Tommorow is the day! We need to show our support for the only candidate supporting our Democracy: Dennis Kucinich.
From the Kucinich Campaign:
On December 15th, 1791, our founders made history when this fledgling nation adopted the Bill of Rights – that sacred, powerful, and visionary statement that establishes our freedoms and guarantees our protections. Now, we have a chance to make history again and turn this Saturday, December 15th, into another turning point for this nation. (Click here for a special message) Our grassroots supporters – the heart, soul, and lifeblood of this campaign – have launched an inspiring effort to raise millions of dollars on one day, December 15th, to show the nation and the world that we can’t be bullied, we won’t be bossed, and our voices will be heard throughout this campaign!. A special message and a powerful video (click here) from video blogger and Kucinich supporter Davis Fleetwood:
With the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary fast approaching, December 15th is shaping up as a turning point for the Kucinich campaign. William Scott Hunter, a Kucinich supporter, started the ball rolling for a December 15th Dennis Kucinich “money bomb” with the potential to electrify the entire Presidential campaign. "Our goal is ambitious," says Hunter, the organizer of www.December152007.com, "but it has to be in order to have the impact Kucinich deserves. In America, candidates are considered ‘electable’ or ‘unelectable’ based on their bank accounts. It’s pretty hard to argue that a guy who can raise $10,000,000 in one day is unelectable."
And let us not forget what Kucinich's leadership has been:
The only Democratic Candidate to oppose the War and the subsequent Occupation
The only Democratic Candidate to show the judgement and Constitutional integrity to vote against the Patriot Act
The only Democratic Candidate who is taking the threats to our Democracy seriously and actually holding this Administration accountable through Impeachment
The only Presidential Candidate offering a truly universal, not-for-profithealth care system
The only Democratic Candidate who will cancel U.S. involvement in job killing, deficit building, human expoliting, environmental raping trade agreements, NAFTA/WTO
Really it goes on. We have seen this leadership. Kucinich has been the heart and soul of this party; the only Democrat willing to stand up for the party's principles, rather than play party politics; the only one willing to put the Constitution and all Americans ahead of politics.
We need to support Dennis because he is speaking for us. And we need to support him now before it is too late. Please follow this link and make your $100 contribution tommorow, December 15th! Support Dennis Kucinich!
“When taken in concert with the statements and actions of the Administration over the past year regarding Iran, the National Intelligence Estimate reveals a pattern of willful deceit directed at the U.S. Congress, the American people, and the rest of the world on the critical matters of war and peace."
He also pointed out that this most recent revelation, of an Administration's deaf ear to facts, shouldn't surprise us:
“More than three months ago, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said Iran was cooperating with inspection procedures and demanded that the Bush Administration disclose any alleged evidence regarding such a program. None was provided. More than a month ago, Russian President Putin revealed findings by his own nation’s intelligence services and announced that there was no credible evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program.
“Yet, in the face of both sets of findings, this Administration continued its drumbeat for war. Just this past week, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, with the NIE in his hands, was trying to arm-twist our NATO allies and the Republic of China into pressuring the U.N. Security Council to impose additional sanctions on Iran because of its alleged weapons program.
As many of you know, Kucinich's push for Impeachment has been concerned specifically with this Administration's actions regarding intelligence for War; Iraq, as well as Iran. In fact, Article Three of the impeachment resolution reads:
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and done so with the United States proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining the national security of the United States, to wit:
(1) Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran as evidenced by the following:
(A) `For our part, the United States is keeping all options on the table in addressing the irresponsible conduct of the regime. And we join other nations in sending that regime a clear message: We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.' March 7, 2006, Speech of Vice President Cheney to American Israel Public Affairs Committee 2006 Policy Conference.
(B) `But we've also made it clear that all options are on the table.' January 24, 2007, CNN Situation Room interview with Vice President Cheney.
(C) `When we--as the President did, for example, recently--deploy another aircraft carrier task force to the Gulf, that sends a very strong signal to everybody in the region that the United States is here to stay, that we clearly have significant capabilities, and that we are working with friends and allies as well as the international organizations to deal with the Iranian threat.' January 29, 2007, Newsweek interview with Vice President Cheney.
(D) `But I've also made the point and the President has made the point that all options are still on the table.' February 24, 2007, Vice President Cheney at Press Briefing with Australian Prime Minister in Sydney, Australia.
(2) The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States as evidenced by the following:
(A) `I know that what we see in Iran right now is not the industrial capacity you can [use to develop a] bomb.' Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.
(B) Iran indicated its `full readiness and willingness to negotiate on the modality for the resolution of the outstanding issues with the IAEA, subject to the assurances for dealing with the issues in the framework of the Agency, without the interference of the United Nations Security Council'. IAEA Board Report, February 22, 2007.
(C) `. . . so whatever they have, what we have seen today, is not the kind of capacity that would enable them to make bombs.' Mohamed El Baradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.
(3) The Vice President is fully aware of the actions taken by the United States towards Iran that are further destabilizing the world as evidenced by the following:
(A) The United States has refused to engage in meaningful diplomatic relations with Iran since 2002, rebuffing both bilateral and multilateral offers to dialogue.
(B) The United States is currently engaged in a military buildup in the Middle East that includes the increased presence of the United States Navy in the waters near Iran, significant United States Armed Forces in two nations neighboring to Iran, and the installation of anti-missile technology in the region.
(C) News accounts have indicated that military planners have considered the B61-11, a tactical nuclear weapon, as one of the options to strike underground bunkers in Iran.
(D) The United States has been linked to anti-Iranian organizations that are attempting to destabilize the Iranian government, in particular the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), even though the state department has branded it a terrorist organization.
(E) News accounts indicate that United States troops have been ordered into Iran to collect data and establish contact with anti-government groups.
(4) In the last three years the Vice President has repeatedly threatened Iran. However, the Vice President is legally bound by the U.S. Constitution's adherence to international law that prohibits threats of use of force.
(A) Article VI of the United States Constitution states, `This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.' Any provision of an international treaty ratified by the United States becomes the law of the United States.
(B) The United States is a signatory to the United Nations Charter, a treaty among the nations of the world. Article II, Section 4 of the United Nations Charter states, `All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.' The threat of force is illegal.
(C) Article 51 lays out the only exception, `Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.' Iran has not attacked the United States; therefore any threat against Iran by the United States is illegal.
The Vice President's deception upon the citizens and Congress of the United States that enabled the failed United States invasion of Iraq forcibly altered the rules of diplomacy such that the Vice President's recent belligerent actions towards Iran are destabilizing and counterproductive to the national security of the United States.
In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
Kucinich pointed out that since it now seems publicly evident that the Administration willfully falsified the facts regarding their weapons program, it is now time for Congress to investigate the mater:
“I call on the Congress to launch an immediate investigation into what our intelligence agencies knew and when they knew it. I believe such an investigation will further build the case for the impeachment of both the President and the Vice President. The fact that the President recently raised the specter of a possible World War III in public comments regarding Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program -- when he knew full well that Iran had no such program – should seriously be considered as a high crime. And, the fact that he and his Vice President have pursued plans for our military to drop 30,000-pound bunker buster bombs on Iranian nuclear research facilities constitutes a war crime.”
And really how couldn't you? Because I want to lay it down here: anyone who hopes to hold our highest office must support accountability for that office. It is time for our other candidates to join Kucinich in pushing for an investigation. Biden has seems to have started to firt with the idea, but we need the pressure from all of our Candidates. The more public and popular, the more pressure their statements will create. Where are they?
“Whatever those candidates say today, remember what they said before: Iran must be stopped at all cost. The fact that Iran stopped pursuing nuclear weaponry four years ago is more than an inconvenient revelation for those candidates. It’s an indictment of their judgment and their qualifications to lead this nation.”
You know, the more you hear the facts it just starts to sink in: Dennis Kucinich has been right! And consistently right, where our leading Democrats have been wrong.
