponding huge deficit for our Federal budget and an historically large national debt.

So, what happened to THE campaign promise? Why don't we ever hear about repealing the Bush Tax Cuts anymore?

That brings me to the Baucus Bill. In its present form, it violates the primary campaign promise that the President made, by imposing a tax increase on the middle class. Anyone who makes less than $250,000, but has a health insurance benefit valued at more than $8,000 would be taxed. Period.

In its original form, the Baucus Bill mandates that we all buy health insurance, and those who don't purchase health insurance would have to pay an excise tax. Don't try to talk around it Mr. President, it is written in to the bill! Read it and say you won't sign anything like that.

President Obama cannot support the Baucus Bill or it will violate his primary promise to the middle class--he will raise EVERYONE'S TAXES.

Wait, it gets worse--and the President's message gets fuzzier.

Everyone wants to know "How are we going to pay for health care reform?" It's going to cost upwards of a trillion dollars over 10 years.

The President talks about two-thirds of it being "paid for" by money saved in eliminating fraud, waste and inefficiencies in the system. I'm all for that. It sounds great, but it's also too theoretical for my taste. I'm not alone. There are many on the Republican side of the isle who question how much will be produced from these new efficiency efforts that will actually "pay" for the bill and not increase the deficit (another promise).

Frankly, finding more than 600 billion dollars of savings in this manner is too vague of a concept for most average Americans to wrap their heads around. In short, as a result, they don't believe the President.

We wouldn't have to guess as to how to pay for health care reform if the source of the funding was the repeal of the Bush Tax Cuts. 100% of us are very familiar with that concept--we heard it almost daily for most of the last 2 years. I'll bet that most of the lower 99% would easily get on board with it as a way to pay for the reform of health care.

It would be easy to understand that taxes are going up on the upper 1%-- to the same rates that they were when Bill Clinton was President (but, they would still be lower than when Ronald Reagan was President). That's a really simple concept that's easy to understand and measure.

It's time to lead on this Mr. President. Forget the nuances and the gimmicks. Remember your promises and keep them.

Governor Crist, Instead of Dialing For Campaign Cash, Why Not Lead On Green Jobs?

The September 20, 2009, edition of the St. Petersburg Times contains two articles that demonstrate the wasted opportunities for leadership that Charlie Crist continues to display as our Governor.

The first article reveals the Governor's uncanny popularity and his personal political skills in being able to "connect" with people in both political parties. It seems that when the Governor's goal is fundraising for his own personal advancement for his next political job, that he is a juggernaut with boundless energy. No one can say "no" to Charlie, when he's dialing for dollars, and he sets extremely high goals and doesn't rest until those goals are met. The thought of making 200 telephone calls to supporters--in one morning, beginning as early as 5 AM, is extraordinary. Too bad he uses this energy for his own personal advancement and not for our State's advancement--the job he was elected for.

The fundraising article shows me that the Governor could be an amazing catalyst for changing our State. He could be using his boundless energy--with help from members of both political parties-- to solve the problems that he promised he would when he ran for Governor.

Remember how he promised to fix our homeowners' insurance crisis, or to make our property taxes "drop like a rock?" Hey Governor, how about focusing on why people are leaving the State of Florida (so that we have a negative population growth for the first time since WWII), and trying to come up with ideas to make Florida a desirable and affordable place to live?

What about the fact that many accused the Governor of being a passive observer, and not an agenda-setter in last year's legislative session?

These are critical times when real leadership is required and we need our Governor to be singularly focused on being the Governor.

What are we going to do to balance next year's budget? (Hint, we won't have the Federal Stimulus Money to do it next year, Governor.)

The second St. Petersburg Times article that caught my interest and made me think of our Governor and his priorities, both for our State and for our Nation, is the article involving the US military's focus on energy efficiency and global warming as national security threats. The CNA Military Advisory Board, which consists of 12 two, three, and four-star retired admirals and generals from all four branches of our military has issued a report that recognizes that we will never have enough oil to provide for our national security, and that unless we start developing alternative energy sources, we will not be able to service our military equipment and operations. These military experts concluded that until we get off our oil addiction, we are fighting the last war and are not doing the things that we need to do to protect ourselves in the future.

One answer to our energy needs may be algae oil. It may be the best biofuel option for the future. Algae oil production actually acts as a source of consumption of carbon dioxide--that nasty CO2 that we need to dissipate--and growing algae is a productive way to accomplish it.

Algae for Oil production can occur in fresh water (both clean and contaminated water) or in salt water, and even in empty big box stores--we have an abundance of all of those things in Florida these days. Algae is a better, more efficient alternative for biofuel than corn or switchgrass. It also has no adverse ecological impacts such as the ones that we need to consider with offshore drilling.

So, where is Gov. Charlie Crist on this issue? Why doesn't he use this need for alternative energy as a way to promote the growth of good green jobs in Florida? Why not have Florida become the leader in algae oil production in the nation? What are we waiting for? Leadership?

