House Lets States Do Single-Payer

[davidswanson]

On Friday morning at 9:45 a.m. ET in the House Committee on Education and Labor, the committee members voted 25 to 19 to pass Congressman Dennis Kucinich's amendment to the healthcare reform bill. This amendment, if it survives the full House, the Senate, the conference, and the President, will not alter the federal legislation except to allow states to create single-payer healthcare systems if they choose to. If this change to the bill makes news, it will pass the Senate, because there is no legitimate argument against it, and the support for it is bipartisan.

The committee members voted in order of seniority through all the Democrats and then the Republicans, returning to allow those who passed or were not present on the first round or the second round to cast their vote. No members switched their votes from yes to no or vice versa, during the voting, but several passed and then voted after hearing their colleagues vote. In the final count, 25 voted Yes, 19 No, 2 left their vote as "Pass," and 3 were not there or did not respond at all.

On the first go round, these Democrats voted Yes: Woolsey, Kucinich, Holt, Grijalva, Loebsack, and Fudge. Not nearly enough, but then came the Republicans, not a single one of whom has supported single-payer healthcare, but many of whom apparently respect states' rights: Kline, Petri, McKeon, Souder, Ehlers, Biggert, Platts, Wilson, McMorris Rogers, Price, and Guthrie. That gave us 17 votes going into round two. Among Democrats, we then picked up Payne, Scott, Shea Porter, and Polis. Among Republicans, Hoekstra and Castle joined in. We had 23 votes moving into round three. Two more Democrats, Tierney and Tonko, brought the total to 25.

Then you have the list of members who voted for the arguably unconstitutional step of banning states from providing their citizens with healthcare, a step for which no legitimate case has been made, but which the health insurance companies strongly favor. First and foremost was Committee Chairman George Miller who led the voting with a resounding "No." He was joined on the first round by Democrats Kildee, Andrews, Hinojosa, McCarthy, Bishop, Sestak, Altmire, Hare, Courtney, Sablan, and Titus, and Republicans McClintock, Hunter, Roe, and Thompson. On the second round Democrats Davis and Hirono voted No, along with Republican Cassidy. On the third round, no more Nos were added. Not voting yes or no were: Wu, Clarke, Pierluisi, Chu, and Bishop of Utah.

There are major campaigns with a good chance of passing single-payer healthcare if Congress permits it in the following states: Pennsylvania, California, Illinois, Ohio, Colorado, and Massachusetts.

ROLL CALL ON VOTE TO ALLOW STATES TO CREATE SINGLE-PAYER HEALTHCARE
9:40 a.m. ET, July 17, 2009
House Committee on Education and Labor
Y=Allow states to provide their citizens healthcare if they choose
N=Ban states
PASS= Pass
--= Not present or no response

25 to 19 to 2

Democrats
* George Miller, Chairman (CA-07) N
* Dale E. Kildee (MI-05) N
* Donald M. Payne (NJ-10) PASS, Y
* Robert E. Andrews (NJ-01) N
* Robert C. Scott (VA-03) --, Y
* Lynn C. Woolsey (CA-06) Y
* Rubén Hinojosa (TX-15) N
* Carolyn McCarthy (NY-04) N
* John F. Tierney (MA-06) --, --, Y
* Dennis J. Kucinich (OH-10) Y
* David Wu (OR-01) PASS, PASS
* Rush D. Holt (NJ-12) Y
* Susan A. Davis (CA-53) PASS, N
* Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07) Y
* Timothy H. Bishop (NY-01) N
* Joe Sestak (PA-07) N
* Dave Loebsack (IA-02) Y
* Mazie Hirono (HI-02) PASS, N
* Jason Altmire (PA-04) N
* Phil Hare (IL-17) N
* Yvette Clarke (NY-11) --, --
* Joe Courtney (CT-02) N
* Carol Shea-Porter (NH-01) --, Y
* Marcia Fudge (OH-11) Y
* Jared Polis (CO-2) PASS, Y
* Paul Tonko (NY-21) --, --, Y
* Pedro Pierluisi (PR) --, --
* Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan (Northern Mariana Islands) N
* Dina Titus (NV-3) N
* Judy Chu PASS, PASS,

