Did You Think Buck McKeon Only Hates Gays? He Also Hates Latinos

A few days ago we mentioned the 26 districts in Republican hands that have at least 25% Hispanic populations. The district with the 9th biggest Hispanic population is CA-25, Buck McKeon's district. Last year Democrat Lee Rogers won the heavily Hispanic third of the district in the Antelope Valley. With 38% of his constituents being Hispanic, maybe McKeon should be a little more respectful. The DCCC compiled a list recent comments and actions from the bigoted McKeon, Happy 4th of July:

McKeon: “I Do Not Support Amnesty For Those That Entered the Country Illegally.” In 2013, on his congressional website, McKeon wrote, “First and foremost, I do not support amnesty for those that entered the country illegally.” [mckeon.house.gov, accessed 4/19/13]

McKeon: “Individuals Who Came Here Illegally Should Be Punished.” In 2013, on his congressional website, McKeon wrote, “I strongly believe that individuals who came here illegally should be punished to the fullest extent of the law, not rewarded for their actions.” [mckeon.house.gov, accessed 4/19/13]

McKeon: “We Need to Examine the “Anchor Baby” Policy.” In 2013, on his congressional website, McKeon wrote, “We need to examine the ‘anchor baby’ policy and must fully comprehend the message we are sending to individuals considering entering the country illegally.” [mckeon.house.gov, accessed 4/19/13]

Voted to Restart Deporting an Estimated 800,000 DREAM Act Eligible Young People. In 2013, Congressman McKeon voted for an amendment to the 2014 Homeland Security appropriations bill that would prohibit the use of Immigration and Customs Enforcement funds to implement President Obama’s June 2012 order that protects the “DREAMers” from deportation—those estimated 800,000 young undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children and have since led law-abiding lives.  The amendment also prohibits other prosecutorial discretion policies that ensure the agency's immigration enforcement resources are targeted at serious criminals, and not at those who pose no threat to U.S. communities, such as victims of domestic violence and other crimes who come forward to seek protection and identify their abusers. The amendment passed, 224-201. [HR 2217, Vote #208, 6/06/13]

McKeon: “We Should Quit Rewarding Those Who Enter Our Country Illegally.” In 1995, McKeon opposed birthright citizenship saying: “We should quit rewarding those who enter our country illegally with citizenship for their children,” said McKeon. [Los Angeles Times, 6/11/95]

Voted to Make Undocumented Immigration a Felony. In 2005, McKeon voted for the House immigration bill that would create criminal penalties for illegal immigration including making living in the country illegally a felony and a crime to assist illegal immigrants. [HR 4437, Vote # 661, 12/16/05, CQ Quarterly Weekly, 12/23/05]

Voted Against the DREAM Act. In 2010, McKeon voted against the DREAM Act, which would provide a path to legal residency for hundreds of thousands of young, undocumented immigrants first brought to the United States illegally by their parents. [HR 5281, Vote #625, 12/08/10]

Co-Sponsored Bill to Block Undocumented Immigrant Students to Obtain In-State Tuition. In 2010, McKeon co-sponsored legislation that aimed at ending in-state tuition fees for illegal immigrants. [HR 4548, 1/27/10]

Supported Proposal to Allow States to Deny Public Schooling to Children of Undocumented Immigrants. In 1996, McKeon supported the amendment to an immigration bill put forth by Rep. Elton Gallegly that would give states the right to deny public schooling to illegal immigrant children. [Los Angeles Times, 4/12/96]

Co-Sponsored Bill to Abolish Birthright Citizenship for Children of Undocumented Immigrants. In 2010, McKeon co-sponsored the Birthright Citizenship Act that would abolish birthright citizenship for children born in the United States to illegal immigrant parents. [Mckeon.house.gov, accessed 4/19/13]

Voted for the Real ID Act of 2005 that Restricted Drivers Licenses to Undocumented Immigrants. In 2005, McKeon voted for the Real ID Act of 2005 that would require all states to obtain proof of legal status and verify all documents before issuing a driver’s license. [HR 418, Vote #31, 2/10/05]

Co-Sponsored Legislation to Make English the Official Language in the U.S. In 1995, McKeon co-sponsored the Language of Government Act that would declare English the country’s official language and cut off federal spending for anything that did not promote English. [Los Angeles Times, 9/08/95]

If you'd like to help Lee Rogers defeat McKeon next year, you can contribute to his campaign here.

Read More

McKeon's Sleazy Son David-- A Chip Off The Corrupt-- And Crumbling-- Old Block

Sometimes I feel like I'm preaching to the choir-- but then I get an e-mail from a Republican wanting to talk about something at DWT. A few weeks ago a Nevada Republican contacted me about Buck McKeon's shady son David, who's running for the chair of the Clark County Republican Party. David was banished to Las Vegas so his very un-Mormon behavior would stop embarrassing the family-- and so he could watch over Buck's extensive interests there. He mentioned that the reason McKeon has persistently covered up military rapes was because his own son is a known rapist. Republicans in Nevada don't want McKeon's brand of corruption tainting their party but the Mormons tend to be-- to put it mildly-- "clannish," and will always lean towards electing one of their own in a state where they have inordinate power inside the local GOP.

A few days ago a self-identified Tea Party activist tweeted that concern about David McKeon's character was spreading among Nevada Republicans. She was referring to this Nevada Politics post by Steve Sanson.

David Owen McKeon is son of controversial Representative Buck McKeon (R-CA), Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and is currently seeking to be Chairman of the Republican Party for Clark  County, the largest county in Nevada.  David McKeon's checkered history  is yet another troubling story in Buck McKeon's career narrative.

David Owen McKeon came to Nevada in 2009. In 2012, he was race shopping for political office. At the end of 2012, while at an organizational meeting to take over the county party from Ron Paul supporters. McKeon  was encouraged to run for Chairman of the county party. He has created a slate of officers to run along side him, has reportedly spent $10,000  to run for this position, and has taken advice from a team of political  consultants.

Since that time, McKeon has gathered support and endorsement from various coalitions. McKeon has taken out numerous radio ads, created  the NRP Voter Registration PAC with local consultant Dan Burdish (Nevada PAC of which he reports he is paying people to do registration work  with his own money and has not yet filed a contribution report), and  repeatedly states he is  spending his own money on his campaign for  county chairman.

Below is a timeline of a few of the events that can be found in McKeon’s past that, should McKeon be elected, would diminish the Republican  brand and destroy efforts of numerous political campaigns from the  Governor on down. More research is being done into further cases I have  knowledge of, but the details below are from information that was able  to be physically secure for review at this date.  You may be able to use your resources to dig deeper and make sure this man does not poison  Nevada and hurt others as he has done in California.

DOWNLOAD DOCUMENTS for Reference

• 08/98 - David Owen McKeon, DOM, Married to Monica Wallace McKeon, MWM. Child 1 born in 2000, Child 2 born in 2001.