Why doesn't the Governor take the lead and announce that he will veto any of offshore drilling legislation--which is environmentally dangerous and clearly yesterday's unsustainable technology? Instead, Governor, you should send a message that you will insist upon promoting biofuel production in this state, including, algae oil production. I'd like you to make some phone calls to legislators and tell them you won't take no for an answer--just like when you are fundraising.

Governor, we need you to be a leader for the rest of your term. Show us that there is a reason for you to be worthy of representing Florida in the US Senate. Show us that you are something more than just a popular guy and a good fundraiser.

Do something substantive that will actually advance the interests of our State, and not just your next election.

Calling All Progressive Democrats

As a result of the last two national elections, it seemed readily apparent that there were a lot of people in our country who looked at the state of our nation and the myriad of problems that we faced, and the electorate sent an overwhelming message that it should be the Democrats that assume power and make the changes that we need. The country was in search of new faces--Democrats with fresh ideas, poised to implement real Change.

The mood of the country cried out for progressive bold policies, including ending the War in Iraq, regulation of our financial system, and finally passing meaningful health care reform. There was a waive of optimism as President Obama was sworn in on January 20.

When I use the term "Progressive Democrat" I do not equate that with a person who wants to overspend foolishly--in fact, I think that progressive policies and fiscal responsibility should go hand in hand. Given the shape that our national balance sheet is in, fiscal responsibility must always be considered, but we need to look at what our true priorities are, and that means doing things differently. In my view, a Progressive is one who understands the need to challenge the status quo, if necessary, in order to effect the types of regulatory change that we need to fix the messes that we have found ourselves in because of the policies of the last 8 years.

However, just when we thought that real changes were coming, we were introduced to the so-called "Blue Dog Democrats" who think it is their duty to be obstructionists to these needed progressive policies. I like to think of myself as a lifelong, strongly Progressive Democrat--because we have a lot of things to fix--and I also consider myself to be a dog lover.

But these Blue Dogs don't seem to understand or appreciate the urgency of the situation, and, with their lack of party loyalty, are inhibiting the passage of the progressive policies that we need. I think that "Blue Dogs" need to pick another nickname for themselves, because lately, they don't seem to be acting much like real Democrats to me, and frankly, they are casting the word "Dog" in an unfavorable light as well.


We are all familiar with the labeling that occurs whenever an elected Democrat is named in print or on television, there is a (D-State) designation after his or her name. The "D" of couse stands for Democrat in that usage. However, in light of the obstructionist character of these Blue Dogs, and their apparent failure to realize and act upon the electoral mandate that was handed to them in the last 2 elections, and in light of their failure to effectively seize control the legislative process (which Republicans always do, by realizing that they are on the same team), I've come up with some other meanings for the "D" after these Blue Dogs' names that convey my feelings when the Blue Dogs act more like Republicans than Progressives:

For Example:

Bill Nelson (D)isappointing--Florida

Evan Bayh (D)isasterous--Indiana

Mark Pryor (D)isingenuous--Arkansas

Joe Lieberman (D)elusional--Connecticut

Blanche Lincoln (D)isgusting--Arkansas

Mary Landrieu (D)isoriented--Louisiana

Ben Nelson (D)eaf--Nebraska

Mark Warner (D)edicated to the Status Quo--Virginia

Tom Carper (D)etached--Delaware

Mark Udall (D)isrepectful--Colorado

Michael Bennet (D)isengaged--Colorado

Mark Begich (D)efective--Alaska

Kay Hagan (D)oggone Ineffective--North Carolina

Herb Kohl (D)econstructing the Party--Wisconsin


Can anyone come up with others?

Actually, I'd really prefer to be able to remove these new nicknames and have these Democrats start to act like a team and get going to fix our serious problems.

If they won't, we need to elect people who will.

Senator Nelson Thinks We're Stupid!

For the entire summer, thousands of Bill Nelson’s constituents have sent him letters and emails and made thousands of phone calls to his office asking his position on health care reform and encouraging Sen. Nelson to get firmly behind the Public Option.

He has been strangely silent, has not granted interviews, and has sent vague messages assuring us that he is working on the problem (between his python hunting photo ops). He sent one of his aides to our South Tampa Democrats' meeting in July, and she told us that the Senator favored a Public Option. After the cheering subsided, she continued...BUT he wants to make sure it is feasible, doesn't cost too much, etc. (His aide didn't have an answer to the question of whether the Senator was as concerned about cost before he voted for the War in Iraq that has cost more than the current health care proposals).

Senator Nelson is a member of the all-important Senate Finance Committee, who finally unveiled its bill yesterday—without a Public Option. Bill Nelson’s response to his constituents who seek cost savings for their small businesses and as individuals who have to buy health insurance in a monopolized market was that we are too stupid to understand the Public Option. After months of silence, our Senator plays the condescension card. Marvelous! That's leadership.