Republicans
* John Kline, Ranking Member (MN-02) Y
* Thomas E. Petri (WI-06) Y
* Howard "Buck" McKeon (CA-25) Y
* Peter Hoekstra (MI-02) PASS, Y
* Michael N. Castle (DE-At Large) PASS, Y
* Mark E. Souder (IN-03) Y
* Vernon J. Ehlers (MI-03) Y
* Judy Biggert (IL-13) Y
* Todd Russell Platts (PA-19) Y
* Joe Wilson (SC-02) Y
* Cathy McMorris Rodgers (WA-05) Y
* Tom Price (GA-06) Y
* Rob Bishop (UT-01) --, --
* Brett Guthrie (KY-2) Y
* Bill Cassidy (LA-6) PASS, N
* Tom McClintock (CA-4) N
* Duncan D. Hunter (CA-52) N
* Phil Roe (TN-1) N
* Glenn "GT" Thompson (PA-05) N

[Oregone]

1. If they are allowed, are they able to ban private insurance from covering the same care?

[FreakinDJ]

4. They won't have to Ban private insurers

Market forces will exclude them handily

[Oregone]

10. Unless a two-tier system developed

With some doctors enrolled in the single-payer mechanism, and some who only accept private. This is not unheard of.

[FreakinDJ]

21. Market forces will also dictate to the Doctors

Sure there will be some but the majority (and I mean overwhelming majority) will accept the single payer fee structure. Additionally Hospitals unless they are willing to give up their lacerative "Non-Profit" tax haven will also be forced to accept the "Single Payer" patients

[Oregone]

27. Cept for in practice in the real world, this doesn't always play out so well

Because those rich bastards with the private insurance who go to the rich private only doctors are the ones who write the laws and control funding. So while the market drives the masses to single-payer, they ensure it is undermined. Depending on the market to solve all ones ills isn't always the best solution. A single provision to ban private coverage for publicly covered services goes a long way to strengthen the integrity of the entire system.

[eridani]

59. The private doctors to the rich could be sitting on their hands a long time earning nothing--

--waiting for something really unfortunate to happen to Bill Gates or Warren Buffett.

[GreenPartyVoter]

22. Not so different than our medicaid/Medicare system? There are, I think,

only 2 orthodontists in the state who take MaineCare, which means driving 3 hours one way when we finally get YoungerGreenKid the braces he's gonna need.

[Oregone]

28. Well, you are lucky to even have public coverage for dental :)

But yes, thats a huge problem you describe there, which illustrates the point perfectly (if not to an extreme). Im up here north of the border and there isn't even public dental in my province, so you might be a bit lucky

[GreenPartyVoter]

32. It only covers kids, but yeah, very, very lucky!

[backscatter712]

2. THANK YOU JARED POLIS!!!

He's my Congressman here in CO-2, and he is absolutely one of the good guys!

[rockymountaindem]

3. He's doing a great job

My district is stuck with Lamborn for the foreseeable future :(

[Hawkeye-X]

53. hopefully 2010 will bear good news

That his district is going to be redrawn to overwhelmingly Democratic.

[LWolf]

5. Excellent.

My state is not on that list of those with a good chance of passing single-payer; I'll have to start talking to state reps about it.

[davidswanson]

6. By all means do

and maybe i missed one

[Laelth]

7. Why did so many Republicans vote for this amendment?

That makes no sense to me. Perhaps they see this as a poison pill. There's no way they actually want any state to try a single-payer system. Their insurance buddies would be furious.

:dem:

-Laelth

[backscatter712]

9. A lot of them have this states-rights schtick going.

Hey, if we can milk it...

[Laelth]

18. I hope you're right about that.

It would be a lot easier for me to move to another state rather than having to move to another country.