• 09/99 - First incident of Domestic Violence (hit/push) occurred and DOM  disappeared for two weeks (Custody Petition, page 7, line 2 of  Respondent Declaration)

• 02/00 - Domestic violence incident, hands around neck of MWM while pouring  water over her to compel her to do what DOM says while 9 months pregnant (Custody Petition report page 7, line 3 of Respondent Declaration)

• 8/10/03 – MWM told DOM she wanted to leave the marriage so DOM “locked me in  our bedroom and choked me for 45 minutes, saying he wanted to kill me. I screamed and plead for my life, often feeling that I was on the brink of death. He finally stopped only after I went limp and urinated on  myself. While I was trying to recover my breath, DOM demanded that I have intercourse with him; I conceded only because I was so weak and  terrified…. Children were in the hallway banging on our door and  screaming.”  (Custody Petition, page 7, line 5 of Respondent  Declaration)

• 09/2004 – while MWM was attempting to take her child to the ER, DOM “refused to let me out the door. While Child 2 was in my arms, DOM pinned me against a glass door and slapped me five times across my  face. …. With the support of my family, I obtained a Temporary  Restraining Order against him.” (Custody Petition, page 7, line 17 of  Respondent Declaration)

• Frequent occurrence in time period of marriage– “DOM would  cover their (children) mouth and nose, so they couldn’t breathe, to stop the crying.” (Custody Petition, page 7, line 27 of Respondent  Declaration)

• 06/03 – on a road trip, DOM “shoved a sock in Child 2’s  mouth. The harder Child 2 cried, the deeper DOM shoved the sock. He  would not stop until I had managed to pull the car over and remove Child 2 from the car seat. (Custody Petition, page 8, line 2 of Respondent  Declaration)

• Frequent occurrence in time period of 2007 – 2010 – DOM threatens he will kidnap children and take them away from MWM if she does not cooperate with  DOM’s demands. (Custody Petition, page 8, line 5 of Respondent  Declaration)  Goes on with examples.

• DOM failed to identify significant change of circumstances. (Custody Petition, page 18, line 7 of Respondent Declaration)

• 08/7/04 – Request for protective order, description of battery (TRO DV McKeon, Page 8)

• 08/7/04 – Description of abuse (TRO DV McKeon, Page 20, 21)

• 03/1/07 Court made finding that DM was a perpetrator of Domestic Violence (Custody Petition, page 1, line 23 & Page 2 line 4.  Also on Page 2, line 14 states that “… custody to a perpetrator of Domestic Violence is detrimental to the best interest of the child.” In order to overcome  the designation, perpetrator must complete batterer’s treatment  program. On Page 3, the record will show no evidence of his completing  any batterer’s intervention or treatment program, alcohol nor drug abuse treatment program, nor parental counseling.

• 2009 – Contract Fraud, ordered to pay to plaintiff

Read More

Lee Rogers Is Running For The House Seat Currently Occupied By Buck McKeon

After the closest call with political mortality of his life in 2012, Santa Clarita Republican Buck McKeon has told political allies that he won't run in 2014 if Lee Rogers challenges him again. Today he's getting the bad news: Rogers-- this time with the solid backing of the DCCC-- is running for the CA-25 seat. McKeon has promised the seat to Tony Strickland but Santa Clarita Mayor Bob Kellar, state Sen. Steve Knight, former Assemblyman Cameron Smythe, State Equalization Board chairman George Runner and Assemblyman Scott Wilk all agree that the seat isn't McKeon's to give away and that Tony Strickland, who ran against Julia Brownley last year, is a carpetbagger. This promises to be a very bloody primary-- at least on the Republican side.

Democrats in Santa Clarita, Simi Valley and the Antelope Valley have closed ranks behind Rogers, who has built a solid base of supporters, a network of donors and volunteers and a top notch campaign team to take on McKeon or whoever replaces him if he's too scared to face him again-- or too eager to go into the lobbying business his brother and nephew have already started for him.

Rogers, a nationally acclaimed surgeon and a recent national spokesman for the American Diabetes Association, has impressed district voters as a health care and patient advocate with the experience and know-how to reduce medical costs by making appropriate adjustments in the Affordable Care Act. Last year he was endorsed by Blue America and we're endorsing him again this year.

"I'm running for Congress, because I still believe that one person can make a difference. Nothing worthwhile comes easy. I could have done the easy thing and get back to my life being a doctor and treating patients who need me. But the district and the country also need me. Washington is constipated and it requires an enema. There is no progress. We demand improvements to the Affordable Care Act, passing universal criminal background checks for gun purchases, achieving comprehensive immigration reform by providing a reasonable path to citizenship for undocumented residents, getting out and staying out of wars in the Middle East, and preventing corporate money from influencing elections. I need your help to put progress back in Congress."

Rogers opposed the Sequestration which McKeon supported and which has held back economic growth. Rogers also opposes the Obama-Boehner scheme to cut Social Security benefits by messing with the cost-of-living adjustments, which McKeon supports. Here are a dozen important votes McKeon took since he was reelected that Rogers disagrees with (chronologically):

• H.R. 678- McKeon voted against requiring that when practicable, all materials used for conduit hydropower generation be manufactured in the United States
• H.R. 624- McKeon voted for CISPA, a Big Brother type domestic spying bill.
• McKeon also voted against a motion to make H.R. 624 less intrusive by prohibiting employers, prospective employers, or the Federal Government from requiring the disclosure of social networking or personal account passwords by an employee or job applicant without a court order.
•H.R. 1406- McKeon voted to penalize workers who receive overtime pay for overtime work.
•H.R. 807- McKeon voted to prioritize payments to China, Saudi Arabia and wealthy bondholders if the Republicans decide to stop funding the government.
• H.R.3- McKeon voted to approve building the Keystone XL Pipeline would will bring toxic tar sands into the U.S. from Canada so it can be trans-shipped to China
• H.R. 1911- McKeon voted to double the cost of student loan rates-- starting today!
• H.R. 1960- McKeon voted against giving the victim of sexual abuse in the military the power to choose whether to allow the Office of Chief Prosecutor to make the binding decision on whether a case goes to trial, or to allow the commander to proceed with the case.
• H.R. 1797 McKeon voted to make it illegal for a woman and her physician to go through with an abortion after 20 weeks.
• H.R. 1947- McKeon voted over and over to cut the food stamps program.
• H.R. 1613- Mckeon voted against allowing California to decide on its own whether or not to allow offshore drilling for oil.

• And, of course, McKeon and Rogers have a basic disagreement over the Affordable Care Act. Rogers sees a flawed bill that needs to be fixed and made better. McKeon voted 37 times to just repeal it, even though it is already saving Californians hundreds of millions of dollars in health care costs.