After writing many Kucinich comments and diaries, trying to convince people of his positions, the most basic facts are still the most powerful. Kucinich has been right. The other candidates have been largely wrong.
Kucinich has, quite simply, evidenced clearer assesment and better judgement on our most critical issues, in the most critical times. He not only voted against the Iraq war/occupation, but compiled detailed analysis of the intelligence concerning Iraq's "weapons of mass destruction" which discredited the argument; an analysis that later proved spot on.
He not only voted against the PATRIOT Act, but he also read it. He voted against funding the war/occupation (the only one who would use the power of the purse!), against Iraqi Oil Privatization tied into supplementals, against China Trade, against Fast-Track, against Yucca Mountain...
Kucinich has been right on these issues, just as he has on Iran. Not only has Kucinich been the only one to have consistently spoken out against the push for war with Iran, actually integrating it into his presidential platform, he has been talking about it for over a year. This comes down again to clarity and judgement. And Kucinich is again the only one tested and proven. Where have the other candidates been? As Kucinich says:
“Iran is a war crime in motion, and the Congress and the Presidential candidates either can’t or won’t recognize that.”
Their judgement?
Today’s report by U.S. intelligence agencies that Iran – contrary to previous claims – ended its nuclear weapons program in 2003 “is proof positive that this pro-war administration has been manipulating intelligence and that the Presidential candidates’ all-options-are-on-the-table posture with respect to Iran reflects their inability to recognize when they’re being duped -- again..."
And, “whatever feeble fall-back statements that the top-polling Democratic Presidential candidates – Clinton, Obama, and Edwards – make today, all three have repeatedly said that all options are on the table with respect to Iran,” Kucinich pointed out.
“All options,” Kucinich said, “include everything from tactical nukes to air strikes to incursions and invasion by U.S. ground troops who are already over-stretched in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Kucinich has been right! It's that simple. Why would anyone vote for the candidates that have been consistently wrong and used poor judgement to lead our nation? That is absurd when there is a Candidate running who has been right. His name is Dennis Kucinich. Please support him!
Well, after so many grossly unfair debate formats that virtually tell each audience which candidates they are supposed to be interested in, Dennis Kucinich finally figured out a way to highlight this fundamental absurdity to his own advantage: Socratic Irony!
After again not receiving a fair amount of time to the other candidates, when it was his turn to participate in a segment that called for each candidate to actually ask a question to any candidate they choose to, Kucinich managed to display that sense of sarcastic wit and pragmatic questioning that Socrates turned into philosophical method; a dialectic which both entertains an audience preoccupied with what will be shown to be absurdity, as well as instructs to something more rational.
What's more, Kucinich asked a question no moderator ever would:
Are you the only candidate that is offering a single-payer, not-for-profit healthcare system..."
That's a question that we will not be hearing in any of the future debates, never mind the question of why the other candidates won't take on the insurance/pharmaceutical companies and offer a single-payer, not-for-profit system like Kucinich or virtually every other major industrialized nation.
The media, just as our other Democratic Candidates, usually like to ignore the option. Whenever the issue does arise they mindlessly "argue" that it "cannot pass through Congress", or more aggresively propogate the many false criticisms regarding the system.
For them I've put together this short Q&A that debunks the most common of these myths and further begs this issue: Why will no one besides Kucinich actually offer what is the most rational and comprehensive solution to our healthcare crisis?
Here's some responses to the false, but commonly made, criticisms of single-payer health care plans. H. R. 676 is a Congressional bill co-authored by Dennis Kucinich, has now gained over 75 cosponsors and the endorsements of powerful unions and organizations, such as the AFL-CIO, California Nurses, PNHP and One Care California, as well as Michael Moore. It would set up a national, not-for-profit, health care system in the United States and provide fully comprehensive health care to ALL Americans, including all primary, emergency and long term care, office visits, medication costs, dental, vision and mental health, as well as drug and alchohol counseling. Further it, eliminates all co-pays, deductibles and medication costs. It is the simplest, most reasonable and dependable solution for the U.S. health care crisis.
1.) We already spend so much on healthcare, so we can’t afford a universal healthcare system that covers everyone: This is false. In fact, H.R. 676 spends $56 billion less each year, while covering all Americans with fully comprehensive medical benefits. The reason is because, as a for-profit industry, the current private system wastes 31% of the $2.2 trillion spent each year on non-healthcare related costs such as, marketing/advertising, billing and paperwork, and corporate profit. H.R. 676 eliminates profit and is thus able to operate at a much more efficient 3% administration cost, saving over $4oo billion a year. Utilizing this money is what makes true universal healthcare for all Americans possible.
2.) I’ve read about other countries with healthcare systems similar to H.R. 676 that have experienced rationing. Wouldn’t H.R. 676 lead to rationing: No. There are quite a few things to be said about rationing, but first and foremost, H.R. 676 is designed to eliminate rationing. Though other countries operating with a single payer healthcare system have sometimes experienced rationing, they devote only half as much money towards the system. And that is the critical point involved here. Under H.R. 676, the U.S. will spend almost twice as much as other countries and get the best care because of it. Under the current private system, the U.S. also spends twice as much as any other country, yet ranks consistently lower on vital indicators of health, such as infant mortality, average lifespan, and rates of terminal illness like heart disease and diabetes. As stated above, this is because the current system wastes more than 1/3 of all healthcare spending on non-healthcare related costs. To paraphrase Marcia Angell, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, for other countries the problem is money, for the U.S. it is the system. Furthermore, it must be pointed out that the current private system is already effectively rationing access to healthcare. Same-day access to primary-care physicians in the U.S. is 33%, significantly lower than other single payers like the U.K. at 41%, Australia at 54%, and New Zealand at 60%. Poll after poll reports many Americans admitting to going without needed care because of out-of-pocket expenses like co-pays and deductibles. Moreover, 46 million Americans are uninsured and another 50 million are considered underinsured.
3.) H.R. 676 is socialized medicine: This is false. H.R. 676 is not socialized medicine. It is a publicly financed, privately delivered healthcare system. This means that the government is the sole provider of insurance, paying the healthcare providers (physicians, nurses etc.) who remain private. So, under H.R. 676 you have free choice of healthcare provider. There is no out-of-network.
4.) I wouldn’t want my benefits to drop and also, I wouldn’t want to change physicians: Under H.R. 676 the large majority of Americans’ benefits would dramatically increase. This is fully comprehensive coverage including office visits, hospitalization, long term care, all prescription medications, and even dental, vision, and mental health services. You will not have to change physicians unless you choose to. You have free choice of provider. Further, when changing jobs or place of employment, under the current private system people often must change physicians or even go without coverage temporarily. However, under H.R. 676 coverage is not affected and patients can continue to see the same physician.
5.) Isn’t government control of our healthcare system going to lead to a much less efficient and more bureaucratic operation: No. In fact, the current private system is much more bureaucratic and much less efficient. Not only does the current system waste 1/3 of all spending, but it interferes in the patient-physician relationship, making doctors justify every test and procedure-while attempting to influence these decisions through financial penalties and incentives. Physicians have to hire administrators just to keep up with the excess of claims and administration. Insurance companies also invest in drug companies, so when covering medications they have corporate duty to cover these medications even if others are cheaper and/or more effective. When further considering the confusing mass of bills, E.O.B.’s, deductibles, co-pays and the up, down and in the middle communication of physicians to insurance companies, insurance companies back to physicians and then the patient’s to both, the current private system is one impressively bureaucratic system, indeed. H.R. 676 eliminates the administrative waste, patient billing, co-pays and deductibles, by funding the system directly through tax dollars. Further, H.R. 676 leaves the medical decisions to the physicians themselves, reviewing their performance regularly instead of directly interfering with the patient-physician relationship.