:dem:

-Laelth

[dixiegrrrrl]

30. Except that the reason the Feds stepped in many years ago

with what is now called "too much government" is that some states, , which were supposed to be acting legally and in the interest of their citizens, refused to do so, so the Feds made it happen.
Example: civil rights-abortion-education.

It sounds like what is happening is a ploy to divide and conquer, by letting private insurance be a state by state decision, which of course the insurance companies will then fight on a state level.
How do you think insurance companies managed to avoid paying out for flood/hurricane/auto etc coverage in the states now?
The main profiteers of this plan will be PR/marketing firms who make all the commercials against private insurance in each state, funded by insurance lobby.

[anonymous171]

80. In my experience, state senators/representatives are a lot less corrupt than national ones.

Governors are a different story however.

[Wednesdays]

52. Exactly. My state of Oklahoma will go for single payer when pigs fly. nt

[peace frog]

69. Ditto Florida. nt

[dflprincess]

37. That's what I'm wondering

One of them voting "yes" is John Kline of Minnesota. I don't think Kline (aka Colonel Klink) has never voted for a program that might actually benefit people before, his speciality is obstruction. Something is not right.

[proReality]

48. They know that a lot of states are in the red

and won't be able to pay for single-payer without raising taxes on everything.

[NashVegas]

72. If I Had to Take a Wild Guess

I might say they think it will kill the bill.

[Still Sensible]

8. Well it was a bipartisan vote, but it looks much

more like a republican measure that some democrats went along with rather than the other way around. Only five of the no votes were GOP. Is that because they perceived the amendment as a states rights issue?

Sestak voted no? Isn't he the guy that is supposed to be so much more progressive than Arlen? Are the dems that voted no concerned that it would somehow hurt the national public option?

[lumberjack_jeff]

24. My guess is that they voted for it because they consider it likely...

... that the amendment will be a poison pill. They think they can use the amendment to derail the bill.

[kath]

36. "more like a republican measure that some democrats went along with rather than the other way around

Yeppers - only 6 dems voted for it on the first go-round.

Can you say "poison pill"?? I knew you could.

[Cleita]

11. We have passed single payer a couple of times in our legislature in California

and Arnold vetoes the bills each time. Since this is a federal statute, is it possible to bypass the steroid puffed brain governator this time?

[robinlynne]

14. There is a huge california campaign about to start!

[dana_b]

20. it may have to wait until after 2010

when the blowhard leaves office. Of course it depends upon who is elected. I have my doubts about Gavin pulling it off. maybe Jerry again?

[Cleita]

29. I would love Jerry again. I hope he's thinking of running. n/t

[dana_b]

33. He is!

http://jerrybrown.org/

[Cleita]

34. That's wonderful!

Thank you. I haven't been paying that much attention to CA politics lately, since the budget crisis.

[davidswanson]

38. no

ya need a new governor

[Senator]

47. Maybe you could do a referendum?

And terminate the effects of uber-testosterone.

--

[Cleita]

50. In order to do that I would have to have Darryl Issa's sugar daddies from

those neo-con think tanks in Washington who funded him giving me matching funds. All the people who gathered signatures statewide were on a payroll. It wasn't done by volunteers which in the spirit of the law it's supposed to be. But if the DNC or the DSCC or Brookings Institute or any others want to fund me damn, I'll do the organizing it takes to make it happen.

[Senator]

54. Not necessarily.

Quite often "doing the organizing" is all it takes to "make it happen." And sometimes even less than that.

Someone mentioned that there's a campaign building in CA. It may be that they've just not considered taking the referendum route -- that they see it as "only for the carpetbaggers" like Issa. But volunteers come out of the woodwork to take part in how it's "supposed to be."

In the same way that this law is using their "state's rights" idiocy against them, the same judo flip could be applied to end-run the entrenched powers in CA. It's their petard, why not hoist them by it?

---

[Cleita]

63. Oh yeah. Just to get a referendum started, like permission from the

state, costs money, like more than I have. It's sort of like starting a corporation.