"We can't let crazy extremist social policies, like limiting a woman's right to make healthcare choices with her doctor, rule the day," Rogers told me yesterday. "If you want someone to go to Washington and stick up for our values, to fight for individual freedoms, and to prioritize challenges faced by our country, I'm your guy!" We know that... please consider being a first-day-supporter, right here.

Read More

Reactionary New Dems Help GOP Pass A Fatally Flawed National Defense Authorization Act

On Friday, the House passed Buck McKeon's tragically flawed National Defense Authorization Act, 315-108. All but 18 Republicans voted YES. The Democratic minority was much more split. Hoyer and Steve Israel led 103 of the more corrupt and conservative Democrats over to the Republican side of the aisle, while Pelosi, Clyburn and Becerra led a contingent of 90 more progressive Democrats against it, folks like Alan Grayson, Barbara Lee, Raul Grijalva, Keith Ellison, John Conyers, Mark Pocan, Jerry Nadler, Jan Schakowsky. As always, uber-corrupt New Dem Colleen Hanabusa, who takes immense bribes from the Military Industrial Complex and is currently running against progressive incumbent Senator Brian Schatz, voted with the Republicans.

Before the vote came down, every single Democrat plus two Republicans rallied around a motion to recommit by Tammy Duckworth and Jackie Speier that would give the victim of sexual abuse in the military the power to choose whether to allow the Office of Chief Prosecutor to make the binding decision on whether a case goes to trial, or to allow the commander to proceed with the case. The DCCC was on the case immediately: "Moments ago," they told Santa Clarita media outlets, "Congressman Buck McKeon doubled down on House Republicans’ War on Women when he voted against a measure to empower victims of military sexual assault to seek justice... 'McKeon just proved that he has learned nothing from the backlash this week over the House Republicans’ war on women,' said Emily Bittner of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. 'Instead, Congressman McKeon just turned a blind eye to military sexual assault victims, and it is shameful that he would oppose giving these victims more options for justice.'"

Another amendment that failed (174-249) was the one offered by Adam Smith, Jim Moran and Jerry Nadler to shut down the Guantanamo gulag. This is what Nadler had to say on the floor of the House during the debate:

“This amendment will remove the existing limitations on transfers, strike the current requests for construction at GTMO, and end funding for the detention facility on December 31, 2014.

“The time to close Guantanamo is NOW! It is a stain on our national honor.

“We are holding 166 people in GTMO, 86 of whom have been cleared for release. That is to say that they have been found guilty of nothing, and judged not to pose any danger. There is no reason and no right for us to hold them further.

“Now, Mr. Speaker, I wonder which of our colleagues doesn’t believe in the American system of justice. I wonder which one of us does not trust our own American courts. I wonder who among us does NOT believe in the Bill of Rights. Who does not believe in the right to counsel, or that people should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. What we have in GTMO is a system that is an affront to those beliefs and to America.

“In the last decade, we have begun to let go of our freedoms bit by bit, with each new Executive order, each new court decision, and yes, each new act of Congress. We have begun giving away our rights to privacy, our right to our day in court when the government harms us, and, with this legislation, we are continuing down the path of destroying the right to be free from imprisonment without due process of law.

“I want to commend the gentleman from Washington and the gentleman from Virginia for fighting to close the detention facility at Guantanamo. The language in this bill without our amendment prohibits moving any detainees into the United States and guarantees that we will continue holding people indefinitely; people who are not necessarily terrorists, who we only suspect to be terrorists, who have not had a day in court to prove that they are or are not terrorists, we will continue holding them indefinitely without charge-- contrary to every tradition this country stands for, contrary to due process and civil rights.

“Because of this momentous challenge to the founding principles of the United States-- that no person may be deprived of liberty without due process of law, and certainly not indefinitely without due process of law-- we must close the detention facility at GTMO now in order to restore our national honor. They will have no additional constitutional rights; the Supreme Court ruled that they have the same constitutional rights in Guantanamo as they do here. We must close this facility, restore our national honor, and support this amendment.

Only two libertarian-leaning Republicans, Justin Amash (MI) and Walter Jones (NC), joined all but 21 Democrats who voted to close it down. The 21 Democrats who joined the Republicans in defeating the amendment were mostly the same right-wing shitheads who always vote with the Republicans and who are bolstered by the DCCC:

• Ron Barber (New Dem-AZ)
• John Barrow (New Dem-GA)
• Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX)
• Bill Foster (New Dem-IL)
• Pete Gallego (Blue Dog-TX)
• Joe Garcia (New Dem-FL)
• Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ)
• Dan Lipinksi (IL)
• Dan Maffei (New Dem-NY)
• Sean Patrick Maloney (New Dem-NY)
• Jim Matheson (Blue Dog-UT)
• Mike McIntyre (New Dem-NC)
• Patrick Murphy (New Dem-FL)
• Bill Owens (New Dem-NY)
• Scott Peters (New Dem-CA)
• Nick Rahall (WV)
• Raul Ruiz (CA)
• Loretta Sanchez (Blue Dog-CA)
• Brad Schneider (New Dem-IL)
• Kyrsten Sinema (New Dem-AZ)
• Filemon Vela (New Dem-TX)

Of the 21 bad Democrats voting to keep Guantanamo open, 14-- the bolded names-- are on the DCCC Frontline List, representing the characters the DCCC funnels nearly all their contributions to. In other words, contribute to the DCCC and you are contributing to conservatives who vote with the Republican to further their reactionary agenda.

Read More

How The DCCC Is Making Hay Of The GOP Vote To Force Up The Student Loan Rate Against Vulnerable Congressmen

Last week, the House passed John Kline's dreadful Make College Less Affordable Act, 221-198. Although only 4 conservative Democrats crossed the aisle to vote with the Republicans, 3 of the four are viewed as extremely vulnerable and are top priorities for the DCCC bad Democrat retention operation. The 4 anti-student voters were all corporately-controled New Dems, of course:

• Jared Polis (CO)
• Scott Peters (CA)
• Joe Garcia (FL)
• Dan Maffei (NY)

Polis, the richest Democrat in the House-- and in a solidly blue district-- can probably get away with almost anything and he isn't on anyone's list. He won reelection last year 56-39% and Obama took CO-02 with 57.9% to Romney's weak 39.5%. Ironically, the Democratic heartland of the district is Boulder, home to the University of Colorado, which boats 30,000 students. And Polis ran up a gigantic lead in Boulder County-- 90,448 (73%) to 26,775 (22%) for Republican Kevin Lundberg. The Republicans would need a lot of imagination to target Polis for his vote-- along with all 4 of the state's Republicans, right-wing extremists Mike Coffman, Doug Lamborn, Cory Gardner and Scott Tipton-- against reducing the interest on student loans. I guess they could make the point that the super-wealthy shouldn't be representing ordinary people because they can't usually too sharply beyond their own piles of gold and silver. But, like I said, it isn't Polis anyone is worried about. It's conservative freshman Scott Peters (San Diego), Joe Garcia (Miami) and Dan Maffei (Syracuse) who they have to worry about. Each has been voting too far right for their Democratic bases. Maffei's district is also college student heavy and he depended on college students to help him defeat crazy teabagger Ann Marie Buerkle last November. Peters, another multimillionaire incapable of representing the aspirations and dreams of ordinary working families, has plenty of college students in his district and so does Miami.