6.) Isn’t the market based competition of the current private based system the best way to control costs: Obviously not, since the costs of premiums rose 86% between 2000 and 2006; three times faster than inflation. The rise of income in the same period rose only 15%. Medical bankruptcies are up 2200% since 1981 and profits for the largest pharmaceutical companies hit $62 billion back in 2004. H.R. 676 addresses cost control immediately by cutting out the profit and wasteful administration of the private system. Further, by being the sole insurer, the government will have the necessary influence to negotiate fair drug prices. Finally, the promotion of preventative medicine, which is virtually non-existent in the private based system, will control costs in the long term by reducing chronic diseases that require expensive treatment, such as cancer, heart disease and diabetes.
7.) Isn’t the reason that healthcare costs keep rising is that we are unhealthy as a country: Yes and no. First, through there are many factors to rising costs in healthcare, one important reason is poor health; with the consequent cost of treating chronic diseases. But, it is here again that the private system fails us. As a for-profit industry, there is no incentive to promote preventative medicine, the cost of such programs being immediate and the long-term financial dividends uncertain; uncertain because clients often switch coverage and companies. The fact is, not only do the private insurance companies rarely promote preventative medicine, they actually invest in industries that cause chronic illnesses. For instance, an insurer may invest in the tobacco industry. However, the “no” is that there are other important factors in the rapid rise of healthcare costs, not the least of which are corporate profit, poor administration, and the outrageous cost of medication.
8.) I’ve read that trial lawyers and malpractice suits are driving up healthcare costs: Yes and no. These do drive up costs, but only fractionally compared to the factors mentioned above, accounting for only 0.46% of our total healthcare spending. This is not the real problem.
9.) There seems to be a lot of factors involved in the high costs of healthcare. Can’t we just make reforms to the current system instead of changing over to another system: This is the critical point: no matter what reforms take place, keeping the for-profit, private insurance healthcare system requires wasting billions of dollars on non-healthcare costs. This system exists first and foremost to make money, not provide care. In fact, as a business it is in their best interest not to pay on claims, to deny claims whenever possible. As for-profit companies, they must use money to market themselves to prospective clients, they must hire administrators and marketers to do the job, and this is factored in to every premium dollar. As for-profit companies they must profile clients and underwrite them, they must promote medications based upon money instead of efficacy. And they must generate billions in profit; billons which don’t go towards healthcare. Consider further that as for-profit companies they have a vested interest in not insuring the elderly or the sick because they are too “expensive”, that they pass off the chronically ill to government programs in the long run anyway. And consider their inability to control pharmaceutical prices. With these considerations, as well as those of above, it becomes evident that reform is not really an option. For, it is the for-profit system that is the problem.
Well, after so many grossly unfair debate formats that virtually tell each audience which candidates they are supposed to be interested in, Dennis Kucinich finally figured out a way to highlight this fundamental absurdity to his own advantage: Socratic Irony!
After again not receiving a fair amount of time to the other candidates, when it was his turn to participate in a segment that called for each candidate to actually ask a question to any candidate they choose to, Kucinich managed to display that sense of sarcastic wit and pragmatic questioning that Socrates turned into philosophical method; a dialectic which both entertains an audience preoccupied with what will be shown to be absurdity, as well as instructs to something more rational.
What's more, Kucinich asked a question no moderator ever would:
Are you the only candidate that is offering a single-payer, not-for-profit healthcare system..."
That's a question that we will not be hearing in any of the future debates, never mind the question of why the other candidates won't take on the insurance/pharmaceutical companies and offer a single-payer, not-for-profit system like Kucinich or virtually every other major industrialized nation.
The media, just as our other Democratic Candidates, usually like to ignore the option. Whenever the issue does arise they mindlessly "argue" that it "cannot pass through Congress", or more aggresively propogate the many false criticisms regarding the system.
For them I've put together this short Q&A that debunks the most common of these myths and further begs this issue: Why will no one besides Kucinich actually offer what is the most rational and comprehensive solution to our healthcare crisis?
Here's some responses to the false, but commonly made, criticisms of single-payer health care plans. H. R. 676 is a Congressional bill co-authored by Dennis Kucinich, has now gained over 75 cosponsors and the endorsements of powerful unions and organizations, such as the AFL-CIO, California Nurses, PNHP and One Care California, as well as Michael Moore. It would set up a national, not-for-profit, health care system in the United States and provide fully comprehensive health care to ALL Americans, including all primary, emergency and long term care, office visits, medication costs, dental, vision and mental health, as well as drug and alchohol counseling. Further it, eliminates all co-pays, deductibles and medication costs. It is the simplest, most reasonable and dependable solution for the U.S. health care crisis.
1.) We already spend so much on healthcare, so we can’t afford a universal healthcare system that covers everyone: This is false. In fact, H.R. 676 spends $56 billion less each year, while covering all Americans with fully comprehensive medical benefits. The reason is because, as a for-profit industry, the current private system wastes 31% of the $2.2 trillion spent each year on non-healthcare related costs such as, marketing/advertising, billing and paperwork, and corporate profit. H.R. 676 eliminates profit and is thus able to operate at a much more efficient 3% administration cost, saving over $4oo billion a year. Utilizing this money is what makes true universal healthcare for all Americans possible.
2.) I’ve read about other countries with healthcare systems similar to H.R. 676 that have experienced rationing. Wouldn’t H.R. 676 lead to rationing: No. There are quite a few things to be said about rationing, but first and foremost, H.R. 676 is designed to eliminate rationing. Though other countries operating with a single payer healthcare system have sometimes experienced rationing, they devote only half as much money towards the system. And that is the critical point involved here. Under H.R. 676, the U.S. will spend almost twice as much as other countries and get the best care because of it. Under the current private system, the U.S. also spends twice as much as any other country, yet ranks consistently lower on vital indicators of health, such as infant mortality, average lifespan, and rates of terminal illness like heart disease and diabetes. As stated above, this is because the current system wastes more than 1/3 of all healthcare spending on non-healthcare related costs. To paraphrase Marcia Angell, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, for other countries the problem is money, for the U.S. it is the system. Furthermore, it must be pointed out that the current private system is already effectively rationing access to healthcare. Same-day access to primary-care physicians in the U.S. is 33%, significantly lower than other single payers like the U.K. at 41%, Australia at 54%, and New Zealand at 60%. Poll after poll reports many Americans admitting to going without needed care because of out-of-pocket expenses like co-pays and deductibles. Moreover, 46 million Americans are uninsured and another 50 million are considered underinsured.
3.) H.R. 676 is socialized medicine: This is false. H.R. 676 is not socialized medicine. It is a publicly financed, privately delivered healthcare system. This means that the government is the sole provider of insurance, paying the healthcare providers (physicians, nurses etc.) who remain private. So, under H.R. 676 you have free choice of healthcare provider. There is no out-of-network.
4.) I wouldn’t want my benefits to drop and also, I wouldn’t want to change physicians: Under H.R. 676 the large majority of Americans’ benefits would dramatically increase. This is fully comprehensive coverage including office visits, hospitalization, long term care, all prescription medications, and even dental, vision, and mental health services. You will not have to change physicians unless you choose to. You have free choice of provider. Further, when changing jobs or place of employment, under the current private system people often must change physicians or even go without coverage temporarily. However, under H.R. 676 coverage is not affected and patients can continue to see the same physician.
5.) Isn’t government control of our healthcare system going to lead to a much less efficient and more bureaucratic operation: No. In fact, the current private system is much more bureaucratic and much less efficient. Not only does the current system waste 1/3 of all spending, but it interferes in the patient-physician relationship, making doctors justify every test and procedure-while attempting to influence these decisions through financial penalties and incentives. Physicians have to hire administrators just to keep up with the excess of claims and administration. Insurance companies also invest in drug companies, so when covering medications they have corporate duty to cover these medications even if others are cheaper and/or more effective. When further considering the confusing mass of bills, E.O.B.’s, deductibles, co-pays and the up, down and in the middle communication of physicians to insurance companies, insurance companies back to physicians and then the patient’s to both, the current private system is one impressively bureaucratic system, indeed. H.R. 676 eliminates the administrative waste, patient billing, co-pays and deductibles, by funding the system directly through tax dollars. Further, H.R. 676 leaves the medical decisions to the physicians themselves, reviewing their performance regularly instead of directly interfering with the patient-physician relationship.