[Senator]

68. Permission? You don't need permission.

You have the right to undertake an initiative effort. And it http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/init_guide.htm">appears to be "free."

At the time of submitting the draft to the Attorney General, the proponent(s) must pay a fee of $200. The $200 is placed in a trust fund in the Office of the State Treasurer and is refunded if the initiative measure qualifies for the ballot within two years after the summary has been issued to the proponent(s).

Which is not surprising, as poor Americans are supposed to have the same access to their gov't as any other citizen. Most gov't fees are quite low and sometimes waivable on request.

You can collect the $200 in donations without even filing a form -- over $1000 requires reporting. And I bet you'd even get some CA DUer volunteers to help get you started.

So, what do you say? Want to be famous?

--

[Cleita]

79. LOL! you make me laugh. If ponying up $200 to the state Treasurer isn't

getting permission to do an action, I don't know what else to call it. So now on top of organizing a referendum action, I have to become a fund raiser too all by myself? Sorry, just find me some deep pockets like Issa got and I will organize the paid signature gatherers from county to county. If it were that easy some one will have already done it.

[Senator]

81. They can't refuse you. So it's not permission.

And you get the money back. So it's free. Sure, Issa's method doesn't require getting off the couch, but it's also fascism.

Doing it the American way does require that others agree with you and volunteer. But it is "that easy." And many have "already done it" on other issues. This is just a novel idea whose time may well be upon us.

Plus, I'll tell you a secret. Even an unsuccessful effort is a better high than crack. And FWIW, if you write a good initiative statement and post it on DU asking for volunteers and donations, then I'll send you the 200 myself.

--

[Cleita]

82. This is the problem, the volunteer part. Several Californians have tried to

organize a recall since the gropers first term, but California being the really large and diverse state that it is, is almost impossible to organize that way, so special interests who can afford all that fascist money are the ones who get initiatives off the ground like Proposition 13 and the recall of Governor Davis. If you can't fight them sometimes to have to join them to beat them at their own game doing it the old fascist way.

[chill_wind]

12. DK working for the people. This needs buzzed up everywhere. K & R.

"If this change to the bill makes news, it will pass the Senate, because there is no legitimate argument against it, and the support for it is bipartisan."

[robinlynne]

13. fantastic news!

[chill_wind]

15. See also these Four Voices in the Senate also getting no media on this --

Senators Sanders, Harkin, Merkley and Brown.



Four Voices in the Senate for Healthcare Justice

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8530463#top

[Libertas1776]

16. My asshat of a

congressman voted NO.

[bvar22]

17. This is how Canada got to Single Payer.

I will take this as a GOOD Thing, though I AM perplexed by the Republican support.


I'm also keeping track of Dems who voted AGAINST it.
They need to UNDERSTAND that through the miracle of the Internet Tubes,
we can watch every fucking thing they do....even committee votes.

[dana_b]

19. that man works tirelessly for us

I'm glad that this will at least have a chance. Go Dennis!!!!!

[lumberjack_jeff]

23. The implication here is that the state plan would be the only plan

available in the state's exchange.

I need to read more on this, but I think I like it, and the more I think about it, the more I think Kucinich is more cagey than I give him credit for.

On the other hand, I think there's a high probability that the Republicans on the committee voted for it because they think they can use the amendment to stop the bill.

[Orsino]

25. Congress, unable to decide to do something right...

...will graciously allow someone else to do it. :eyes:

Isn't it sad that a handful of representatives had to resort to heroic measures to accomplish nothing?

[undeterred]

26. Thank you Dennis Kucinich and thank you

to the State Senators in Wisconsin who have a state plan ready to go if we only had the money.

[redqueen]

31. Thank you, Dennis.

:)

[mmonk]

35. Thank you for the details.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

39. So, what this does is give the state a right to create their own single-payer option?

That sounds like a good idea.

[cascadiance]

41. Darn, should have called David Wu this morning to get him to do a Y instead of a Pass!

or at least give an explanation to us why he wasn't voting on this...

