Medicare celebrated its 45th birthday last week. There were parties around the country and, while I don't know if people brought presents, health care reform is kind of a gift for Medicare. The Medicare Trustees issued their annual report this week and said Medicare is on sounder financial footing -- by 12 years -- than it was a year ago. Seniors who fall in the prescription drug donut hole can now get rebates to help with the cost of their prescriptions; next year they'll get 50% discounts on those prescriptions. Also next year, preventive care like mammograms and physicals will be free for seniors.
President Obama used his weekly address to talk about Medicare and how health care reform has strengthened it.
And as reform ramps up in the coming years, we expect seniors to save an average of $200 per year in premiums and more than $200 each year in out of pocket costs, too.
... we are no longer accepting business as usual. We’re making tough decisions to meet the challenges of our time. And as a result, Medicare is stronger and more secure.
That's a good thing, and something you'll never hear from the Republicans who are more interested in talking down Medicare and Social Security than improving them.
Sen. Max Baucus did not cover himself with glory during the Senate wrangling over the Health Care Reform Act. How his bad behavior is rewarded or, fox, meet henhouse:
Liz Fowler, a key staffer for U.S. Sen. Max Baucus who helped draft the federal health reform bill enacted in March, is joining the Obama administration to help implement the new law.
Fowler, chief health counsel for the Senate Finance Committee, which Baucus chairs, will become deputy director of the Office of Consumer Information and Oversight at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
...
Fowler headed up a team of 20-some Senate Finance Committee staffers who helped draft the bill in the Senate. She was Baucus’ top health care aide from 2001-2005 and left that job in 2006 to become an executive at WellPoint, the nation’s largest private insurer.
She was vice president of public policy at WellPoint, helping develop public-policy positions for the company. In 2008, she rejoined Baucus to work on health reform legislation.
So Liz Fowler, Wellpoint’s gal, will be writing the rules implementing the law (the rules that will determine whether this is a worthless bill or a decent one), particularly those designed to protect (cough) consumers and oversee companies like … Wellpoint.
This is the kind of “oversight” that resulted in the BP disaster.
It's hard to imagine Fowler's appointment is going to end well for consumers. Artur Davis (and Bobby Bright) may get to say "I told you so" after all.
Alabama Democrats shouldn't run against health care legislation. The DNC has a new ad and each bullet point hits yet another key demographic. Explanations after the jump:
We had eight years of Bush and Cheney, but now you get mad! You didn't get mad when the Supreme Court stopped a legal recount and appointed a President. You didn't get mad when Cheney allowed energy company officials to dictate energy policy. You didn't get mad when a covert CIA operative got ousted. You didn't get mad when the Patriot Act got passed.
As Mr. Paul Harvey used to say... You didn't get mad ...when we illegally invaded a country that posed no threat to us; when we spent over 600 billion (and counting) on said illegal war; when over 10 billion dollars just disappeared in Iraq; when you found out we were torturing people; when the government was illegally wiretapping Americans.
You didn't get mad when... we didn't catch Bin Laden; you saw the horrible conditions at Walter Reed; we let a major US city drown; we gave a 900 billion tax break to the rich, ; using reconciliation; a trillion dollars of our tax dollars were redirected to insurance companies for Medicare, an advantage which cost 20 percent more for basically the same services that Medicare provides.
You didn't get mad when the deficit hit a trillion dollar mark, and our debt hit the thirteen trillion dollar mark. You finally got mad when the government decided that people in America deserved the right to see a doctor if they are sick. Yes, illegal wars, lies, corruption, torture, stealing your tax dollars to make the rich richer, are all okay with you, but helping other Americans - oh hell no!
I would like to express my appreciation to a dear, close friend who sent me this material. I cannot claim authorship, but I completely agree with what has been said. Chew on it awhile...
Every year hundreds of Alabamians die because they can't afford health care. When Artur Davis had the chance to give them health care, he voted no. Davis is the only African American to vote against President Obama's plan that gives health care to one million Alabamians. Why did Davis vote against us? Because big drug companies and insurance companies bought him off. ... Davis will say or do anything to get conservative votes for governor, even if a few more of us have to die along the way. ...