6.) Isn’t the market based competition of the current private based system the best way to control costs: Obviously not, since the costs of premiums rose 86% between 2000 and 2006; three times faster than inflation. The rise of income in the same period rose only 15%. Medical bankruptcies are up 2200% since 1981 and profits for the largest pharmaceutical companies hit $62 billion back in 2004. H.R. 676 addresses cost control immediately by cutting out the profit and wasteful administration of the private system. Further, by being the sole insurer, the government will have the necessary influence to negotiate fair drug prices. Finally, the promotion of preventative medicine, which is virtually non-existent in the private based system, will control costs in the long term by reducing chronic diseases that require expensive treatment, such as cancer, heart disease and diabetes.
7.) Isn’t the reason that healthcare costs keep rising is that we are unhealthy as a country: Yes and no. First, through there are many factors to rising costs in healthcare, one important reason is poor health; with the consequent cost of treating chronic diseases. But, it is here again that the private system fails us. As a for-profit industry, there is no incentive to promote preventative medicine, the cost of such programs being immediate and the long-term financial dividends uncertain; uncertain because clients often switch coverage and companies. The fact is, not only do the private insurance companies rarely promote preventative medicine, they actually invest in industries that cause chronic illnesses. For instance, an insurer may invest in the tobacco industry. However, the “no” is that there are other important factors in the rapid rise of healthcare costs, not the least of which are corporate profit, poor administration, and the outrageous cost of medication.
8.) I’ve read that trial lawyers and malpractice suits are driving up healthcare costs: Yes and no. These do drive up costs, but only fractionally compared to the factors mentioned above, accounting for only 0.46% of our total healthcare spending. This is not the real problem.
9.) There seems to be a lot of factors involved in the high costs of healthcare. Can’t we just make reforms to the current system instead of changing over to another system: This is the critical point: no matter what reforms take place, keeping the for-profit, private insurance healthcare system requires wasting billions of dollars on non-healthcare costs. This system exists first and foremost to make money, not provide care. In fact, as a business it is in their best interest not to pay on claims, to deny claims whenever possible. As for-profit companies, they must use money to market themselves to prospective clients, they must hire administrators and marketers to do the job, and this is factored in to every premium dollar. As for-profit companies they must profile clients and underwrite them, they must promote medications based upon money instead of efficacy. And they must generate billions in profit; billons which don’t go towards healthcare. Consider further that as for-profit companies they have a vested interest in not insuring the elderly or the sick because they are too “expensive”, that they pass off the chronically ill to government programs in the long run anyway. And consider their inability to control pharmaceutical prices. With these considerations, as well as those of above, it becomes evident that reform is not really an option. For, it is the for-profit system that is the problem.
Kucinich addressed a crowd of over 5,000 citizens today in Iowa, at the Heartland Presidential Forum. He was in good company, as the gathering of community and political leaders and Democratic Party activists involved in the forum announced as their priorities, including: “health care for everybody,” the “right to a living wage,” workers’ rights, an end to corporate control of government, and the adoption of progressive immigration reforms that “don’t use immigrants as scapegoats” for failed federal policies-all bread and butter stump issues for Kucinich and, further, the issues that along with the war/occupation and civil liberties best distignuish him as the leading Democrat:
One especially poignant moment dramatically reflected the affinity between the coalition’s populist agenda and Kucinich’s deep involvement in those same issues. A community leader from Iowa recounted the events of Dec. 12 , 2006, when federal immigration authorities raided a plant in search of undocumented immigrants. Among those detained and exiled to Mexico was the mother of five small children who lived in a modest home with her husband. It happened, the speaker said, her voice choked with emotion, on the hallowed feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe.
Kucinich walked across the stage and asked her to look at his watch. “What does it say?” he asked her. “It’s Our Lady of Guadalupe,” she responded. Kucinich said the watch was a gift from friends in El Paso, Texas four years ago “when I was standing up for the rights of immigrants.” The crowd’s reaction swelled from sighs and gasps to sustained applause and cheering.
Kucinich has been leading on Immigration issues, from his rousing speech at the Latino Congresso to his vote against the S-CHIP that left out over 600,000 children of LEGAL IMMIGRANTS.
Accountability and special interest reform was also highlighted by Kucinich when he drew cheers and applause regarding impeachment and talked about his career-long battle with the corrupt influence of special interests on our political process:
“As Mayor of Cleveland, I put my career on the line to save a municipal electric system” from a corporate take-over, Kucinich said.
That same public-interest philosophy, he elaborated, has given him the strength to challenge the for-profit health insurance and pharmaceutical companies and call for a national, not-for-profit program that covers all Americans. His opposition to corporate-backed trade agreements that have off-shored millions of U.S. jobs is part of that same philosophy, he said. And, the war in Iraq was motivated by a political and corporate thirst for oil, the same motivations that allow oil and gas companies to exploit federally owned lands in the U.S., he said.
The surest route to ending the monied-control of politics and government is public financing of elections; and, he said, he would push for a Constitutional amendment to ensure that federal campaigns were publicly, rather than privately financed.
“It’s your government,” he said, “Take it back,” he concluded to thunderous applause and a standing ovation.
Now that Mr. Reid will be making a critical decision on the FISA legislation and we need so desperately our Representaitives to be vocal about their opposition to immunity, let's be clear about where Kucinich stands:
“I object to any immunity for telecommunications companies and demand a full accounting of these companies’ involvement to Congress and to the American public. When corporations cooperate with the government to strip people of their Constitutional rights, that is a text book description of fascism. There must not be any place in America for this type of conduct.” -Dennis Kucinich
And, so wandered Dennis Kucinich; alone again; alone into that uncharted 2008 Presidential Candidate territory, called courage; called clarity; called "getting to the heart of an issue and speaking about it honestly"!
It really is amazing that so many "common sense", and "common good", positions could be held by him alone, yet they are. Speaking for, and taking action in the name of, the American people, always trumps "politics" for Kucinich and he's proven it, again and again. Yet, how sad that there is a difference between the two! The whole idea behind Representative Democracy is speaking and taking action for the people. But, what other Democrat, besides Kucinich is willing to choose the poeple over politics? What other candidate is willing to take on the war machine and reject war as an instrument of policy; take on insurance and pharmaceutical companies to offer not-for-profit health care, take on corporate power involved in our trade agreements; take on this Administration?
Kucinich's above quote was in response to the Senate Intelligence Committee vote to immunize telecommunications companies from civil lawsuits for tapping Americans’ phones and computer without court approval. He has already sent letters to
the Chairmen and CEOs of the nation’s largest telecommunications companies in May 2006, demanding they reveal to Congress their dealings with the National Security Agency (NSA).
The letters sent to the heads of Verizon, Qwest, BellSouth and AT&T specifically ask if NSA employees forced telecommunications companies, through coercion, to comply with the NSA illegal domestic spying program.
“It is imperative the telecommunications companies reveal everything they and their employees know about this illegal request,” Kucinich stated in the letter. “You have a responsibility to safeguard our democracy by revealing potentially illegal activities of the NSA to Congress.
“In light of these allegations, I urge you to reveal to Congress the nature of (your) discussions with NSA. Specifically, did any NSA official make coercive statements to any of your employees? Did the NSA make any legal arguments for their request of this information? And did the NSA suggest it was your company’s patriotic duty to adhere to such a request?” Kucinich also asked in the letter.
We know Kucinich will continue to stand up for the American people:
“Why should telecommunications companies be held above the law? If we permit our constitutional rights to be watered down out of fear, we have given up important foundations of our democracy. Congress must stand firm and defend the Constitution.”