Of course none of this has stopped the DCCC from going right after the Republicans they view as among the most vulnerable-- for doing exactly what they'll have to defend Maffei, Garcia and Peters for. Over the weekend, media in Santa Clarita, Simi Valley and the Antelope Valley got this press release in regard to Buck McKeon's vote for higher student loan rates. It's reminiscent of the Buck McKen Hates Students Facebook page from last year, when he voted to take away health insurance from college students:

VOTE ALERT: Congressman McKeon Supports ‘Students Pay More Act’

Congressman Buck McKeon just joined House Republicans to approve the “Students Pay More Act,” a measure to force college students to pay more interest for their education loans. With the average college student shouldering $26,000 in debt, the Associated Press this week described how “student loan rates could steadily climb and cost students more over the long haul under the plan House Republicans are considering.”

While Congressman McKeon voted today to make student loans more expensive, he and Republicans refuse to end taxpayer subsidies to Big Oil companies that are already making record profits.

“Congressman McKeon voted today to make student loans more expensive, but heaven forbid that oil companies’ subsidies end,” said Emily Bittner of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “Instead of solving the problem of loan rates that will double at the end of the month, Congressman McKeon and House Republicans are putting a bigger burden on the backs of future students. The simple fact is that Congressman McKeon and House Republicans would rather force students to pay more than ask oil companies to pay their fair share-- and those are the wrong priorities.”

BACKGROUND

Congressman Buck McKeon Voted To Raise Student Loans by 8.5 Percent. [H.R. 1911, Vote #183, 5/23/13]

AP: House Republican Plan Would Raise Student Loan Interest Rates Up to 8.5 Percent. According to the Associated Press: “Under the GOP proposal, student loans would be reset every year and based on 10-year Treasury notes, plus an added percentage. For instance, students who receive subsidized or unsubsidized Stafford student loans would pay the Treasury rate, plus 2.5 percentage points. Using Congressional Budget Office projections, that would translate to a 5 percent interest rate on Stafford loans in 2014, but the rate would climb to 7.7 percent for loans in 2023. Stafford loan rates would be capped at 8.5 percent, while loans for parents and graduate students would have a 10.5 percent ceiling under the GOP proposal.” [Associated Press, 5/16/13]

  • Headline: Republicans move forward with student loan plan that could mean higher rates later [Associated Press, 5/16/13]

Under the “Students Pay More” Act, Graduates Would Pay Almost $5,000 More in Student Loan Interest. The Associated Press reported: “In real dollars, the GOP plan would cost students and families heavily, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. The office used the CBO projections for Treasury notes’ interest rates each year. Students who max out their subsidized Stafford loans over four years would pay $8,331 in interest payments under the Republican bill, and $3,450 if rates were kept at 3.4 percent. If rates were allowed to double in July, that amount would be $7,284 over the typical 10-year window to repay the maximum $19,000.” If the Republican plan were implemented, college graduates would pay $4,881 more in interest, compared to the current rate. [Associated Press, 5/16/13]

The Average College Graduate Has $26,600 in Student Loan Debt; Total National Student Loan Debt Exceeds $1.1 Trillion. According to the Washington Post: “A recent report from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau estimates that there 38 million student loan borrowers in the United States and the total debt load has passed $1.1 trillion. The Project on Student Debt has estimated that 66 percent of graduating college seniors in 2011 had some student loan debt, with an average balance of $26,600.” [Washington Post, 5/20/13]

CBO: Federal Government Turns $51 Billion Profit on Student Loans. According to the Huffington Post: “The Obama administration is forecast to turn a record $51 billion profit this year from student loan borrowers, a sum greater than the earnings of the nation's most profitable companies and roughly equal to the combined net income of the four largest U.S. banks by assets. Figures made public Tuesday by the Congressional Budget Office show that the nonpartisan agency increased its 2013 fiscal year profit forecast for the Department of Education by 43 percent to $50.6 billion from its February estimate of $35.5 billion.” [Huffington Post, 5/14/13]

AND BACHMANN

I guess you heard by now that Michele Bachmann, under investigation by the FBI for serious financial shenanigans involving campaign funds and a coverup (and brand new to term limits fandom), has decided to not run for reelection. This endless and excruciating ad below is like nothing I've ever seen before (except as part of a Saturday Night Live skit):

Read More

Buck McKeon's Family Opens A Defense Industry Lobbying Firm To Enrich Itself At Taxpayers' Expense

The other day it was revealed that three stooges named Steve McKeon, Daniel McKeon & Joe McKeon opened up a new shoppe-- a war industries lobbying shop. Joe is Buck's failed businessman brother who's gone bankrupt at everything he's tried. Steve and Daniel are Buck's nephews. Buck himself was appointed Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee by Boehner and, despite, a serious national security breach connected to McKeon's overt corruption, has refused to make him give up the chair, despite demands from other Republican committee members. And, keep in the back of your mind that Buck McKeon has taken in more in legalistic bribes from war industries than anyone else in Congress-- more than Boehner, more than Cantor, more than any senator. He started the Congressional Drone Caucus-- officially, the Unmanned Vehicle Caucus-- and he got the legislation carefully crafted by the drone manufacturers through Congress. Buck insists he'll be scrupulous in making sure there are no conflicts of interest with the family firm and the taxpayers money, although his history would indicate that the entire enterprise was planned out as one giant conflict of interest.

Roll Call, in their Moneyline column-- "Inside the flow of money in politics"-- points out the obvious: "More than likely the McKeon name will help business." For his whole shady career, McKeon gas taken in an astronomical $1,396,400 in legalistic bribes from arms manufacturers and related war-oriented firms. In way of comparison, McCain has only gotten $1,230,052 from these same galoots. Lindsey Graham, another demented war-monger has only taken in $354,966 and John Boehner and Eric Cantor only got, respectively $385,100 and $430,750. In the 2012 cycle, McKeon topped everyone else again-- both Houses of Congress. Last year alone, he took in more than the second and third biggest recipients combined:

The drone manufacturers have been particularly generous to him. His family firm, Golden Oak Consulting of Santa Clarita started last May as bribes from the arms manufacturers were gushing into McKeon coffers to the maximum extent allowed by the very lax laws. He needed to figure out a way to get even more-- and that's where ne're-do-well brother Joe and his kids came in. Their first arms manufacturing client was  Threat Deterrence of Alexandria, Va., a computer software firm dealing with defending against various kinds of threats.