Temporarily passing over the "bought off" claim -- we've dealt with similar Sparks claims in the past -- are people really dying because of Artur Davis' vote against the health care bill?Of course not. The bill passed without his vote and people in Birmingham will reap any benefits just as quickly as folks anywhere else do. Davis' vote didn't even hold up the process toward reform, the U.S. Senate was the roadblock to passing health care reform. In fact, Davis' only vote in favor of HCR came last June when he voted to move it out of committee, saying he wanted the process to keep moving and hoped the bill could be improved down the road. The Artur-Davis-is-letting-people-die-by-voting-no meme is a ridiculous exaggeration and most people know it.
However ridiculous, it opens the door for this Davis ad running in the same market that goes right to the heart of Sparks' most serious weakness -- he can't be trusted because he says different things to different audiences:
Notice how the key lines in this ad are delivered by Ron Sparks himself? It's unfortunate that his past statements on health care (one of them just days before the March 21 vote) don't match his current zeal for the issue.
Ron Sparks is attacking Artur Davis in the black community on health care reform. But what does Sparks say when we're not around? When a roomful of business lobbyists asked Sparks for his opinion, he said, "Do I support the current legislation that we have on the table? No, I don't."[Business Council of Alabama Forum. 8/1/2009.]
And what did Ron Sparks tell a conservative radio talk show host, "I'm not saying we give health care to anybody."[Matt Murphy Show. WAPI. 3/19/2010.]
And then there is the unemployment benefits faux pas from Sparks ...
And while Artur Davis was the only Alabama congressman to vote to increase unemployment benefits, Ron Sparks told us one thing but told big business he opposed extra benefits because, "As governor I would never strap the businesses of Alabama to take care of that tab." Do you think we can trust Ron Sparks to keep his word to us? "No, I don't."
I've heard longer clips from these instances and Sparks isn't being mischaracterized here. He said those things and more and left himself wide open to the charge that he tailors his message to please the audience before him. In other words, Ron Sparks panders. He's running like it's 1994, when you could maybe get away with tailoring your message to a specific crowd, trying to be all things to all people. It wasn't right back then either, but technology was such that you might not get caught. Not so today.
Decide what you believe and stick with it, Commissioner Sparks. Because you believe it, not because someone wants to hear it or because you sense a political opportunity.
I recently got into it on Health Care Reform with an old friend of mine from a place where I used to work. It started with his Facebook attack on President Obama for bowing to the Saudi king. Since the photos of Dubya macking on that very same king are all over the intertoobs, I decided to comment with a link and what I thought was a good-natured joke. Balloon, chemical symbol Pb. My friend ended up firing back a few angry responses, criticized HCR as a "government takeover," and concluded with, "Anyhow[,] I know where you stand. Big Government is better."
As a result, I began thinking about the fetish that the GOP has had with the idea of small government since even before Ronald Reagan's overhyped, simplistic, demagogic claim that "[i]n this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem." Ever since Saint Ronnie, the classic GOP attack on Democrats has been that we support "Big Government." My friend's conclusion that I support Big Government really brought home for me something a lot of people have been saying for some time now: under the present political conditions, that old attack is empty, hypocritical, and moribund.
Woo-hoo. The healthcare bill is done. People will see many of the provisions go into place immediately and then they can decide how they feel about these reforms based on reality instead of frenzied, uninformed rhetoric. Let's just take a moment to recognize this historic occasion.
This isn't an Alabama political issue, but something we can all probably agree on.
For the past two years, I've been monitoring the disaster known as Michele Bachmann. I was disappointed like many of you were when we fell just short of getting rid of her in 2008.
Well here we are in 2010 and we have another great shot to boot her from Congress.
This couldn't come at a greater time as we sit on the heels of her latest action of embarrassment - Repealing the Health Care Bill
Rep. Artur Davis, long regarded as one of the most promising of a younger generation of black politicians that has emerged over the past decade, took a bold stance this week as he seeks to become the first African American governor of Alabama: distancing himself from the biggest legislative achievement of the first black president.
I spoke with Bacon on the record, and he used a quote from me (got it right, too!) so I'm not going to comment on the article, other than recommend y'all read it.
So Alabama's AG has decided to join the multi-state lawsuit against federal health care reform legislation. Spencer Bachus offered a clue as to the main focus of Republican legal strategy:
"The individual mandate to buy insurance is especially troubling. There is no power in the Constitution for the federal government to force people to buy something they don't want to buy," Bachus said.