“I want to get to the bottom of this Administration’s aggressive abuse on Americans’ civil liberties.”
And now we need to stand up as well. We need to get rid of the fear. We need to get back to America. We need to support Dennis Kucinich!
According to public, campaign finacning regulations tommorow, November 29th, is the last day to receive matching funds through public financing.
So if you make a contribution tonight or tommorow to Dennis Kucinich, this means that your $50 contribution becomes a $100 contribution, $200 equals $400 ... up to $250.
From the Kucinich campaign:
There are literally just weeks left before the primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada. We are proud of how far we've come, and the way the American people have embraced our message of "Strength through Peace." According to recent polls we are in 4th place in New Hampshire. You could help put us over the top in New Hampshire by making a contribution today, and Double Your Impact, by taking advantage of the federal matching funds program.
Your support is essential as you can help us:
* Run advertisements and media * Hire field coordinators and staff * Provide housing for volunteers willing to come to New Hampshire to help get Dennis' message out. * Have all the resources we need to compete in New Hampshire and other early primary states
You know our campaign does not take contributions from corporations or from special interest groups. We have relied on people like you to help support our campaign. You have always come through during our end of quarter drives.
This is such an important opportunity for us and we cannot let it go by. Kucinich has disporpotiantely been supported by small donors and so the fact of doubling our contribution is something that we simply need to take advantage of. Even a small donation now becomes more significant. If you have already donated, I sincerely thank you. But, if you can make the extra committment for Mr. Kucinich's leadership, it will go twice as far until tommorow.
Let us not forget what Kucinich's leadership has been:
The only Democratic Candidate to oppose the War and the subsequent Occupation
The only Democratic Candidate to show the judgement and Constitutional integrity to vote against the Patriot Act
The only Democratic Candidate who is taking the threats to our Democracy seriously and actually holding this Administration accountable through Impeachment
The only Presidential Candidate offering a truly universal, not-for-profithealth care system
The only Democratic Candidate who will cancel U.S. involvement in job killing, deficit building, human expoliting, environmental raping trade agreements, NAFTA/WTO
Really it goes on. We have seen this leadership. Kucinich has been the heart and soul of this party; the only Democrat willing to stand up for the party's principles, rather than play party politics; the only one willing to put the Constitution and all Americans ahead of politics.
We need to support Dennis because he is speaking for us. And we need to support him now before it is too late. Please follow this link and make your contribution now.
As Bob Fertik points out, Dennis Kucinich's leadership against the Iraq war/occupation has not only been prescient and consistent, but comprehensive and definitive:
In the wake of the Bush-Maliki Declaration of an "enduring relationship," TalkingPointsMemo is doing its usual outstanding work by collecting statements from the Democratic Presidential candidates on keeping permanent U.S. bases in Iraq...
Like Obama, Clinton, and Dodd, Edwards doesn't address the fact that many have already been built, or say what he will do with them.
Kucinich sounded the alarm about Bush's construction of permanent bases back on 4/14/05, when he released a Congressional Research Service (CRS) report that found over $1 billion for military construction in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In 2006, Kucinich cosponsored Rep. Barbara Lee's bill to close permanent bases, which did pass the House. He has also been adamant about withdrawing all U.S. troops bringing the private contrators back, Not allowing privatization of Iraq's oil, and handing back reconstruction contracts and stability to the Iraqi economy: Basically all of the aspects of the U.S. Occupation which is the main causse of violence and instability in the region.
Kucinich is the first candidate to acknowledge Bush built permanent bases, and to say he will close them. And he has the record to prove it, including co-sponsoring Barbara Lee's resolution against permanent bases in 2005, opposing permanent bases in a floor speech in 2006, and calling the current Democratic plan for Iraq a "total fraud" just last week because it would permit permit bases.
It is well known that the cost of healthcare takes a heavy toll on businesses. Large corporations are unable to compete in the world market with foreign companies that benefit from national not-for-profit healthcare systems: G.M. reports that the costs of healthcare adds an additional $1,600 to each automobile. But, nowhere is the strain more apparent than for small businesses, which disproportionately do not offer healthcare to workers.
And now a new study finds this trend only worsening:
A new annual report by employee benefits firm Mercer, shows the cost of providing employer-sponsored health insurance increased by 6.1 percent in 2007 to nearly $8,000 per employee.
Employee coverage by small businesses dropped from 69 percent to 61 percent since the beginning of the Bush Administration. The results provide further evidence that HR 676, the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act, is the only choice for health care reform.
Dennis Kucinich, who is the only candidate willing to challenge the private, insurance and pahrmaceutical industries by offering a not-for-profit, truly universal healthcare system, commented:
“Small businesses are no longer willing to bear the burden of the cost of keeping the health insurance industry profitable,” said Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH).
The survey also revealed that employers are shifting their costs onto workers and they are getting less care.
“Health care is increasingly too expensive for small businesses to cover. It’s time for America to join with the rest of the industrialized nations of the world in guaranteeing health care for its people.”
Kucinich's plan H.R. 676 is the most rational, economically feasible, and comprehensive solution to our national healthcare crisis:
H.R. 676 is a bill, co-drafted by Dennis Kucinich, which will enact a true universal health care system for the United States. The bill will create a publicly financed, privately delivered healthcare program that provides all U.S. citizens with comprehensive medical coverage, including office visits, hospitalization, emergency care, long term care, prescription drugs, medical equipment, mental health services, drug and alcohol treatment, dental and vision care; with no co-pays, deductibles, or denial of coverage.
Moreover, H.R. 676 provides this comprehensive coverage to all citizens by spending $56 Billion less each year than the current for-profit, private insurance system; the private insurance system that leaves 46 million Americans uninsured and 50+ million underinsured; the same system that wastes 31% of every healthcare dollar (roughly $600 billion/yr) on non-healthcare related spending, such as marketing/advertising, an inefficient administration, rating and underwriting clients, denying coverage, and generating corporate profit; the system structured around profit that has undermined quality, affordable coverage, leaving Americans vulnerable to financial ruin in times of need because of excessive co-pays, deductibles, and medication costs.
As a not-for-profit system, H.R. 676 eliminates the waste by operating with a much more efficient 3% administration cost, utilizing the roughly $600 billion saved each year for actual healthcare and finally guaranteeing the same high quality care for every American. As a not-for-profit system, H.R. 676 creates a healthcare system structured for the purpose of providing the best care to all in the most economically efficient way, rather than maximizing profit. As a not-for-profit system, H.R. 676 finally presents access to healthcare as a basic human right, rather than just another corporate commodity. And, in his support of H.R. 676, Dennis Kucinich is the only candidate considering what will truly strengthen and provide security for all Americans, rather than the healthcare industry. In supporting H.R. 676 Dennis Kucinich is considering:
Crisis: 46 million Americans uninsured and 50+ million underinsured; medically related bankruptcies, up 2,200% since 1981, account for half of all bankruptcies in this country and, yet ¾ of them were insured at the time. H.R. 676 guarantees full coverage for every American.
Quality: Not only does H.R. 676 provide all Americans with unparalleled quality of coverage, including free choice of provider and complete portability, but it finally allows medical decisions to be made only by those that should: medical professionals. H.R. 676 has the support of over 14,000 physicians and nurses associations because it eliminates the business of private insurance and pharmaceutical companies from influencing medical decisions to save money.
Costs: The private system has utterly failed to control costs as premiums have risen three times faster than inflation and pharmaceuticals go through the roof. H.R. 676 will not only spend $56 billion less, but go further in controlling costs by allocating budgets, eliminating profit and finally having the clout to negotiate fair rates with the pharmaceutical companies.