The company website states, “we have worked inside some of the most capable threat mitigation agencies in the world. These agencies include the United States Intelligence Agency, Central Intelligence Agency, national Security Agency, US Joint Special Operations Command, US Congress and many other threat support organizations.”

Golden Oak Consulting also registered on May 21 to lobby for GoPro of San Mateo, Calif., which makes waterproof and shockproof cameras. In 2011 the company launched a military helmet mount for its camera. A press release stated “We developed our NVG Mount to make it simple for them to attach their GoPro cameras to the helmets they’re already using every day. The men and women serving in the military and civil services are out there every day, working in some of the most extreme conditions on earth. We are hopeful that our products can help them with their work…”

The managing partners of Golden Oak Consulting are Steve McKeon, Daniel McKeon and Joe McKeon. These are the first two federal lobbying clients for the firm.

Golden Oak Consulting is also working with another company, DuraSeal Coatings, a nanotechnology company, in Kansas City, Mo. A Golden Oak Consulting press release stated, “Golden Oak is looking forward to enhancing DuraSeal Coating’s current value position and is committed to building DuraSeal Coating’s position in the new Government market.” DuraSeal Coatings wants to sell products to the Department of Defense. In September of 2012, another firm, J. M. Burkman & Associates registered to lobby on behalf of DuraSeal Coatings in the Defense area, and specifically the “sale of coatings products to DOD.”

Folks in the Santa Clarita area are used to seeing scams perpetrated on innocent families by vicious predators who all happen to be named McKeon. This is a news account of one of the "scrupulous" McCain clans forays into what anyone would call "bad behavior," especially since it always seems to involve Mormons taking advantage of non-Mormons.

The largest creditor of a defunct retail clothing chain co-owned by U.S. Rep. Howard P. "Buck" McKeon has accused the company-- and most of its owners-- of fraud and misrepresentation.

The accusations are part of a civil suit filed in Los Angeles Superior Court Wednesday by Coast Business Credit, a division of Southern Pacific Bank. Coast claims McKeon's four brothers, all part-owners of Howard and Phil's Western Wear, owe it about $4 million.

Under a preliminary sale agreement, expected to be finalized today, Coast will receive roughly $550,000 for the remaining assets of the broken company. But that is just a fraction of the money Coast says it is owed, and in its suit it seeks to foreclose on homes owned by the four brothers to cover part of the shortfall.

In its suit, Coast says Howard and Phil's "deliberately overstated the value and/or amount of the finished goods inventory... with the intent to deceive Coast" into giving it large cash advances.

The suit says Joseph B. McKeon, John D. McKeon, Monte B. McKeon and Timothy McKeon "participated and conspired in the submission of false reports to Coast."

Yeah... real scrupulous. It's hard to understand why even a crook like Boehner won't cut McKeon lose as the chairman of such an important and sensitive committee.

Read More

How Buck McKeon's Mormonism Played Right Into The Military Rape Epidemic Coverup

Last summer the cover-up of the epidemic of military rapes at Lackland-- engineered by House Armed Services Committee chairman Buck McKeon-- began to unravel, due, primarily, to the tireless efforts by Protect Our Defenders. POD battled McKeon's determination to cover up the scandal and keep it out of the public view. At all times, he insisted on closed briefings rather than the public hearings this kind of scandal demanded. And who was McKeon's point person on the Committee, with his own peculiar take on rape? Todd Akin, of course. It was two of Congress' most backward, patriarchal and misogynistic Neanderthals that John Boehner put in charge of "protecting" the Pentagon... and leaving the rape victims to twist in the wind. This from last summer:

For one of the most misogynistic members of Congress, Buck McKeon, the decision on whether or not to have an open hearing on rape in the military was easy. No! That’s been the answer given to Protect Our Defenders (POD) and Lt. Paula Coughlin-Puopulo, USN (ret.) who delivered 10,000 signed petitions to McKeon asking for an open investigation into the sexual assaults at Lackland Air Force Base. Some may remember Lt. Coughlin as the whistleblower in the Tailhook Scandal in the early 1990’s where 83 women and 7 men were sexually assaulted in a Las Vegas Hotel. A statement from POD read, “More than 20 years ago, 87 servicewomen were sexually assaulted while serving in the U.S. Navy, in what became known as the “Tailhook scandal.” Paula was one of the 87. The former Naval aviator reported the incident to senior officers, but they did nothing. So she went public. Today, Paula is going public again demanding Rep. McKeon open a congressional hearing about Lackland and then legislate fundamental reforms.”

A closed briefing was held instead and one general reportedly asked McKeon not “to hobble base commanders” in determining how to handle sexual assault cases.

Military sexual assaults have been put back in the spotlight after 38 female Air Force recruits came forward with complaints of sexual assault or rape by instructors at Lackland AFB. Fifteen instructors have been implicated and two already found guilty. One awaits sentencing and another given only 30 days’ confinement and a reduction in rank-- a punishment criticized by POD asserting the military doesn’t take these crimes seriously.

I'm in the middle of reading Rana Husseini's courageous book on how men brutally enforce their will on women, Murder in the Name of Honor. Much of the book covers her beat as a journalist and activist: so-called "honor" crimes in her native Jordan. But she goes beyond Jordan and talks about the dynamics of these horrific and barbaric crimes against women around the world. Patriarchy is so ingrained that even many women are ready to blame the victims like this 25 year old Jordanian with a Masters degree in economics:

"Women are the source of seduction for men and if all women are chastised then men would become good on their own. We are in a Middle Eastern society and I am for punishing women more than men because men cannot resist the seduction of girls who are dressed improperly... When women are punished, fear of their families will build up among them and they will think twice before committing any immoral mistake."

She was talking about women who are brutally, savagely murdered by their own families because they are raped-- and about the murderers who go unpunished by patriarchal legal systems-- whether sharia courts in Muslim countries or outmoded military chain of command decisions in our own Pentagon.

In an interview with Jordan Member of Parliament Mahmoud Kharabesheh for the Jordan Times Husseini found an attitude that many privileged males feel all over the world: "Women adulterers cause a great threat to our society, because they are the main reason that such acts [of adultery] happen. If men do not find women with whom to commit adultery, then they will become good on their own." Well, if they can't find a woman to rape, some rape children or other men. Others turn to sheep. And when Jordan decided to start allowing women deputies in Parliament, religious conservatives there reacted the same way religious conservatives did here. A deputy from Amman's fourth district, explains Husseini, "strongly opposed the idea. He said that being an MP was a man's job; a woman can jeopardize her honor by going out late at night to take part in related social activities. If his daughter stayed out late at night he would shoot her himself, he added. He told the gathering that a woman's presence in Parliament 'would be damaging, since a woman in the house would distract make deputies and stir trouble when male deputies instinctively look at her breasts.'" Husseini traces these attitudes back to the primitive Bronze Age origins of the three Abrahamic religions:

This has its roots in numerous ancient texts, including the Old Testament, specifically Deuteronomy (22:12- 21), where proof of the bribe's virginity could be presented to both sets of parents in the form of stains on the bedsheets. If an unwed woman was found not to have been a virgin, then she was to be punished by being stoned to death.