But as usual, the Party of No doesn't have a leg to stand on. The legal challenge to a mandate will certainly fail, and the reason may surprise you: guns.
Alabama U.S. Rep. Artur Davis, one of only 34 Democrats to vote against President Barack Obama’s health care plan in Sunday’s key House vote, said Tuesday he told the president he could not vote with him because of the cost of the program.
“I didn’t vote against health care — I voted against the bill in Washington,” Davis, who had been Obama’s state campaign coordinator in 2008, said at an outdoor press conference in downtown Tuscaloosa. “We can’t just keep throwing a trillion dollars toward the problem.”
[snip]
“But I will say this much,” he added. “We have had a vote in Washington. That vote’s over now, so the task (of the next) governor of Alabama won’t have anything to do with how he voted on federal legislation, it will be administering the legislation.”
My sense of the current situation is that Davis is unlikely to pay a high price with Democratic primary voters for voting against the health care reform act. Many of us are disappointed, but the bill passed, even without his vote. Results are more important than process to Alabama voters; the bill passed and we all get the benefits, no matter how our Representatives and Senators vote. Kind of like the Stimulus Act; most of them (although not Davis) voted against it, but it helps balance the state budget just the same -- we're glad to have the money and not shy of griping about those big spenders in Washington as we enjoy the largesse.
Davis' opponent in the Democratic primary, Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks, has criticized Davis for his "no" vote, but isn't well positioned for a full throttle attack because his own record on this issue is mixed. Shortly after the Sunday evening vote, Sparks sent an email to supporters and the media saying he applauded the vote (219-212) and saying, “I have been on record supporting affordable healthcare. I am happy for the 7th District, which will finally get the assistance they desperately need and want.” It's not a bad statement, but not nearly as strong as saying, "I would have voted "yes" on the health care reform bill!"
Today's message to supporters simply said "[I will] fight for quality affordable healthcare ..."
Quality affordable healthcare probably isn't a battle the next governor will get to fight, and declaring support for affordable healthcare is kind of like saying you support low gas prices -- everyone wants it, but there's considerable disagreement on how to actually achieve it. The key thing here is whether Sparks actually supports, not affordable health care, but the bill Congress voted on, and whether he would have voted "yes" in Davis' place.
Ron Sparks has been rather careful on that point.
In August at the BCA Forum (a conservative crowd) Sparks said:
You know we have 48 million Americans without health care in this country today. Do we need reform in health care? Absolutely. But do I support the current legislation that we have on the table? No I don't. And I commend Congress by slowing this down and not moving swiftly, but we have definitely got to get our hands around health care reform in this country
At the NAACP Forum (a fairly liberal crowd) in October, Sparks said:
"Unfortunately, I'm not in Congress and I don't have an opportunity to vote on that issue but I wish I was. If I were I would fight for the public option. I would make sure that everybody in Alabama has affordable health care"
"I support President Obama's health care package, I support public option."
The health care bill came up last Thursday on the Matt Murphy radio show (listen here) with this back and forth between Ron Sparks and the host:
Matt Murphy: You seem to indicate that you would be willing to at least entertain the idea that health care is a right.
Ron Sparks: I think we need to make health care an opportunity for those who want it, and that's what we ought to do.
MM: Without regard for ability to pay?
RS: I'm not saying we give health care to anybody, but it certainly ought to be affordable.
MM: You're supporting Obama's health care plan and Obama's health care plan would not deny health care based on the ability to pay.
RS: That's the only health care plan we've got on the table today. In my opinion, it's better than having nothing. I just believe that the average ... let me tell you something. I doubt if there's anybody out there opposing health care that has health care.
MM: Anybody out there opposing health care that has health care.
RS: I doubt if there's anybody out there Matt, that's doing that. Just the same ... I doubt if there's many folks that have picketed Victoryland and Country Crossing that's got a paycheck last Friday.
Sparks' attack on Davis' health care vote would be far more effective if he stated flat out that he would have voted "yes" had he been in Congress. He needs to draw a real contrast with Davis on health care to pick up some traction. Sparks' strongest statements on health care came last fall when he said he would vote for the public option -- not included in the final bill. Since then he has retreated to a more general support for affordable health care. The fact that Sparks isn't making unequivocal statements in support of this specific legislation raises the question: Is support for this particular health care reform package that toxic in Alabama, even for Democrats?