Families: As H.R. 676 is funded through tax dollars, 95% of families will pay less for health care than they do now. Under the current private system, the average family premium is up to $11,000/yr. However, under H.R.676, a family of three making $40,000/yr. will spend roughly 1,900/yr. For comprehensive coverage without any additional costs, such as co-pays, deductibles or prescription medications.
Businesses: The current private system places a heavy burden on businesses to provide healthcare for employees, the average employer contributing $2,600 per employee. Under H.R. 676 the average would drop to about $1,600. This financial strain handicaps U.S. businesses competing in the world market.
The for-profit system requires non-healthcare related spending and waste to operate, the whole system designed to create income, not care. In supporting H.R. 676, Dennis Kucinich is the only presidential candidate who offers a solution for high quality, true universal health care in this country: eliminating the for-profit, private insurance system. In supporting H.R. 676 Dennis Kucinich is able to finally guarantee all Americans the security of affordable and fully comprehensive coverage. And through H.R. 676, Dennis Kucinich is reaching out to all Americans, bringing them together, to face the for-profit, private healthcare system and once again reclaim our responsibility as a great nation.
Well, Dennis Kucinich continues to speak for America rather than gross party politics. Speaking in New Hampshire, Wednesday, Kucinich stated:
the vow from his party's leadership in Congress to stand up to President Bush on ending the war in Iraq amounts to a "total fraud."
The Ohio congressman said the most recent House-passed plan to set a timetable for ending the war still would permit permanent bases in Iraq and allow Americans soldiers to train Iraqi military and police and to fight off insurgents.
"This is a fraud, a total fraud, and it breaks the promise the Democrats made to the voters that we would get out of Iraq," Kucinich said of his own party's congressional leadership during an interview Wednesday.
It really does seem to me that only Kucinich understands, or at least is willing to admit, that this country is in serious danger right now. Kucinich, seems alone among the candidates who believes that this election is much less about reclaiming the White House for the Democratic Party, than it is about reclaiming the United States for all of its citizens.
Yet, there is such a disconnect within our political system that the Democratic Leadership will not act upon the wishes of a majority of Americans regarding the war/occupation or even in protecting the essence of our Democracy through accountability and beginning impeachment investigations. As kucinich duly noted:
"I think the outrage is building among the voting public, but to the political system, it's business as usual."
State Rep. Betty Hall, D-Brookline, who attended, decided to endorse Kucinich after he forced consideration of V.P. Cheney's Impeachment a few weeks ago. Hall tried to bring in a non-binding resolution to the New Hampshire House supporting an impeachment proceeding against Bush and Cheney, which House leaders from both parties opposed, not allowing an up or down vote.
"It isn't popular to speak up; I know. When I spoke in the Legislature, some people were angry, but we must talk about it. We must learn about it," Hall said.
Hall also showed Kucinich an article in the New Hampshire State Constitution, which reads inpart:
"The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power and repression is absurd, slavish and destructive of the good of all mankind."
Kucinich, who is now promising to bring more detailed articles of Impeachment against President George W. Bush, said:
"I'm going to quote that language from the New Hampshire Constitution all over the country. Clearly New Hampshire is the place to bring this message.
Seems fitting for New Hampshire: "Live free or die"...
Kucinich will be a leading speaker Monday night at Dartmouth College for an "Impeachment Teach-In" sponsored by state and national liberal-leaning organizations.
In an age of corporate consolidation and dispropotionate power, Dennis Kucinich is the candidate most willing to face the problems threatenting the American dream head on by leveling the economy and supporting growth and stabalization in the small business sector. As Kucinich notes:
The challenge before us today is whether we can maintain a government of the people, by the people and for the people, or whether we will timidly accept the economic, social, and political consequences of a government of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations.
As with the entire Kucinich platform, his solutions are intricately weaved throughout his policies and holistic view of government, however, Kucinich's benefits for small businesses can be seen in three main area of his policy:
1.) Economic Policy
2.) Jobs/Energy Program
3.) Healthcare
Dennis' program for the economy is one marked by balance. His plan will:
create a more level playing field for small businesses by reconstituting the trust-busting powers of the Justice Department and breaking up the monopolies that make competition next to impossible for small businesses in many industries. Repealing corporate trade agreements -- NAFTA and the WTO -- that currently give further advantages to large corporations at the expense of small businesses and local economies are central to this goal.
Kucinich will repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, double the tax refunds for American families making less than $80,000, and ensure that corporations pay a fair tax rate, which now pay over three times less than in the 1950's.
He will also work to make it possible for small media and agricultural businesses to compete by busting media monopolies and
requiring country-of-origin labeling; by actively enforcing existing anti-trust laws; and by enacting new laws to force divestiture in concentrated markets, breaking apart monopolistic agribusiness companies and shifting farm economics towards higher commodity prices for farmers. To increase competition in the livestock industry, I strongly support a national ban on packer ownership of livestock.
Our country must shift USDA funding and focus away from the promotion of concentrated intensive and industrial agribusiness. A new focus will benefit family farmers, rural communities, the environment, and consumers, with policies crafted to enable farmers to earn a fair price and to provide safe, nutritious food.
By cutting our bloated Pentagon budget by at least 15%, Kucinich will then use that money for a universal education program, as well as his Jobs Program.
In this more balanced framework of competition, the Kucinich Jobs Program will create millions of new working/middle class jobs, and huge opportunities for small businesses, while simultaneously addressing our crumbling infrastructural problems and energy needs. Through his Works Green Administration, or WGA, Dennis is investing in the environment, as well as our future, while stimulating the national economy.
Inspired by FDR's Works Progress Administration, the WGA utilizes the Environmental Protection Agency to put millions of Americans back to work rebuilding our schools, bridges, roads, ports, water systems, and environmental systems. Not only does the bold practicality of the plan lie in putting Americans back to work by investing in the national wealth of our own infrastructure, but the plan also incorporates environmental and energy concerns to further create wealth for the country and save individual families more money. For example, not only will the public works projects stress green building and renewable energy technology, but the plan will enable homes to be retrofit with green building, solar and wind microtechnology which will save families money on their energy bills. And this shift from oil, coal and nuclear energies will open up opportunities for emerging small businesses developing renewable energies.
Dennis will also institute a National Housing Trust Fund to provide affordable housing to millions of Americans and have consistently shown to stimulate the economy, as well as small businesses.
Finally, the Kucinich Healthcare plan, H.R. 676, will not only support the health of the 47 million Americans without any care and the 50+million who are underinsured, but also the health of our economy-particularly small businesses, as the Mercer report recently showed.
Employer provided healthcare coverage-under the current private, for-profit system-places a heavy burden on businesses: The average employer contributing $2,600 per employee. Under H.R. 676 the average would drop to about $1,600. This financial strain handicaps large U.S. businesses competing in the world market and small businesses here at home. Small businesses end up with larger cost sharing, often pushed off on the worker, and less comprehensive benefit packages. More and more often small businesses cannot even offer healthcare at all.
Under a Kucinich Administration, small businesses receive an equal and much greater opportunity in this country. Under a Kucinich Administration, the American dream becomes and equal and greater opportunity. Please support Dennis Kucinich!
We cannot forget who we are. We are a nation of, a nation welcoming and built by immigrants. And though this Administration wants to divert attention from its current mistakes, we cannot forget who we are in the process. To Dennis Kucinich, America means "give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses...". To Dennis Kucinich, in an open and free democratic nation there must be a path to citizenship. To Dennis Kucinich, there is no such thing as an illegal human being.
Speaking at the Latino Congresso last month, Kucinich said:
I want to let you to know something; how I feel about what’s happened to our country...
in this toxic environment, the Administration, in its never-ending quest for more scapegoats, focuses on immigrants. You know it and I know it. And we see, unfortunately, the failure of the Democratic Party to stand up to this Administration...
Isn’t it interesting how famous Ronald Reagan became for saying, “Mr. Gorbachev, take down that wall.” Oh, how far we’ve come from those days. When President Reagan said, “Take down that wall,” and President Bush now says, “Build up a wall,” where are we going as a nation?