This is the way Canada got their current system going, by incrementally allowing it to be deployed at a local level and in the provinces first.

I'm glad it passed though. We need to make sure that it get passed in the general house vote. I think I will call Wu to make sure he doesn't try to back away from his responsibilities there...

[Jackpine Radical]

40. David, Thank you for this

and for all the major contributions you continue to make daily to the struggle for the progressive causes that matter.

I just needed to say that.

[KoKo]

85. Another Thank You to David for all his efforts from this DU'er.

:thumbsup: for all you do and keeping us posted with the latest info.

[valerief]

42. This would be fabulous. Of course, I've learned not to expect too much from govt.

I've been trained well, I guess.

[Hannah Bell]

43. that's great except in a mixed system, the moneymen can play the spread.

profit forever!

[Demeter]

44. Chickens! chickenchickenchicken chickenchicken

The STATES are going to fund it? Don't make me laugh!

[WestSeattle2]

73. My thoughts exactly. California can't pay their bills as it is.

[yy4me]

83. Just like Massachusetts, it will quickly go broke, cut benefits and

end up a puffed up bureaucracy.

Single payer needs to be uniform in its coverage and administration.

[PretzelWarrior]

45. this is a GREAT THING! Wonder when Oregon will do it. Probably soon?

I am sure hoping so. I bet California could help with their budget crisis by going to single payer.

[bkkyosemite]

60. Wu passed on it two times "Pass Pass" Think I'll call and complain or if CA passes it I'll just move

back as I won't have the high cost of premiums I think.

[JimWis]

46. This is good news. Thanks for sharing it. I was wondering what

would happen to Dennis K.'s amendment.

[sasquatch]

49. This thread makes me want to whistle Buckeye Battle Cry

:woohoo:

[bobbolink]

51. First good news! Does "PASS" mean they didn't vote?

If so, I'm really disappointed in Jared Polis, and will have to make an unhappy phone call, even tho he isn't my Rep.

If that's what it is, I would have expected MUCh better from him,, and he's in a VERY progressive district.

[glowing]

55. AND any state that does will be a state that brings in jobs first to its state.

When companies think about costs, insurance is one of them. If a state designs single-payer healthcare in a manner that makes a company's overhead costs for its employees less, then they will think about setting up shop... Also, if unions do not have to push so hard for healthcare for its members, it gives them more money and time emphasizing pay issues and safety issues. It also gives a model for national single-payer system to adjust more easily. If a state throw the insurance bums out of their state and creates a medicare system within their state, the costs will be spread and everyone will be covered. It might actually be easier for a state to figure out cost conrols and electronic medical systems. Essentially, they would expand what systems they have for their state medicare systems.. cover everyone.. and charge thru pay check based upon income the cost. Many people already pay for medical insurance from their check.. Instead of paying to an ins. co, they send it to the state run agency instead. Its really not so hard to set up, much harder to get the insurance companies and their lobbyists out of the pockets of the politicians.. However, it would cost the ins. companies quite a bit of money to have to pay off the states 50 wide along with the D.C. crooks.

[irislake]

56. Hurrah!

The beginning of the end for the insurance companies. That's the way we got it in in Canada. First Saskachewan then Canada! (God I hope I spelled Saskatchewan correctly. On second thought, who cares? I'm a senior now. I can spell however I like!)

[bc3000]

57. Any states out there want to add an experienced senior programmer to their tax base?

Insure me, you got me.

[InkAddict]

65. I live w/a great analyst that would pass you good specs

w/11 years healthcare claims experience. Could be a tag team!

Sometimes the more things change, the more and the more often they stay the same...and I wonder if the wounds will re-open...

I sure hope Dennis also remembers how much Silverstein's PR ad agency made off with during the campaign to win out over the population's grumpiness about a certain Cleveland 9th Street merger in the early 80s when the battle cry was "One plan per state" while laying off hundreds in the Cleveland area.

