Democrats that voted with President Bush on Childrens Healthcare (SCHIP)...

[SaveElmer]

Jim Marshall (D-GA), ADA rating 35

Baron Hill (D-IN), ADA rating 90

Gene Taylor (D-MS), ADA rating 40

Bob Etheridge (D-NC), ADA rating 80

Mike McIntyre (D-NC), ADA rating 50

Dan Boren (D-OK), ADA rating 25

Kathy Castor (D-FL) (new member)

and

Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), ADA rating 100

[Debi]

1. sad n/t

[Donnachaidh]

2. why did Dennis vote this way? n/t

[gateley]

A Kucinich supporter will be able to give you a more accurate response, but in

case this sinks before one comes along...

Basically what I heard was that he felt this didn't cover all children equally, and that he wouldn't vote for something like this unless he felt it was fair to all.

When they (not just Kucinich) take this stance and say "it needs to go back to the drawing board" I usually feel they've let an opportunity slip through their fingers. Especially in a cases such as this -- help who you can, now, and work to get it changed for the better.

I know you didn't ask for my opinion, but it was my pleasure to share it with you.

[Donnachaidh]

12. I agree with your opinion, glad you shared it

I also read his statement posted by another, and I think this bill should go forward. It's equally unfair to yank the healthcare from kids who are covered. He made a bad decision on this. My opinion, ymmv.

[autorank]

14. Thanks for you opinion. K*R

On issues like this, it's important to get the program going. You make a good point.

Edit: The ADA ratings are fascinating. There are three high Dems and the rest low. Now I'm really intrigued.

I'm going to pay more attention to this.

[laconicsax]

15. He explained on his congressional website

http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=75275

“I cannot support legislation which extends health coverage to some children while openly denying it to other children,” Kucinich said. “This legislation is woefully inadequate: and I will not support it.

[JDPriestly]

3. If they did not vote for this, they are not Democrats.

It is quite simple. They are wolves in sheep's clothing. Why did Kucinich, Hill and Etheridge fail to support this. They seem to vote Democratic on other issues. I am particularly curious about Kucinich. Did the bill not go far enough for him?

[Demit]

6. Kucinich's statement:

Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), issued the following statement after voting against the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) conference report today:

“I cannot support legislation which extends health coverage to some children while openly denying it to other children,” Kucinich said. “This legislation is woefully inadequate: and I will not support it.

“Legal immigrant children deserve the same quality health care as other children receive. It is Congress’ responsibility to address the main difficulties that prevent legal immigrant children from gaining access to health care. Today, we did exactly the opposite.

“HR 676 guarantees full health care coverage for all children. When considering a universal health care proposal, HR 676, the Medicare for All bill, is the only health care plan that addresses three important issues: quality, accessibility, and cost. HR 676 stands alone in an increasingly crowded field of efforts to provide health care coverage to all,” Kucinich said.

Kucinich voted for the original House-passed version of the bill because it contained language to grant health coverage for legal immigrant children. However, in today’s bill, this language was omitted.

http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=75275

[JDPriestly]

43. Thanks.

[gateley]

4. Thank you! K&R nt

[PDJane]

5. There's been discussion.

Kucinich voted against it on the pricinciple that it did not cover all children, knowing that the bill would pass.

[Justitia]

7. They have NO good excuse for voting against this - NONE.

Healthcare access legislation is very different than other legislation.

Expanding access to existing programs for the previously excluded is 90% of winning the battle for access to all.

There is no reason good enough for voting against this bill, it goes against our most fundamental Democratic principles.

Damn.

[sandnsea]

8. We should help DUers in those districts

Help get this info out, pay for newspaper or radio ads, start letting those voters know what's going on. Somebody has to do it.

[YOY]

9. So Dennis is a threat to the all mighty Hillary?

I wouldn't have thought so but sounds like someone is feeling it.

[SaveElmer]

10. Funny...

This thread has nothing whatever to do with Hillary...

Why not instead attempt to defend this disgrace on Kucinich's part (and on the part of the other Democrats that voted for it)!

[YOY]

11. His reason was listed above by another poster

Reply to it. Save your words on this twice printed hitjob as rebuttal there.

You or some other DUer would have put a "hypocrite" post if he voted for it for endorsing health insurance.

You and Wyldwolf don't post any thread unless it has relevance to Hillary. Spare the innocent act.

[SaveElmer]

13. Defend his vote....

Do you think he was correct and every other member of the Progressive Caucus was wrong?

[YOY]

16. Reply to his reasoning.

Not my post. I read his reasoning. He defends himself there.