This was convenient for men in a patriarchal society who might be paranoid about "his" woman comparing his prowess in the sack with other partners. And, all across the patriarchal world even murdering women who are perceived as not living up to the patriarchal rules, is forgiven because it is judged to be in "accordance with tradition." A Pakistani Senator insisted that "We have fought for human rights and civil liberties all our lives but wonder what sort of human rights are being claimed by these girls in jeans."

In February 2008 an Islamic fundamentalist shot and killed a government minister because of her refusal to wear a Muslim veil. Zilla Huma Usman, the Punjab Provincial Minister for Social Welfare, was shot as she prepared to address a public gathering in the town of Gujranwala. The attacker, Mululvi Ghulam Sarwar, said that he was opposed to the participation of women in politics and the refusal of many professional women in Pakistan to wear the veil.

Speaking to a local TV channel, he said, 'I have no regrets. I just obeyed Allah's commandment. Islam will not allow women to hold, positions of leadership. I will kill all those women who do not follow the right path. if I am freed again.'

What about Iraq, where the Bush Regime proclaimed that women's rights would be at the center of the project to make Iraq a democratic model for the rest of the Arab world? In Iraq women's rights have deteriorated dramatically since the start of the U.S.-led coalition's occupation.



And this kind of patriarchal mentality is certainly not unique to the Muslim world.

In Brazil, it is widely believed that a man can legitimately kill allegedly adulterous wife on the grounds of honor and such cases are regularly treated with leniency in the courtroom. Human Rights Watch has documented cases of women killed by their husbands from the 1970s to the late 1990s for leaving or divorcing their husbands, returning home late from work, refusing to sleep with their husband, suspicion of adultery or because they had been caught in an adulterous situation.

So what does this have to do with Buck McKeon's Mormonism and how he orchestrated the cover-up of the military rape epidemic? After all, Mormonism isn't the same as the Muslim faith, even if both were rooted in extreme patriarchy and polygamy... right?

Anyone who has lived among Mormons has observed the sect’s legendarily happy families and tight-knit communities. They are self-satisfied, devout and abstemious; overwhelmingly white and middle to upper class. Hard working, acquisitive, conservative and disciplined. A whopping majority of them consider helping the poor a top priority-- an admirable quality even if their anti-poverty efforts are mostly directed at their own ranks.

...Mormonism is a valid issue of concern not as a religious test for office, but for its most distinctive characteristic — male authoritarianism. The controversial and secretive religion is a multibillion-dollar business empire ruled by a stern patriarchal gerontocracy. Only “worthy males” can ascend to positions of power-- both now and in the afterlife-- and women are relegated to supporting roles. Male dominance is the essence of the faith, as the Mormon feminist Sonia Johnson found when she was excommunicated for her support of the Equal Rights Amendment. In her memoir, From Housewife to Heretic, Johnson describes a patriarchal world in which everyone is taught that "God, being male, values maleness much more than he values femaleness, that God and men are in an Old Boys’ Club together, with God as president.”

Protecting the victims of rape was the last thing on Buck McKeon's mind as chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Protecting the old boys' network at the Pentagon was. This week President Obama called the military heads into his office for a chat. He had a very different perspective:

[O]ne of the great honors of my life is serving as Commander-in-Chief to what I consider to be the best military in the history of the world. And I am in awe of the work that the vast majority of our men and women in uniform do.

But the reason we are so good is not because of the fancy equipment. It’s not because of our incredible weapon systems and technology. It’s because of our people. And the capacity for our men and women in uniform to work as a team, a disciplined unit looking out for each other in the most severe of circumstances, is premised, as Ray Odierno said, on trust. It comes down to do people trust each other and do they understand that they’re all part of a single system that has to operate under whatever circumstances effectively.

The issue of sexual assault in our armed forces undermines that trust. So not only is it a crime, not only is it shameful and disgraceful, but it also is going to make and has made the military less effective than it can be. And as such, it is dangerous to our national security  So this is not a sideshow. This is not sort of a second-order problem that we’re experiencing. This goes to the heart and the core of who we are and how effective we’re going to be.

Now, the good news is I am absolutely confident that everybody in this room and our leadership, starting with Chuck Hagel and Marty Dempsey and the Joint Chiefs, as well as our top enlisted men and women, they care about this. And they’re angry about it. And I heard directly from all of them that they’re ashamed by some of what’s happened.

But it’s not fixed yet, and that’s clear. So even though I think there’s a level of concern and interest that is appropriate, we haven’t actually been able to ensure that our men and women in uniform are not experiencing this, and if they do experience it, that there’s serious accountability.

So what I’ve done is I’ve asked Secretary of Defense Hagel and Marty Dempsey to help lead a process to continue to get at this. That starts with accountability, and that means at every level. And that includes accountability not just for enforcing the law, but also training our personnel effectively, putting our best people on this challenge.

I think Secretary of the Army McHugh made a very good point, which is I’m not sure we’ve incentivized some of our top people to understand this is as core to our mission as anything else. And we’ve got to reward them, not think of this as a sideline for anything else that they do, but incentivize ambitious folks in the ranks to make sure that they understand this is important. So that’s part of accountability.

Empowering victims. We’ve got to create an environment in which victims feel that they’re comfortable coming forward and they know people have their backs, and that they will work through this process in a way that keeps the focus on justice and make right what’s been wrong as opposed to suddenly they’re on trial, it may weaken their position, it make compromise their ability to advance.  That’s going to be important. They’ve got to know that they should have no fear of retaliation, no fear of stigma, no damage to their careers, and certainly no protection for criminals.

Third thing is justice for the victims. When victims do come forward, they deserve justice. Perpetrators have to experience consequences. And I’m pleased that Secretary Hagel has proposed reforms that would restrict the ability of commanders to overturn convictions after trial. Those reforms have my full support.

...I want to emphasize-- everybody in this room has heard from me directly. They’ve heard from Secretary Hagel, and they’ve heard from Marty Dempsey. They all understand this is a priority and we will not stop until we’ve seen this scourge, from what is the greatest military in the world, eliminated.