[Grinchie]

58. Curse you Hirono!

I had my doubts, but now it's pretty clear.

[grahamhgreen]

61. Text of Kucinich email

Exciting Healthcare Update

Dear Friends,

With your support, your phone calls, your emails, we won a major legislative victory today for a state single payer health care option in the House of Representatives in Washington, DC. The House Education and Labor Committee approved the Kucinich Amendment by a vote of 27-19, with 14 Democrats and 13 Republicans voting yes.

The amendment propels the growing single payer health care movement at the state level. There are at least ten states which have active single payer efforts in their legislatures. They are California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Washington. The amendment mandates a single payer state will receive the right to waive the application of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), which has in the past been used to nullify efforts to expand state or local government health care.

Under the Kucinich Amendment a state's application for a waiver from ERISA is granted automatically if the state has signed into law a single payer plan. With the amendment, for the first time, the state single payer health care option is shielded from an ERISA-based legal attack. Now that the underlying bill has been passed, as amended, by the full committee, we must make sure that Congress knows that we want the provision kept in the bill at final passage!

The state single payer option was one of five major amendments which I obtained support to get included in HR3200. One amendment brings into standard coverage for the first time complementary and alternative medicine, (integrative medicine). Another amendment drives down the cost of prescription drugs by ending pharmaceutical industry's sharp practices manipulating physician prescribing habits. An amendment stops the insurance industry from increasing premiums at the time when people are not permitted to change health plans; and finally an amendment imposing a requirement on insurance companies that they disclose the cost of advertising, marketing and executive compensation expenses (which generally divert money from patient care).

Please make sure you post this message on your social networking site, ask all your friends to get involved and encourage everyone you know to sign up at www.Kucinich.us so we can build full momentum behind this movement for real health care.

Let's do this!






PO Box 110475 | Cleveland | OH | 44111 | 216-252-9000


Forward email


This email was sent to [e-mail] by [e-mail].
Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy.

Re-Elect Congressman Kucinich Committee | PO Box 110475 | Cleveland | OH | 44111

[jcarterhero]

62. This is a good idea

Although, as some have already mentioned, there is unusually high support from the right.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

64. You're really racking up those posts, Jimmy

[snot]

66. What if my state doesn't adopt single-payer??? (wailing)--Can I buy another state's plan?

[Greyhound]

67. K&R, for another victory for the people, compliments of Representative Kucinich.

He is far brighter that the status quo warriors would like to believe. Can't get through the leadership? Go to the opposition for the votes you need.

Oh, and Mr. Chairman...

Fuck you very much.

[madrchsod]

70. illinois-single payer? no thanks

both parties in this state is to corrupt to trust any of them with a penny. phil hare of the illinois 17th voted against it and that`s good enough for me.

[NorthCarolina]

71. I predict CA with their simple referendum process will be the first

state with single payer style health care. That is of course assuming that the Kucinich legislation makes it all the way through to the final outcome of the health care initiative.

[WestSeattle2]

74. How will they pay for it? I'd like to hear from CA DU'ers.

[Bandit]

75. How can states afford this when the Federal Government can not?

It is simply a way to get out of passing a real Health Care Reform bill...It isn't going to happen..

[ibegurpard]

77. As a business...

would you not find it tantalizing to consider locating to a state where you don't have to pay a hefty amount of money for insurance for your employees?
And, as an employee, would you mind paying higher taxes when you don't have to pay a big portion of your paycheck for insurance premiums?
The problem is just like it is at the national level though...fighting entrenched interests who profit from the status quo. That fight is potentially easier at a state level though.

[Bandit]

78. Do you have any grasp on what relocation costs might be?

For a small business it is prohibitive.

[ibegurpard]

76. K & R

THIS is the kind of incremental change I can get behind.

[defendandprotect]

84. Organizing for MEDICARE FOR ALL at State level with Governors may be easier . . .

or more difficult . . . ??

I think the corporate cancer on government is very thick at all levels now !!!

We need to stop campaign finance BRIBERY --