[SaveElmer]

18. It's pathetic...

Denying health care to the 90% until the magical day when he gets 100% of what he wants...he is either clueless as to how the legislative process works, doesn't realize nearly half the Congress is of the opposition party...or more likely is playing politics with his vote...

[OHdem10]

24. Untill we realize, Democrat / Republican means little; Conservativism

VS LIBERALISM always decides the outcome of Legislation.

Conservative Democrats have similar beliefs to Republicans.

When you look at a list of Senators or House Members, kdentify
as Liberal or Conservative and you can predetermine exactly
how the votes will go. Some will always vote with GOP.


God Guns Gays is not so important as Economic Conservatism .

Economic Conservatives(Democratic) joined the GOP on their
beliefs.

[cascadiance]

19. One might argue this is like going against Rush Holt's bill on election reform

Some may try to say (and in fact some HAVE said) that those who vote against it are against fixing the problems of the voting machines. Some may vote against this for this reason.

However, a good many of the election integrity experts/activists ALSO went against it because they felt that putting it in place would put in bad law that institutionalized and endorsed certain practices of things like touchscreens without paper ballots, etc.

So, you could see how Dennis might have felt the same way about this bill. Now I think there are arguments to be made both ways, and I think in this case, it is probably easier to fix the damage later too, but to try and make Dennis sound like he's some kind of corporate whore (and moreso than Hillary) because he voted against this is disenguous misrepresentation of the facts.

Now you can disagree or agree with Dennis's strategy on this. There are points to be made on both sides of that that I both have good arguments. However, to make it sound like he voted against it for the same reasons that the other medical industry lobbyist beholden pols is as I said dishonest and unfair.

[redqueen]

38. Wow... you talk so much sense.

You stick out like a turd in a punch bowl in this monkeypen!

:rofl:

[William769]

25. As I just stated in another thread, it also applies here.

"Shields up! DEFLECT!! DEFLECT! DEFLECT!"

[RaleighNCDUer]

17. What's this ADA rating thing? Only ADA I know is Americans with

Disabilites Act.

[Debi]

20. Americans for Democratic Action

http://www.adaction.org/index.htm

[SaveElmer]

21. Americas for Democratic Action...

A liberal advocacy group that publishes ratings on members of COngress...100 is perfect liberal rating...0 is a perfect Conservative rating...

[Mend]

22. Kucinich is seeking coverage for legal children of illegal immigrants...

the parents come here illegally and have children born on US soil...the children by law are legally US citizens. Pretty much all studies have shown that since most of the illegal immigrants have poorly paying jobs and pay very little in taxes because of their low wages, they get a lot more in benefits in this country than they pay into the government. If the insurance for their kids is approved, the amount they get in benefits goes way up. It is sad that kids and their health become political pawns but reasonable people realize that this is a very hot button issue for many Americans who do not want to subsidize illegal aliens. Kucinich is taking the moral high road but not the electable road as he knows very well he isn't going to get elected anyway.

[SaveElmer]

26. Moral high ground?

Denying 90% of kids insurance because he hasn't yet secured it for the final 10%?

Hardly moral...or courageous...

[Mend]

48. personally I think he is a crackpot. eom

[bvar22]

23. Dennis is CORRECT on this vote.

*It WAS a protest vote that allowed Dennis a platform to point out the glaring problems with a bad piece of legislation.

*For those who believe that it is better to pass BAD legislation than NO legislation:
Check History. BAD legislation has a way of becoming etched in stone. I refer you to the Patriot Act.
Many of the outraged demanded to know why Democrats voted FOR BAD legislation. The reply was that it was better to have something, even bad something NOW. Many Dems promised that they would go back and fix the Patriot Act. We ALL know how that has worked.


*There is only ONE way to fix the HealthCare crisis in America.
This is the single LARGEST Children's Issue.
This is the single LARGEST Women's Issue.
This is the single LARGEST GLBT Issue.
This is the single LARGEST Racial Issue.
This is the single LARGEST Economic Issue.
This is the single LARGEST MiddleClass Issue.
This is the single LARGEST Homeless Issue.
This is the single LARGEST MentalHealth Issue.
This is the single LARGEST Retirement Issue.
This is the single LARGEST Equal Rights Issue.

The HealthCare issue IS the great equalizer, and ONLY Single Payer Universal HealthCare will solve this problem. Settling for LESS and letting the gigantic, RICH HealthCare corporations write legislation that diverts $MILLIONS of taxpayer dollars into the pockets of the richest CEOs the World has ever seen is a step in the WRONG direction that will only make it more difficult to institute a HealthCare plan that delivers quality HealthCare to everyone without discrimination.

