Gonna glue myself to the TV and CSPAN to watch every little detail of this historic vote. OpenCongress has the 411 on what's happening today in Your Guide to the House Health Care Debate, but here's the breakdown:
1) Debate of the rule — At 1 p.m. ET, the Chair of the House Committee on Rules, Rep. Louise Slaughter [D, NY-28], will officially start the health care debate by calling up the “rule,” H.Res.1192, that will govern it.
2) Vote on ending debate of the rule — After one hour of debating the rule, the House will take up a “previous question motion,” which, essentially, asks if the House is ready to end debate on the rule and begin debate of the actual legislation. It’s possible that this will be agreed to unanimously by voice vote — these kinds of motions typically are simply agreed to, but with the health care debate it’s not safe to expect the typical.
3) Voting on the rule — Having voted to end debate of the rule, the House will then vote on approving the rule itself. more this way»
One of my first experiences with culture shock here in the United States, was when I first got really ill here after leaving college and finding myself without access to the NYU clinic: I came down with a really bad throat infection and needed medical assistance. So I asked around where was the public clinic and people looked at me like I was insane. This was the end of the 1980s and not only did Ed Koch do away with almost all of them, but most people who'd go to the public clinics would do so because they ahd AIDS.
I was shocked and confused, to say the least. In Puerto Rico I had always had access to medical care. After my parents divorced and my mother found herself needed to go to public assistance, the public clinics where always there for us to use. Sure, they weren't convenient or brand spanking new but they were access to health care for all. At no point in the 20+ years I lived in Puerto Rico --and even as a young adult with no health insurance-- was I ever denied access to health care. more this way»
If you are not looking closely, some of these votes do not make sense given the previous voting record of people like Costa ad Rodriguez. After all, wasn't Ciro Rodriguez a darling of the netroots? And yet when you look closely at their lists of donors, their votes actually become not just sinister but cynical as well (as in the case of John Salazar). So we can't just blame it on the fact that all of these guys happen to be Roman Catholics or members of the Blue Dog Coalition. It's those donors lists for 2008 and 2010 that really paint a clearer picture of their "conservatism".
In that post I was trying to figure out why did a vast majority of Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Los Siete Infames, voted with Stupak. Am too much of a cynic to believe they were voting with their pure Catholic hearts. What I found out at the time was that all seven had been heavily funded by the insurance industry.
You know people have crossed a line with a reputable news organization like McClatchy deems it newsworthy to print State of the health care debate: Talk radio attacks an 11-year old. In it they describe how Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Michelle Malkin have viciously attacked the 11 yr-old orphan by lack of health care insurance. The story of his mother is heartbreaking:
Tifanny Owens died in June 2007 of pulmonary hypertension, which is described as high blood pressure in the arteries of the lungs that can lead to heart failure. The disease is considered rare. While there's no cure, it can be treated.
The treatments can cost as much as $100,000 a year and must be "consistent and constant," said Katie Kroner, the director of advocacy and awareness for the Pulmonary Hypertension Association.
"It's extremely important to have health coverage," she said.
Owens was an assistant manager at a fast food restaurant when she became sick in September 2006. As she became sicker, she missed work and was eventually fired, leaving her without health insurance. She was treated twice in an emergency room and died at age 27 after a week of unconsciousness. Gina Owens has custody of Marcelas and his two younger sisters.
Gina Owens said her daughter didn't qualify for Medicaid. State officials said that without knowing the details, it was impossible to speculate on whether Tifanny Owens would have qualified.
Tifanny Owens might have been eligible for Washington state's basic health care plan, which is aimed at the working poor. The plan has had a long waiting list for some time, said Sharon Michael of the Washington state Health Care Authority.
"Right now, we have 100,000 people on the wait list," Michael said.
The neo-con punditocracy not only doesnt believe the story, but Beck insisted, without actually giving specifics, that Gina Owens had other alternatives. Limbaugh and Malkin had the nerve to parrot the same and even worse: that there was no proof his mother would have lived longer anyway since her condition is allegedly incurable.
Have you read Charles Schumer and Lindsey Graham's "bi-partisan" framework for Comprehensive Immigration Reform? Here's a taste:
Last week we met with President Obama to discuss our draft framework for action on immigration. We expressed our belief that America's security and economic well-being [1] depend on enacting sensible immigration policies.
The answer is simple: Americans overwhelmingly oppose illegal immigration [2] and support legal immigration. Throughout our history, immigrants have contributed to making this country more vibrant and economically dynamic. Once it is clear that in 20 years our nation will not again confront the specter of another 11 million people coming here illegally [3], Americans will embrace more welcoming immigration policies.
Our plan has four pillars [4]: requiring biometric Social Security cards [5] to ensure that illegal workers cannot get jobs; fulfilling and strengthening our commitments on border security and interior enforcement [6]; creating a process for admitting temporary workers [7]; and implementing a tough but fair path to legalization for those already here [8].
Mindboggling is the only word that comes to mind. I have no words for what Frank Sharry, the Executive Director of America's Voice is lauding as a a positive step forward. Really Sharry? Having every single American hand over control of their identity and who they are "data-wise" to the government and some employer in the name of immigration reform is a step forward?
Let me breakdown that paragraph so you'll understand my outrage: more this way»
ENDA or the Employment Non-Discrimination Act is one of those pieces of legislation that has left me baffled for years for the seemingly lack of support outside of the LGBT activist community. But if the roadblocks that went up during the process of getting the Puerto Rican Amendment into the Voting Rights Act are any indication, the long road for equal LGBT rights has proven to be equally as difficult.
If we can't discriminate against people of a different race, ethnicity, language, religion or even sex, I don't understand why we can't expand the definition of sex to "sexual orientation and gender identity". This should be a no-brainer for every person who gets teary eyed every time they listen Martin Luther King's speech, "I have a dream".
Got any dirt, tips, leads or money for us? Then drop us a line or two at editors [at] culturekitchen [dot] com or use our general contact form to reach everybody in the editorial team ASAP.
Nibble daily on our brainy goodness with our daily syndication digest. You'll receive an email with a list and links to the previous day's posts.
Of course it's wrong that big companies get away with choosing not to offer their workers health insurance, leaving those very same workers to turn to public hospitals and Medicaid for health care, and leaving regular working people like me to pay the bill while the companies' profits go through the roof.
In this changing economy, is it really wise to pursue employer-based solutions? I mean, as progressives, aren't we supposed to be advocating for a single payer system in which every individual has access to care no matter where they work?
is one of those pieces of legislation that has left me baffled for years for the seemingly lack of support outside of the LGBT activist community. But if the roadblocks that went up during the process of getting the 