I believe the way the immigrant community is treated, whether documented or not, reflects the direction and future of America. We must believe that our brothers and sisters, Latinos and all of the other ethnic groups, are essential to who we are as Americans.
Kucinich has voted against and vocally criticized the debate on the border fence, though he does support securing our ports and borders. However, to really address the immigration issue, we reform our trade agreements that have caused the mass immigration from Mexico. NAFTA and the WTO not only destroyed high paying manufacturing jobs at home, but seriously depressed the economy in Mexico and forcing millions to cross the border in search for work. The immigration issue is becoming more and more the scapegoat for our disastrous trade agreements and wars. Only by renegotiating fair trade agreements and improving the Mexican economy can we hope to begin to solve our immigration issues.
Kucinich wants to offer immigrants a clear road map to legal status in the United States and grant legal permanent residence to immigrants who have been living in the U.S. for five or more years. He would also offer conditional legal status and work authorization to all law-abiding immigrants living in the United States for less than five years and revoke current laws that bar certain people who live abroad from re-entering the U.S. for a period of three to 10 years. Kucinich wants to stand for all Americans and all people:
It is time that we had a President who understood that human unity is what makes for peace. And that when we impose the wrath of the law that is unjust, what we’re doing is we’re stopping peace from happening. So, I’m running for President to make sure that all the people in America know that they have someone who they can count on, and know that they will have a President who will stand up for them. And I will tell you today that the Latino community, in particular, has a right to expect that all the candidates will stand in front of you and say, “Yes. We must have a path to legalization. Yes. There must be a way for people to work in this country, if they want to live in Mexico. Yes. We must take down that wall!”
Here's Kucinich at the recent debate in Nevada addressing the immigration issue, along with the label of "Illegal Immigrant"
We have to recognize the relationship between global warming and “global warring”. Just as dependence on foreign oil has led to wars in the Middle East, allocating an outrageous amount of our budget to the Pentagon facilitates and preserves this dependence on foreign oil. Dennis Kucinich understands this connection and so, as stated above, will slash the Pentagon budget by 15% as his first step to move away from fossil fuels and towards sustainable and renewable fuels and energy sources. As stated above, this money will go to education, as well as creating his Works Green Administration (WGA). The WGA will couple the EPA with NASA to develop new technologies to utilize alternative fuels and energies.
Inspired by FDR's Works Progress Administration, the WGA utilizes the Environmental Protection Agency to put millions of Americans back to work rebuilding our schools, bridges, roads, ports, water systems, and environmental systems. Not only does the bold practicality of the plan lie in putting Americans back to work by investing in the national wealth of our own infrastructure, but the plan also incorporates environmental and energy concerns to further create wealth for the country and save individual families more money. For example, not only will the public works projects stress green building and renewable energy technology, but the plan will enable homes to be retrofit with green building, solar and wind microtechnology which will save families money on their energy bills. The WGA rebuilding effort will incorporate sustainable development and renewable energy from our public infrastructure to the millions of private homes that choose to retrofit with wind and solar technologies to save on family energy costs. In fact, they will be able to sell energy back to the grid.
The role of utilities will change dramatically because it will no longer be a centralized approach toward energy production. Utility companies will have to provide support for green alternatives. They will no longer be dictating energy costs, as Kucinich will work to break up the monopolies and ensure close regulation of their activities. They will be required to go green as license conditions and shut down if they violate the Clean Air Act. We will finally have a strict and EPA.
Further, Kucinich will finally committ the U.S. to the provisions of the Kyoto Protocol, as well as incorporating a carbon tax to create disincentives for using carbon-based energies. However, he believes this isn’t enough; simply punishing those people who are using carbons is not the answer. Rather, Kucinich wants to put the emphasis first on the government supporting renewable technologies, to move the country toward a renewable portfolio standard of at least 30% by 2020.
Kucinich will create a cooperative and synergistic relationship between all departments and administrations within the government for the purpose of greening America. Whether it's the Small Business Administration, or the Housing and Urban Development Department, or the Department of Agriculture, or the Department of Labor, each would incorporate green goals into its policies.
Internationally, as President, Kucinich will work with the leaders of China and India and other nations to promote an environmental consciousness and sustainable economies. After withdrawing from NAFTA, the new trade agreements will include requirements for protecting the air and the water and the land of all the countries we do business with.
Dennis Kucinich has a long history and strong committment of fighting for the environment. He was active in helping draft the first environmental law protecting the air, as a member of the Cleveland City Council 30 years ago and led the effort in Ohio challenging nuclear power as being unsafe, unreliable, and unsustainable. Internationally he attended the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, advocating a plan with Mikhail Gorbachev for a Global Green Deal that would enable the introduction of $50 billion of new solar projects around the world.
Support Dennis Kucinich and make America a leader in protecting our environment and creating a sustainable future.
Tucker Carlson spends over three minutes of his show, along with L.A. Times columnist, Rosa Brooks, and A.B. Stoddard of The Hill, to discuss "why Dennis Kucinich isn't a frontrunner?". Even more amazing is the "conclusion" they reach: He should be!
Forgive me if I'm editorializing a bit too much on that last point, but they do seem to concede that Kucinich doesn't get a fair shake by anyone, the media or his own party, even though he stands for everything the Dems say they do and then vote against. Tucker and the two correspondents even cite the media role in marginalizing Kucinich, the self-fullfilling nature of polling, the need to let canididates get more equal time to let the public decide the election; to which Brooks presumes, "we might get different results". They even bandy about words and phrases like "trailblazer" and "the machine"...
It's very interesting, particularly in light of Tucker's history of continually trying to undermine Kucinich at any cost-no matter how base and ridiculous his methods.
However, skeptical I can be towards their intent, I do think that this is proof that Kucinich is making noise. They would simply ignore him otherwise.
Something's happened to Dennis Kucinich. There's a newfound confidence; a deeply resigned, yet boldly assertive tone gathering in his voice. I don't know what it is. Maybe it's his recent progress in major polls and grassroots support. Maybe it's the fighter coming out, now that impeachment has gained some life. Maybe it's the realization that a majority of Americans side with him on the issues and that he is the one pushing this party back to the people. Or maybe it's that he's been the candidate who has best exercised the leadership and judgement on huge issues, such as Iraq, the Patriot Act, Iran, Trade, and Impeachment.
I'm not really sure, but Kucinich has been digging in and swinging long lately. And, yeah, he's driving them home. Listen to the applause!
When Wolf asked Kucinich about his being the only candidate to vote against the liberty robbing PATRIOT Act, Dennis took a hard cut:
That's because I read it.
After a round of huge applause, Blitzer asked Kucinich if he felt that those who voted for the PATRIOT Act held a responsibility to people who have been treated unfairly and racially profiled, to which Kucinich responded that
...the president of the United States is called upon to make the right decision at the right time. And you've seen here tonight, people who have voted for the war, voted to fund the war, and now they have a different position. People who voted for the Patriot Act, now they have a different position. People who voted for China Trade, now they have a different position. People who voted for Yucca Mountain, now they have a different position.
Just imagine what it will be like to have a President of the United States who's right the first time. Just imagine.
Another healthy round of applause, but, Kucinich wasn't done.
Addressing an earlier question regarding the Bush Administration's abuses of power and what is to be done, Kucinich laid into it even as Blitzer tried to cut him off:
...they're out of control and the Congress isn't doing anything. Its' called Impeachment. And you don't wait. You do it now. You don't wait. Now...
No more applause: Out and out hooting and hollaring, standing and cheering, excited, involved...
Kucinich has long been the only candidate saying that the "Occupation is fueling the Insurgency" and that the first step in stabalizing the region is withdrawing all of our troops, contractors, etc.