Conservative Democrats will try to spin this as something it isn't, but DKs supporters are some of the most informed, intelligent, and educated members of the Democratic Party. They have a record of thinking for themselves and NOT falling for Corpo Media NewSpeak or following the authoritarian Party Line talking points.


”Unlike other candidates, I am not funded by those corporate interests.
I owe them no loyalty, and they have no influence over me or my policies.” ---Dennis Kucinich

[Justitia]

31. Taking DK out of this discussion, I have to correct you on one thing...

This was not "bad legislation".
This was an expansion of already existing, good legislation.
This was about letting more children have access to an ongoing, good, policy.
We would all love to get to 100% coverage, but we aren't there yet - healthcare access legislation always comes in increments.

You create the program (done) and then you expand it to let more people in - that's what this was about.
Just like we've done with Medicare in the past, and Medicaid.

I just wanted to make this clear because I'm hoping this will go through eventually and I don't want this very important legislation denounced for the wrong reason.

This should work just like the concept of "Medicare For All" - we already have the program (SCHIP), let's simply offer it to more children.
Please, we should all advocate for ANY expansion of this healthcare access for children.

Thanks.

[RaleighNCDUer]

34. No, it IS bad legislation.

It allows the 'moderates' to do as little as possible and get kudos for it, while the conservatives claim that the problem is solved, while it still leaves a huge percentage of children without medical care.

Half measures are NOT improvements, they are excuses for NOT improving.

[Justitia]

36. Have you read the bill??? It increases spending by 7 times! It dbls the number covered.

How on earth could you possibly say any of that if you actually read the bill???

[Highway61]

27. Dennis was mentioned as if it were the end of a "drum roll"

Those here who criticize his vote simply don't understand his policy, convictions and integrity. It's ALL children he wants coverage for. Let's put it this way, let's just say, for shits and giggles, if HE were speaker of the house, we would be 3/4 into impeachment hearings at this point if not done and over with completely. He's a good man...no agenda...can't be bought, you know, like it's suppose to be????

[SaveElmer]

28. Doesn't show integrity...

To deny 90% of the children that would be covered under this, until that magical day when he convinces Congress to cover the last 10%...shows an unwillingness to engage in the legislative process...which coincidentally...is his job!!!

[Highway61]

32. Perhaps it would matter more

If by chance your child was one of the 10%. We agree to disagree...that's what make DU special.


edit spelling

[RaleighNCDUer]

44. Oh, they understand.

It't just that his position makes their candidate's "mandated health insurance for all" look really crass.

[Zandor]

29. Careful, Dennis, you may dip below 2%

:)

[bvar22]

30. SaveElmer, .....really,

after your public embarrassment yesterday, I thought you would be more careful.
Once again, your thread title is in error.

I don't believe that Bush* is allowed to cast a vote in the House of Representatives.
Therefore, your Thread Title is , once again, factually wrong and a partisan distortion of REALITY.

No one in the House "voted with President Bush".
Some members of the House cast a symbolic vote against a bad piece of legislation.

Blind partisanship is an ugly thing, especially when it descends to the level of gross distortion and prevarication.

It is too late to correct your Thread Title, but it is not too late to post a retraction.


Sincerely,
bvar22

[SaveElmer]

35. Ridiculuous...

And about the strangest reply I have gotten in a while...it is very clear that President Bush's position is that of those that voted against SCHIP...and your sophistry in this case is simply a sad attempt to keep from having to attempt a defense of the indefensible...

Why not attempt rather to defend Kucinich's egregious alliance with Bush and the Republicans on this issue?

[bvar22]

39. Nevertheless, your thread title is not factually correct.

It is a FICTION designed to divide and distort.
Since your thread title is FALSE, it should be corrected.

As for this:
"and your sophistry in this case is simply a sad attempt to keep from having to attempt a defense of the indefensible...
Why not attempt rather to defend Kucinich's egregious alliance with Bush and the Republicans on this issue?

The above is also a FALSE statement.
I refer you to post #23 so that you can correct the FALSE information contained in your post #35.

It is too late to correct your Thread Title which states FALSE information.
It is not too late to post another retraction.

bvar22

[SaveElmer]

40. No retraction required...it is accurate...

What about your defense of Kucinich?

[bvar22]

47. Do you read your own thread?

"What about your defense of Kucinich?"

Please go read Post #23 in YOUR OWN THREAD, posted @12:19PM Central, and titled "Dennis is CORRECT on this vote".
After reading Post #23 of YOUR OWN THREAD, you can correct the FALSE information you have posted about yours truly in this thread.