Add Mike "Do Nothing" Rogers to the growing list of Congressmen who will co-sponsor Crazy Michele Bachmann's repeal bill HR 4903 which is titled To repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
"The majority of folks in East Alabama let me know they didn't want this health care bill to pass," Rogers said. "While the bill has now become law, it is not too late to repeal and replace the worst parts of this legislation, which will vastly increase the Federal government's role in our lives at a time when our economy is in a severe recession."
"During these tough economic times when folks are struggling to stay afloat and find or keep a job, I agree reform was needed. But this is not reform - it is a massive government intervention into one-sixth of our economy.
Rogers said he supports alternative legislation which would help offer coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, allow association health plans, allowing insurance to be sold across state lines, increasing the age in which children can be covered by their parent's plan, and tort reform to help lower the cost of frivolous lawsuits.
Rogers has a habit of saying some rather ridiculous things, but I thought he was the more moderate of the Alabama Republican delegation. Certainly would not have expected him to be the first to sign on in this bill. Perhaps that's just because outside of AL-07 this district is the most Democratic leaning in the State. Surely Rogers can back up his claims that East Alabama doesn't want this with some poll numbers. Snark
No doubt the Republicans will find other straws to grasp as they desperately seek to block the health care reconciliation bill in the Senate (remember, this is the bill that fixes stuff like the Nebraska deal, which the GOP didn't like) but the Parliamentarian has ruled against their Social Security argument.
The parliamentarian ruled that changes to a proposed excise tax on high-cost plans would not violate the 1974 Budget Act by changing contributions to the Social Security trust fund.
...
Democrats had already reviewed the bill in an eight-hour meeting with Frumin and removed portions he signaled could run afoul of budget rules.
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) predicted that the parliamentarian may rule against them on some issues but that such setbacks would have little impact on the cost or policy substance of the legislation.
That second paragraph is key - Democrats have done their homework on this bill and worked with the Parliamentarian in advance to make sure they are within the rules. Maybe we aren't the party of Will Rogers after all.
Here is Episode 3 of Counterpunch -- What caused the problems in our health care system? The segment is cross posted at Politics Alabama, please consider joining the conversation there as well.
Health care costs too much and not enough people can get it. Notice I said CARE, not COVERAGE? We ought to be talking about getting health CARE for everyone, not health insurance.
It started out with employer based health insurance which during World War II was a way to reward employees in spite of wage controls. It was popular. Then the cost became tax deductable and the idea really took off. Soon the focus was on providing insurance, not care, decisions were being made by bean counters, not patients & doctors ... and we end up with a fragmented, inefficient system with layers and layers of bureacracy. Cost control is virtually impossible, those who need insurance most can't get it and sickness is a profit center, every step of the way ... drugs, tests, treatments, equipment -- Nobody profits if you're well so the system ends up profit driven, not results driven.
Some form of single payer/universal coverage is the only way to cure the real systemic problem, but the status quo hates that idea.
Health Care Reform passed the House of Representatives -- not with ease, but with three Democratic votes to spare. Not a single Republican voted for this landmark bill. I heard a caller on C-SPAN say this is like when Ebenezer Scrooge has finally seen the light and Tiny Tim will get health care at last. Guess the Republicans were rooting for Scrooge.
...Some of the Republican leadership like Jim DeMint, I think did play a very hard-line role. Some of our leaders were trapped. They were trapped by voices in the media that revved the Republican base into a frenzy that made dealing impossible. I mean, you can’t negotiate with Adolf Hitler, and if the President is Adolf Hitler, then obviously you can’t negotiate with him. So some of the blame has has got to go to those who said, who got the psychology of the party to a point where a lot of good people, reasonable people were trapped.
...We are encouraging a mood of radicalism in the party that is not just uncivil, that’s not the problem, the problem is it makes you stupid. It makes you make bad decisions, it leads you to think that President Obama with 53% of the vote is as beatable in 2009 as President Clinton with 42% of the vote in 1993, and that’s obviously not true.
What will it mean for Democrats? I think Bill Clinton nailed it last summer:
I'm telling you, I don't care how low they drive support for this with misinformation, the minute the President signs the Health Care Reform Bill, approval will go up because Americans are inherently optimistic. Secondly, within a year, within a year, when all those bad things they say are going to happen, don't happen, and the good things do begin to happen, approval will explode.