The Baucus Bill is an abomination. It is woefully inadequate to cut costs of health insurance. In idiot-speak that even the Senator's constituents understand, “it sucks.” It significantly increases costs to the middle class. Wendall Potter (former CIGNA executive and whistle blower on the insurance industry) calls it a “Gift to the Insurance Industry.”

Senator, is the Public Option “so complicated” because you and your committee members have outsourced the writing of the bill to the health insurance industry?

Senator Nelson is one of the key Senators that will be responsible for whether we can truly reform health care. If it doesn’t happen, we know who to hold accountable.

Senator, stop chasing the snakes in the Everglades and start rooting out the ones in Washington who are choking us with ever-increasing health insurance premiums.

Hey, Health Insurance Companies; Stop Interfering With My Doctor's Orders

I go to my primary physician because she is a great doctor. Most of my doctor's charges are not covered by my health insurance. I choose to pay "out of network rates" to see her.

(I can't wait until I'm covered by Medicare and her bills will be at least partially paid by Medicare --but that's another issue for a different day).

Today's topic is the daily interference that my Doctor has to endure with Health Insurance Companies constantly undermining her health care orders and decisions.

In order to understand the situation fully, you should know that my physician, unlike many others, refuses any "perks" from drug company reps. She doesn't accept their gifts or their trips or their meals, or their event tickets. She severely limits the drug rep's visits, and isn't swayed by the drug company's marketing ploys.

My doctor won't prescribe a medication unless she has done her own independent research and believes that a particular medication is the best one for her patient.

In some instances she has prescribed generic drugs for me, and in others she has insisted upon prescribing a particular drug--usually based upon the results of a specific clinical trial conducted by a reputatble clinic or hospital that was conducted for patients of my same gender and age.

In short, my doctor does her homework and knows exactly why she chooses the particualr drug that she prescribes, and she doesn't prescribe it to curry favor with a drug company that is providing her with gifts.

Last month when I was in her office, she related to me that she had received 18 phone calls the previous day from various health insurance company employees, asking my doctor and her staff, if the doctor would countermand her orders and agree to prescribe a different drug instead. She related that this is standard operating procedure to attempt to save the insurance company money. She has to fight with them tooth and nail each and every time and considers it "a personal victory for her patients" every time that she prevails in one of these arguments with an insurance company.

Some times these insurance company battles require my doctor to get on a "peer conference call" with an insurance company paid doctor to argue her case for approval of a particular medication. Many times the "peer" physician that my doctor is arguing with has ablsolutely no training or experience in the particular medical specialty, or has no knowledge of the clinical trials of the drugs. In some cases, the "peer" has never even heard of the drug that she is arguing against the use of--yet the "approval" for the patient cannot be given until the "peer" says "ok." Explain to me the point of arguing the merits of the use of a drug that one of the parties has never heard of and knows nothing about. Could it be simply to frustrate my doctor into surrendering her principles?

Often times it is the same insurance company employee that calls back day after day knowing full well that my doctor always says NO, yet the calls continue, every day, in the same or higher volume, without fail.

I asked my doctor if the insurance company employees ever stop calling (because they know that my doctor never backs down). The answer is, they NEVER stop calling-- and they increase the peer calls whenever they can to make it more inconvenient and time-consuming to get an approval of something that should never have been questioned in the first place. It is that employee's job to continue to pressure our doctors, every day, in hopes that they will grow weary and give up the fight.

TALK ABOUT GETTING BETWEEN ME AND MY DOCTOR!!

I asked my doctor if her collegues face the same pressures from insurance companies that she does. She assured me that they all do, and that some of her fellow physicians have reluctantly admitted that they have grown weary of fighting the insurance companies day after day, and have acceded to their orders being changed.

My doctor also related that these problems never arise with her Medicare patients--only private health insurance company patients. Remember that the drug companies convinced the then Republican-controlled Congress and President Bush that they should include a provision in the Medicare Part D law that makes it illegal for the Federal government to negotiate with drug companies for lower priced drugs. So, the profit margins are already built into the cost of the insurance premiums for Medicare Part D and are built into the drug prices for Medicare patients.

This allows the insurance companies and drug companies to focus their energies solely on those of us who have private health insurance plans. Lucky us!

(Congress should fix the no negotiation provision of Medicare Part D as well, but that too, is a topic for another day.)

This madness has to end. We need a Single Payer system. We need to have Medicare for all, and those under 65 have to pay for it. Health insurance companies bring no value to the delivery of health care services and syphon off billions in profits that have nothing to do with keeping patients well.

Just think about the wasted energy and distractions that my doctor and your doctor face on a daily basis because of these oppressive, profit-induced insurance company practices.

Get mad about it and start expressing your outrage to your friends and neighbors. Write to your Member of Congress and Senators. Reach out and contact those in Congress from other states. Make them support REAL health care REFORM.

We have to demand better care and need to let our doctors do their jobs as they deem necessary, without interference and distractions.