Read More

Republicans Led By John Kline (R-MN) Voted Down Elizabeth Warren's Plan To Lower Student Interest Rates

After watching him as a freshman senator, I never believed Obama would be a vehicle for Hope and Change. I voted for him in 2008 anyway. I couldn't force myself to do it again last November. Elizabeth Warren, on the other hand, is someone who I have actually bought into right from the start. I donated to her campaign and helped promote her cause. This week, her first proposed legislation has made me-- and thousands of others across the country who backed her-- proud. The Bank on Students Loan Fairness Act would lower student loan interest rates for one year from 3.4% to 0.75% -- the same rate the government loans money to the banks through the Federal Reserve discount window. As Senator Warren reminds us in the video above, student loan interest rates will double to 6.8% on July 1st without action.

John Tierney (D-MA) introduced a sister bill in the House. As Warren and Tierney have told their colleagues in both houses of Congress, "The biggest banks in the country-- the ones that wrecked our economy and cost millions of Americans their jobs-- pay next to nothing on their debt, while students pay nine times as much. The Bank on Students Loan Fairness Act lets students take advantage of the same low interest rates offered to banks through the Federal Reserve discount window:

• Sets Interest Rates for Government Loans to Students at the Same Level as Government Loans to Banks. The Act would provide a one-year fix to the impending interest rate hike by setting the rate for federal subsidized Stafford loans at the primary interest rate offered through the Federal Reserve discount window as of July 1, 2013.

• Funded by the Federal Reserve, Administered by the Department of Education. The Federal Reserve would make funds available to the Department of Education to make these loans. While the Federal Reserve would now provide funding, the Department of Education would continue to administer all other aspects of the federal subsidized Stafford loan program in the same manner as it currently does.

So Cantor and Boehner assigned it to John Kline's Education and Workforce Committee where they knew they could depend on the reactionary Kline to kill the bill. Thursday he called a vote and it died 23-14. Every Republican plus New Dem Jared Polis voted against it:

• John Kline (MN)
• Tom Petri (R-WI)
• Buck McKeon (R-CA)
• Joe Wilson (R-SC)
• Virginia Foxx (R-NC)
• Tom Price (R-GA)
• Kenny Marchant (R-TX)
• Duncan Hunter (R-Betty Ford Clinic)
• Phil Roe (R-TN)
• Glenn Thompson (R-PA)
• Tim Walberg (R-MI)
• Matt Salmon (R-AZ)
• Brett Guthrie (R-KY)
• Scott DesJarlais (R-TN)
• Todd Rokita (R-IN)
• Larry Bucshon (R-IN)
• Joe Heck (R-NV)
• Susan Brooks (R-IN)
• Richard Hudson (R-NC)
• Luke Messer (R-IN)
• Jared Polis (New Dem-CO)

Mike Obermueller is the Minnesota Democrat running for Kline's seat next year. MN-02 is a winnable district for Democrats-- Obama beat Romney, though just barely. Last year Obermueller got no help from the DCCC whatsoever and Kline beat him 54-46%. Kline spent $1,957,356 and Obermueller spent $705,166. This year the DCCC is promising to help. Obermueller was disappointed but not surprised by Kline's reaction to Elizabeth Warren's proposal this week:

"You either want to help students or you don’t. Senator Warren’s bill took a stand in favor of students and Congressman Kline’s decision to kill the bill shows how short sighted his thinking is.

"Making sure students can afford to go to college means a better-trained workforce that not only attracts more businesses, but ensures our country is competing globally. Making it harder for families to afford college is downright bad for the economy.

"Unfortunately, Kline chairs the committee where good bills go to die."

Distinguished Simi Valley surgeon Lee Rogers, a spokesperson for the American Diabetes Association, is deciding whether or not to run against Buck McKeon against next year. He's very enthusiastic about Elizabeth Warren's approach and spent a great deal of time speaking with students at College of the Canyons, Antelope Valley College, Cal Arts, and Cal State Northridge when he ran in 2012. When McKeon chaired the committee he was notorious for taking immense legalistic bribes from the big predatory lending institutions who ripped off students as normal business procedure. Rogers was ahead of his time when he spoke out about the issue last year, telling voters that outstanding student loan debt was over a TRILLION dollars, surpassing credit card debt and McKeon was just delighted to get his cut from the banksters and hustlers. The Republican plan, being pushed by McKeon acolytes, Kline and Foxx, which they call "market-driven," pegs the loans to 10-year Treasury notes, plus 2.5 percentage points. What market is driving that? The market for lobbyists bribing Members of Congress?

Democrats on the committee opposed the bill, saying it puts students and families at risk of paying more in the future.

"Our students and families deserve better than this bait-and-switch scheme we're voting on today," said California Representative George Miller, the senior Democrat on the committee.

"A low-income, four-year borrower enrolling in college next year would pay more interest on her student loans under the Republican proposal than she would if we took no action," he said.

The non-partisan Congressional Research Service estimates that under the Republican plan, a student who borrows the maximum amount of subsidized and unsubsidized Stafford loans over five years would pay $14,430 in interest. If rates were allowed to double on July 1, a student would pay $12,598, compared with $7,965 if rates don't double.

Read More

Why Is Buck McKeon Gung-ho To Allow Insurance Companies To Deny Coverage To People With Pre-existing Conditions?

90% or so of Americans would like to see Congress pass a law to enhance background checks for criminals, terrorists and the mentally-ill before they can purchase a gun. But Republicans have steadfastly refused to even allow a debate, let alone a vote, in the House. Instead, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor has scheduled a 37th-- literally-- pointless vote on repealing Obamacare... not on making Obamacare better, which most people would like, but to repeal it, which would require a huge majority in the Senate and a signature from President Obama. So why are Cantor and Boehner wasting everyone's time? It means they don't have to do any real work and, more importantly, is allows freshmen from super red gerrymandered rural districts in the Old Confederacy to have a chance to vote NO as a way of showing lo-info voters back in their district that they're standing up to the illegitimate black usurper in the White House.

The DCCC is making their own political hay out of it. And, I was happy to see that just as they have realized they screwed up by not helping Jim Graves defeat Michele Bachmann in 2010-- and are working to remedy that situation next year-- they seem to have figured out the same dynamic here in the Los Angeles area. Yesterday they sent out a press release tying vulnerable Republican committee chairman Buck McKeon to Cantor's anti-healthcare nonsense.

The Republican Congress will cast its 37th vote this week to put insurance companies back in charge of health care-- will Congressman Buck McKeon go along? House Republicans have Tea Party Caucus Chair Michele Bachmann as their sponsor. Instead of finding smart reforms to our health care system, House Republicans are voting on Tea Party Caucus Chair Michele Bachmann’s bill that refights old ideological battles to take away consumer health care benefits and put insurance companies back in charge of health care.

  House Republicans already voted 36 times to repeal the Affordable Care Act during the last Congress-- costing the taxpayers $50 million.