The misinformation will be disproved, the horserace of "can they pass it?" will be forgotten -- the focus wcan now shift to "how will this help people?" Reuters has an interesting roundup of winners and losers.
Local reaction to the bill's passage, in the order received, is below the fold. If you have more, please post it in a comment.
The House of Representatives is debating the issue now. A vote is expected around 8:15 pm. The vote on the rule went well -- it was 224-206. That bodes well for the vote on final passage where the magic number is 216.
Rep. Steny Hoyer stood up and invoked the memory of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s successful march across the Edmund Pettus bridge (many thanks to Dardango for the image on our banner) which ocurred on March 21, 1965.
On the other side, the first member allowed to speak for Republicans was Alabama's own Mike Rogers (R, AL-03). What did he say? Something along the lines of "I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks and I oppose the bill." When you have no argument, oppose anyway.
CSPAN is carrying this live. It's historic. It's sweet. Watch it.
This is from Mitchell Howie, running in the AL-05 Democratic primary -- mooncat.
When Parker Griffith votes against the People of North Alabama
I had a conversation the other day with a gentleman named Robert Hughes in Muscle Shoals. Mr. Hughes asked me if I were in Congress, would I vote for the healthcare reform bill being debated.
I talked with Mr. Hughes about my concerns that, even though the bill reduces the federal government's budget deficit, it might not have the muscle to bring down costs for healthcare for most families in North Alabama. I also had some concerns that with 30 million new, federally-subsidized customers, and no public option or Medicare-for-all, this bill might end up being a give-away to the big insurance corporate interests that got our healthcare system into this ditch to begin with.
I told Mr. Hughes that there were some things about the bill that I did like. In 2010, seniors whose drug costs put them into Medicare Part D's donut hole, will get a $250 rebate to help offset those costs. Next year, seniors in the donut hole will only pay for half of their prescription drug costs, and over the next ten years the hole will shrink. In a decade, all prescription drugs covered by Medicare Part D will be paid for 75% by the program, and the donut hole will be closed.
As I talked with Mr. Hughes, I thought about the fact that, under the provisions of the bill, Alabamians will no longer be able to be denied coverage by their insurance companies, because of pre-existing conditions, and they'll be able to seek preventative care without worrying about exorbitant copays. Pulling this all off while reducing the deficit sounds like a pretty good deal. In fact, once the Congressional Budget Office's final estimate on the merged package being considered by the House of Representatives this weekend came out, I set aside my reservations and decided that if I were in Congress today I would find myself voting for this bill and voting for the small businesses and families of North Alabama.
I would be voting to reduce the federal budget deficit by $130 billion over the next ten years and over a trillion over the next. I would be voting to insert a degree of protection into the healthcare coverage of 430,000 of our neighbors in the fifth congressional district, while bringing another 51,000 into the ranks of the insured. I would be voting to ensure that the thousands of individuals in North Alabama who, today, can be denied coverage because of their pre-existing conditions, are not left without care when they need it the most. And I would be voting to bring $23.4 million in new investment to North Alabama's 18 community health centers.
The fifth district's current Republican Congressman, Parker Griffith, on the other hand has made it clear that he will not be supporting the bill. He has become something of a mascot for Republican opposition to healthcare reform, since his political party flip flop in December, despite the fact that the National Republican Congressional Committee aired a TV ad just a year and half ago, citing an independent review that accused Griffith of misconduct and profiteering off of his patients.
Back on March 6th, he was tapped by his Republican Party bosses to deliver a rebuttal to the President's Weekly Message. Disappointingly, but not surprisingly, he took an opportunity that could have been used to talk about our district, to parrot the same half-truths and talking points that Republicans have offered in place of solutions since the healthcare reform debate began, over a year ago. In place of real solutions, Congressman Griffith and the Washington Republicans offer more tax cuts for the rich, and incentives for insurance companies to cover the healthy and the wealthy, while working families struggle against the status quo.
My own grandfather, Dr. Virgil Howie was a doctor in the fifth district who knew what service was about. He had one of the first medical practices to have an integrated waiting room, and during the 1950s and 1960s, he and the rest of my family faced death threats for his support of civil rights protesters. It is to continue this tradition of service that I am working for the opportunity to serve Alabama's fifth district in Congress, to ensure that the provisions of this bill can be put in place in a way that supports our neighbors and their small businesses, rather than the insurance companies.