After your public embarrassment and apology for posting FALSE information yesterday,
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3547174&mesg_id=3548938

you promised to be more careful.
And yet, today, SOS.

It is too late to correct your Thread Title, but it is not too late to post a retraction or a correction.

[SaveElmer]

49. Pathetic...absolutely pathetic...

Read my thread...What I said was accurate...no retraction required...

[RaleighNCDUer]

41. There you go again.

Bush wants nobody covered; Kooch wants everybody covered. The fact that both disagree with this half-measure which is intended to forestall the development of single-payer healthcare does NOT make them allies.

And you are just making yourself look silly by claiming it.

[SaveElmer]

42. When it was crunch time...

Kucinich cast his lot with the Republicans...

[Yukari Yakumo]

33. Proof the no sane person should consider Kuch presidential

This is his usual "my way or no way" ass-clownery. Anyone who supports his stance is either ill-informed or willfully ignorant. If he were ever in the Oval Office, he'd veto almost everything that came to his desk. We've already had 8 years of this kind of "thinking", we don't need 4 more years of it.

[slipslidingaway]

52. Edwards my way or no way on health care...

And if one of these employees has a dependent with a chronic or life threatening illness he is in favor of ending their insurance in 6 months unless they pass HIS heath care plan?

Kucinich knows that once these children are left behind it will be years before they may be included.


"Chicago, Illinois – Senator John Edwards today announced how he would achieve universal health care once elected president. Edwards, at a speech in front of the Laborers Leadership Convention in Chicago, laid out his strategy for actually accomplishing universal health care, including ending the game in Washington. Edwards said on the first day of his administration he would submit legislation that ends health care coverage for the president, all members of Congress, and all senior political appointees in both branches of government on July 20th, 2009 - unless universal health care legislation that meets four specific, non-negotiable principles has been passed by that date."

[bhumikag]

37. why reject?

i am surprised why http://www.thenewsroom.com/details/770051?c_id=wom-bc-bg">Kucinich voted against it..i mean if he is against certain provisions then he could have proposed an amendment or worked something out but flat out rejecting it surprises me


bhumika
politics desk,Voxant Newsroom

[RaleighNCDUer]

45. Because this is a meaningless half measure which will allow

moderates to say they've done something, while still allowing themselves to collect huge donations from the health insurance industry.

DK's single-payer healthcare plan would not only cover ALL the children, which this fails to do, but it would cover everybody else as well, and for less cost than the current 'system'. But THAT would interfere with collecting lobbyist money.

[SaveElmer]

46. Really?

That is about the dumbest thing I have heard so far on this whole topic...

What percentage of children do you suppose are legal immigrants? You think it is an effective strategy to deny coverage to the vast majority of children that would be covered in this bill while we wait for that magical day when there are no Republicans left to stop us from having everything we want?

Christ, every other member of the Progressive Caucus that voted...every one...voted for this. Kucinich is the only member as far as I can tell that voted against it for the reason he gives...

He again has totally abdicated his responsibilities as a legislator in favor of being a permanent gadfly...

[RaleighNCDUer]

54. you've been misled on what this bill will do.

At a cost of 35 billion over 5 years (that's the part the republicans don't like - the additional 7 billion a year) they will cover 2-3 million more than the 4 million currently covered -- that's 2-3 million out of the 9 million potential recipients, leaving at least 6 million NOT covered. Of that six million there are tens of thousands who are specifically targetted as being ineligible because of their parents' immigration status, despite their themselves being US citizens.

This is a plan?

DK's universal healthcare bill will cover ALL these kids, as well as the forgotten, the homeless, the unemployed, the under-employed, the students and the seniors.

Why settle for half measures? With this in place everybody can pull back and say "see, we did something about it - now let's move on."

Fuck that. Let's do it right the FIRST time.

[onenote]

50. i would imagine it is anything but "meaningless"

to those who will finally get coverage.

[slipslidingaway]

51. Questions, Who wanted the language changed? How many

additional children will be left without, what is the cost of covering all children and who will advocate for them if they are excluded?

http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=75275

"Kucinich voted for the original House-passed version of the bill because it contained language to grant health coverage for legal immigrant children. However, in today’s bill, this language was omitted."

[Nutmegger]

53. That's why America needs Dennis Kucinich.

He isn't one of the spineless.

[NoPasaran]

56. O! Hail the mighty Dennis Kucinich!

The Democrat with the spine to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the rethugs and vote against children!
:puke:

[Hippo_Tron]

55. IMO most of the above are idiots for not voting for this

Even in the reddest districts in the country, children's health care is a way to draw partisan lines and attack Republicans.