    If Congressman McKeon votes yes, he will be:

•         Raising prescription drug costs by re-opening the prescription drug donut hole
•         Denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions
•         Ending tax credits for small businesses
•         Kicking children off their parents health care before they turn 26
•         Closing prevention and wellness initiatives that lower costs and improve health
•         Eliminating the cap on health care costs and let people go back into bankruptcy because of health costs

"California families want solutions that lower health care costs and protect consumers but Congressman McKeon’s Republican Congress just wants to refight old ideological battles instead,” said Emily Bittner of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “Republicans will vote to put insurance companies back in charge of health care, which will raise prescription drug costs, deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, and even drive people back into bankruptcy because of health care costs--but will Congressman McKeon go along with this backwards plan? Middle class families will clearly suffer if Congressman McKeon puts insurance companies back in charge of health care."

Last November, Lee Rogers won in the Antelope Valley third of McKeon's district and came closer to defeating him than anyone had in his career. Local activists are hoping to persuade Rogers to run again. When we first met him last year, he had an entirely different persepctive on health care policy than McKeon-- although he told us he would have voted against the bill that came to be known as Obamacare.

As a doctor, I see the effects of health policy and health funding on Americans every day. There are several tenets of basic health policy that I believe in. I believe health care is a right, not a privilege. Every American should be able to choose their own doctor or other heath care provider. Insurance portability, allowing you to take your same insurance from job to job, is important. Discrimination for pre-existing conditions must not be allowed.

But this is a deeper problem because our current heath care crisis cannot be separated from our current fiscal crisis. They are one in the same. Health care represents about 23% of the federal budget-- and it’s growing. Part of the increase is because of the aging baby boomers who are requiring more care and part of it relates to the advances in medicine which are more costly. These costs cannot be controlled. Take my specialty, diabetes, for example. Diabetes affects 26 million Americans and an additional 79 million more have “pre-diabetes.” Diabetes alone is responsible for about a third of health spending. In most cases, diabetes is a preventable disease. For the first time in human history, chronic diseases (diabetes, heart disease, cancer, etc.) surpassed infectious diseases (pneumonia, HIV/AIDS, etc.) as the leading causes of death. The World Economic Forum (WEF) estimates that chronic diseases will cost the world $47 Trillion by 2030. We must get control of chronic diseases, lest we bankrupt ourselves. This problem is not going away in 5, 10, or 15 years. It is a problem that is going to last decades and will be a major draw on the country’s finances.

But there is something that can be done. We can intervene to prevent chronic disease, before they occur, before they become more expensive. We can invest in research to treat disease and prevent complications. We shouldn’t slash the health care budget leaving more people to seek treatment later when the diseases are more advanced and costly.

Many people have asked my opinion on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), or the health reform law. Yes, I am a Democrat, but I’m also a doctor and I would not have voted for the bill. It is about 2700 pages long filled with payoffs to corporations and legislator’s home districts funded by taxpayers. It’s a sad state of affairs when legislators couldn’t care about what’s best for the country, only what pet projects they can get funded so they can fill their re-election coffers.

Certainly the law contains some beneficial provisions, like outlawing exclusions for pre-existing conditions, allowing adult children to stay on parents insurance until age 26, and eliminating lifetime maximums on policies. But there is more bad about the law than good. It creates an executive branch appointed panel to legislate reimbursement decisions by Medicare, instead of Congress. It creates Accountable Care Organizations (ACO), which sounds responsible, but they are really HMOs for Medicare patients without the ability to contain costs that traditional HMOs have. In the few pilot ACOs from around the country, all have lost money.

I don’t think it’s reasonable to repeal the law, but I think that we can take the good parts of it and improve upon them and repeal some of the bad provisions and pork.

One significant cost saving opportunity missed by Congress was failing to allow Medicare Part D (the prescription drug plan) to negotiate medication prices. Why should we pay more for the same medication in the US than they pay in England or in Canada. In effect, we’re subsidizing health care in other wealthy nations.

As I have stated, the health issue is a fiscal issue. We need legislators with the right priorities in Washington. There will have to be shared sacrifice including a combination of cuts and increases in revenue. Irresponsible behavior in Washington caused this debt and we can’t let it solely fall on the backs of our middle class, poor, and seniors by cutting their benefits and raising premiums. That will only lead to a poorer health quality for all, and result in larger expenses down the road. We can’t bury our heads in the sand. Let’s put America first.

The DCCC isn't sending e-mails like that blasting all Republican culprits though (let alone to media in districts with anti-health care Democrats like Jim Matheson and Mike McIntyre). One especially bad Republican they ignored was John Mica in the Orlando area. But the progressive Democrat running against him, Nick Ruiz, isn't ignoring Mica's vile record.

"When John Mica votes with the GOP's plan to roll back the Affordable Care Act, what does it mean? Does he believe that Americans don't need or want it? Most do. Or does he believe that he has a better idea for American healthcare? He doesn't. And he certainly is against other alternatives like single payer care for all. So what is it with representatives like John Mica? And what is it about the GOP? Do they want people to suffer? Do they want illness to go uncared for? There's no logical explanation for their position against expanding insurance coverage for American families. The only question now is-- will American families act to remove people like him and his party from office, because they clearly do not represent the best interests of America."

You can help Nick do that-- here.

UPDATE: DCCC Staffers Seem To Be Making Good Decisions Without Interference From Israel

The DCCC is launching a campaign of robocalls against 10 Republicans who keep voting against Obamacare in blue districts. In the past Steve Israel and Debbie Wasserman Schultz have prevented staffers from launching these kinds of campaigns against their personal Republican friends. This list includes two Republicans the dynamic duo have protected in the past, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) and Frank LoBiondo (R-NJ). We'll see if Israel allows the DCCC to follow through with real recruitment efforts and campaigns against these two. The other eight Republicans who are getting the robocalls: Chris Gibson (R-NY), Michael Grimm (R-NY), Jon Runyan (R-NJ), Gary Miller (R-CA), David Valadao (R-CA), Bill Young (R-FL), Joe Heck (R-NV) and Steve Pearce (R-NM). The script people living in Coalinga, Hanford, Delano and in Fresno's southern suburbs are getting: today:

The Republican Congress is scheduled to vote tomorrow to put insurance companies back in charge of your health care and repeal vital consumer protections and benefits that you’ve earned.

And your Congressman might be part of the problem. Tell Congressman Valadao to stand up for middle class families here in California-- and don't help the Republican Congress give insurance companies more control over your life.

We don’t need any more ideological wars in Washington, we need solutions that reduce health care costs and protect consumers. Sadly, Congressman Valadao might deny coverage to people with preexisting conditions, raise prescription drug costs, kick kids off their parents' health care before they turn 26 and even eliminate the cap on health care costs, forcing people into bankruptcy to take care of their families.

That would be a devastating blow to middle class families like yours across the country. Call Congressman David Valadao now at [xxx-xxx-xxxx] and tell him to vote no. Tell him it’s time to move forward and strengthen our health care, not join the partisans in Congress who want to put insurance companies back in charge.

Read More