If the recent withdraw of British troops from Basra is any indication, then he's dead on. From Associated Press:
BAGHDAD: Attacks against British and Iraqi forces have plunged by 90 percent in southern Iraq since London withdrew its troops from the main city of Basra, the commander of British forces there said Thursday.
The presence of British forces in downtown Basra, Iraq's second-largest city, was the single largest instigator of violence, Maj. Gen. Graham Binns told reporters Thursday on a visit to Baghdad's Green Zone.
90%! Now, it should be noted that Basra is a different situation than, say Baghdad, because of it's overwhelming Shite population. The theory here, being that this will lessen the likelihood of sectarian conflict. Which, of course, seems logical.
However, Basra has seen major fighting:
...between Shiite militias vying for control of the city and its security forces.
British officials expected a spike in such "intra-militia violence" after they pulled back from the city's center, and were surprised to find none, Binns said.
So, the view of the British as an Occupation force seems to have been the most important factor in driving up violence, just as Kucinich has been holding for the past 5 years.
Further than this, Kucinich's plan is the only one that addresses all of the issues regarding the occupation. This includes oil privatization, handing reconstruction contracts back to Iraqis, stabalzing their economy, and reparations. It is the most comprehensive and, even with all of the hard work and effort going into it-take a deep breath-the most practical. Kucinich is the only candidate who is proposing what we need to do.
(1) the United States should end the occupation of Iraq immediately, simultaneously with the introduction of a United Nations-led international peacekeeping force pursuant to an agreement with nations within the region and which incorporates the terms and conditions specified in section 1;
(2) the Department of Defense should use readily available existing funds to bring all United States troops and necessary equipment home while a political settlement is being negotiated and preparations are made for a transition to an international security and peacekeeping force;
(3) the Department of Defense should order a simultaneous return of all United States contractors and subcontractors and turn over all contracting work to the Iraqi Government;
(4) the United Nations should be encouraged to prepare an international security and peacekeeping force to be deployed to Iraq, replacing United States troops who then return home;
(5) the United States should provide funding for a United Nations peacekeeping mission, in which 50 percent of the peacekeeping troops should come from nations with large Muslim populations;
(6) the international security force, under United Nations direction, should remain in place until the Iraqi Government is capable of handling its own security;
(7) the Iraqi Government, with assistance from the United Nations, should immediately restart the failed reconstruction program in Iraq and rebuild roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, and other public facilities, houses, and factories with jobs and job training going to local Iraqis;
(8) the Iraqi Government, in an act of political sovereignty, should set aside initiatives to privatize Iraqi oil interests or other national assets and abandon all efforts, whether at the behest of the United States or otherwise, to change Iraqi national law to facilitate privatization;
(9) the Iraq Government, in an act of political sovereignty, should set forth a plan to stabilize Iraq's cost for food and energy, on par to what the prices were before the United States invasion and occupation;
(10) the Iraqi Government, in an act of political sovereignty, should strive for economic sovereignty for Iraq by working with the world community to restore Iraq's fiscal integrity without structural readjustment measures of the International Monetary Funds or the World Bank;
(11) the United States should initiate a reparations program for the loss of Iraqi lives, physical and emotional injuries, and damage to property, which should include an effort to rescue the tens of thousands of Iraqi orphans from lives of destitution; and
(12) the United States should refrain from any covert operations in Iraq and any attempts to destabilize the Iraqi Government.
Dennis Kucinich is keeping the heat on the Democratic Leadership by calling them out on the war funding game. Kucinich has been adamant in telling the truth about the situation: Anytime the Dems want to end the war they are able to do so!
The situation isn't about obtaining Republican votes to pass a bill which would end the war (the myth they continually hide behind), but rather NOT PRESENTING A BILL AT ALL. No bill=no money and an end to the war; exactly what the American people want. This does not endanger the safety of our troops or the stability of Iraq, as the money that has already been appropriated will be then used to begin the process of withdraw and the U.S. works with the U.N. and other countries in the region to provide an international peacekeeping and security force.
Upon passage of another supplemental for $50 Billion more the other day, Kucinich released a statement:
“When the American people went to the polls last November, they overwhelmingly voted for Democrats. They voted for Democrats because they wanted to see a new direction in Iraq -- and that direction is out."
"For the past 11 months, all the House Leadership has done is play into President Bush’s hand. They have approved every war funding bill the President has asked for.
“Leadership could have told President Bush they will not continue to fund the war. They could have said: Use the money you already have to bring the troops home. That is what the American people want.
“They did not have to bring a bill to the floor. They could have forced the President to bring the troops home by refusing to provide any money for the war. Enough money exists to bring the troops home -- without further appropriations.
“But by offering the emergency supplemental appropriations bill today, the House Leadership is taking this Congress and this country down the same path: a path of destruction, chaos and death."
He went on to mention the extreme waste in lives and money of this illegitimate war/occupation:
"More than 3,800 Americans have died and more than one million innocent Iraqis have perished in an unjust and unnecessary war. It is commonly accepted that there is no military solution in Iraq, so why are we there?
“Each year this war is getting more and more costly -- both in the amount of money spent and in the number of lives lost. The Congressional Budget Office released a report last month showing the Iraq war could total $1.9 trillion through 2017 and just yesterday the Joint Economic Committee published a report revealing the total economic costs of war could exceed $3.5 trillion through 2017.
He concluded by asking the same painful questions that 70%-80% of all Americans have been asking themselves:
“When will the House Leadership stand up for the American people? How many more lives have to be lost before they stand up to this Administration and refuse to send any more money for the war?”
To which one might add a few other equally painful questions: When will someone other than Kucinich start to tell the truth on this issue and push for an ctual end to this war? When will our Democrats in Congress and running for a highest office stop playing games? When will our politicians put lives above politics?
Here's Kucinich speaking in front of the House to draw attention to the Defense Autorization Bill which includes language that would authorize use of U.S. Military for Domestic Purposes:
This makes sense, as Edwards has been very vocal lately about trade agreements; trying to fashion himself the labor candidate. Kucinich, however, has been most consistent leader on fair trade that protects U.S. jobs, human rights, worker's rights, and environmental principles.
“real warning label should say ‘Made in Washington, D.C. by corporate lobbyists’ because the life-threatening hazards of these products were either ignored or brushed off by members of the Congress seven yeas ago,” Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich said today.
And, at least one then-member of the Senate, John Edwards, who has been railing lately in favor of higher safety standards for Chinese-made products, defended his 2000 vote supporting expanded China trade with the famously reported comment, “it does us no good to pretend that these remedies are perfect and that people will not be hurt.”
“Senator Edwards knew seven years ago that people would be hurt, so why did he vote for China trade?”Kucinich asked. “How credible is his newfound consumer protectionism and his campaign advocacy for trade reform to save American jobs?”
Pointing to Edwards' expertise in product liability matters as a Trial lawyer, Kucinich questioned how Edwards could have voted in good conscience for the 2000 China trade agreement, which has
resulted in the loss of more than 973,00 manufacturing jobs and more than 1.2 million jobs total, according to studies released by the AFL-CIO.
“If he knew then that this trade agreement would hurt people and put Americans out of work, he had a moral responsibility to vote against it,” said Kucinich, who has a perfect record in his votes against unfair trade agreements. “Like his now-regretted vote in favor of the resolution that led to the Iraq war, his votes on trade issues raise questions of judgment.”
Kucinich also cited an analysis conducted by Public Citizen in August which rated the actual votes on trade agreements for each Presidential candidate. Kucinich received the highest rating at 93% (which would have been 100%, except he missed one vote) and Edwards only scored 63%. In fact, two Republican candidates, Duncan Hunter and Ron Paul, scored higher than Edwards!
"When candidates stand in front of a union audience or in front of the cameras, they bemoan the three millions jobs that have been lost because of ‘free trade’ agreements,” Kucinich noted. “When they had a chance to vote as a member of Congress, they strongly supported those agreements. That means they voted against American workers, and, as recent events have shown, against American consumers.”