It's my belief that North Alabama needs a Congressman who is committed to service, and who will look at issues like healthcare reform in terms of what they can do for the folks right here in North Alabama, not for how they can be exploited for political points. When the healthcare reform bill has passed, that will provide some glimmer of hope that Congress might find its way back to solving problems. North Alabama can help put service back in Washington by electing a Congressman who's committed to service and solving tough problems.
So if Mr. Hughes is reading this today, I'd like to let him know, if I were in Congress today, in light of all of the benefits that this bill will bring to our community, I would have no sane choice but to vote for this bill. However, I'm not in Congress today; Parker Griffith is. And when Parker Griffith votes against this bill, he's voting against North Alabama.
Mitchell J. Howie 107 North Side Square Huntsville, Al. 35801
I like to think of this bill as like a starter home. It is not the mansion of our dreams. But it has a solid foundation, giving every American access to quality, affordable coverage. It has an excellent, protective roof, which will shelter Americans from the worst abuses of health insurance companies. And this starter home has plenty of room for additions and improvements.
The Congressional Budget Office's report on the latest, up-for-a-vote-within-days, Health Care Reform Bill is now out. The CBO is a non-partisan arm of the United States Congress.
Here's part of what the CBO Report says about the Bill to be voted on:
.
1. CUTS THE DEFICIT Cuts the deficit by $130 billion in the first ten years (2010 - 2019). Cuts the deficit by $1.2 trillion in the second ten years.
2. REINS IN WASTEFUL MEDICARE COSTS AND EXTENDS THE SOLVENCY OF MEDICARE; CLOSES THE PRESCRIPTION DRUG DONUT HOLE Reduces annual growth in Medicare expenditures by 1.4 percentage points per year-while improving benefits and lowering costs for seniors. Extends Medicare's solvency by at least 9 years.
3. EXPANDS AND IMPROVES HEALTH COVERAGE FOR MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES Expands health insurance coverage to 32 million Americans Helps guarantee that 95 percent of Americans will be covered.
4. IS FULLY PAID FOR Is fully paid for - costs $940 billion over a decade. (Americans spend nearly $2.5 trillion each year on health care now and nearly two-thirds of the bill's cost is paid for by reducing health care costs).
.
Blue Dog (oft-times Vichy) House Democrats like Bobby Bright and Artur Davis have NO legitimate (with the key word being legitimate) reason to vote against this Bill. Of course, neither do any of the House (or Senate) Republicans from Alabama. But they, the Republicans, made their beds with Big Insurance and against Alabamians long, long ago.
So, what's it going to be? Will Bright and Davis side with Alabamians and the Democratic Party, or will they just go ahead and put their
Honk if You're Owned by Big Insurance!
. . . bumper stickers on their cars and get it over with?
UPDATE: Just released by the House Committee on Energy & Commerce are District-by-District "Benefits of Health Care Reform" Reports.
Send the links to these reports to all your friends and family members who live in these Congressional Districts and ask them to contact Bright and Davis and ask if each is voting with Big Insurance and against these fixes to a system in need of fixing.
When the staffer trots-out the GOP Lying Point about "fiscal responsibility," tell them that voting for the bill is the fiscally responsible thing to do. When they trot out the GOP Lying Point about "government takeover," (1) politely tell them that's a lie and they (the staffer) knows it; and (2) politely ask the staffer when can we expect the Congressman (whether Bright or Davis) to introduce the Bill to repeal Medicare and all VA Benefits, since one is a "government run" insurance plan and the latter is a system of "government run" hospitals and benefits.
Then listen for the stammering, or a dial tone...
.
Rep. Bobby Bright (D, AL-02) doesn't plan to vote for Health Care Reform. Below the fold is his letter to Speaker Pelosi explaining his position.
At the link above, some commenters are complaining that Bright's letter is too nice. It is a nicely worded letter. Although I disagree with his decision to vote NO, unlike my own congressman, at least Bright isn't suggesting Speaker Pelosi needs mental health counseling.
T.H.E. Social Work Agency Adoption home studies & care management services in the North Alabama area.
Licensed, certified, caring social workers. blog advertising is good for you
I had a conversation the other day with a gentleman named Robert Hughes in Muscle Shoals. Mr. Hughes asked me if I were in Congress, would I vote for the healthcare reform bill being debated.
