Hey, miracles can happen. Maybe Peter was visited by three ghosts last night or something.

The House is expected to vote on the bill on Saturday and  every vote is important.

So ask Roskam to vote in favor of the Democratic plan to ensure affordable healthcare coverage for all Americans and against the ridiculous Republican alternative that will result in higher premiums and watered down coverage and will actually increase the number of uninsured Americans. You can read a detailed summary of H.R. 3962 here.

H.R. 3962 has been endorsed by the American Medical Association:

“On balance, H.R. 3962, The Affordable Health Care for America Act, is consistent with our principles of pluralism, freedom of choice, freedom of physician practice and universal access. It will significantly expand health insurance coverage to Americans to empower patient and physician decision making; institute meaningful insurance market reforms; make substantial investments in quality; institute prevention and wellness initiatives; provide incentives to states that adopt certificate of merit and/or early offer liability reforms, and reduce administrative burdens.”

“H.R. 3962 is not the perfect bill, and we will continue to advocate for changes, but it goes a long way toward expanding access to high-quality affordable health coverage for all Americans, and it would make the system better for patients and physicians,” Dr. Rohack said. “This is not the last step but the next step toward health system reform. We will remain actively engaged with patients, physicians, Congress and the administration to ensure that the final bill results in marked improvements to our health system.”

H.R. 3962 has been endorsed by the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP):

AARP Chief Executive A. Barry Rand said the organization supports the House bill over other proposals because the measure does more to lower drug costs for Medicare beneficiaries, strengthen Medicare and bar insurance companies from denying people coverage because of their health or age. The bill also would lower premiums for Americans ages 50 to 64 who have to buy insurance in the private market and would create a voluntary long-term care insurance program.

“Under the House plan… insurance companies will not be able to reject you or charge you an outrageous premium because you got sick once, you may get sick again, you lost your job, you’re over 50 years old or because your employer dropped your coverage,” Rand said at the briefing. “Millions of Americans will start to regain control over their lives.”

H.R. 3962 has been endorsed by the American Cancer Society:

The insurance reforms proposed in the Affordable Health Care for America Act represent a tremendous improvement over the current system. Cancer patients and survivors will no longer face the loss of affordable coverage due to their illness. These critical changes include:

• Elimination of the use of pre-existing medical conditions and health status in determining insurance premium rates, and limiting rating differential to 2:1 on the basis of age, geography, and family size only;
• Guaranteed issue and renewal of insurance policies, and the elimination of rescissions except in the case of fraud; ? Elimination of annual and lifetime benefit caps;
• Establishment of a national health insurance exchange to facilitate access and affordability;
• Provision of premium subsidies for low- and middle-income families;
• And limits on out-of-pocket expenses.

ACS CAN supports the national approach to health insurance exchanges. We believe that a national model can greatly facilitate making quality, affordable health care more uniform across the country over time. We support the subsidies covering individuals and families up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level. Health insurance is essential to good health, and it is imperative that we not put low- and middle-income individuals and families in a position where the cost of insurance threatens their financial viability.

H.R. 3962 has been endorsed by the American Academy of Family Physicians:

Family physicians particularly appreciate that the revised legislation would provide health insurance coverage for some 96 percent of Americans and would reduce the federal deficit by $30 billion. It is particularly noteworthy that the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the revised bill would also lower health care costs overall by accelerating the applicability of the medical home and other health care delivery improvement models.

H.R. 3962 has been endorsed by the Consumers Union:

In addition to key consumer protections that eliminate current anti-consumer practices like excluding applicants who have pre-existing conditions, the bill makes health insurance more affordable and secure. It includes a wealth of major health reforms—far too many to single them all out. We particularly support:

• the provision on comparative effectiveness research, which will help consumers and their medical providers better determine the most effective treatment options;
• public reporting of health-care acquired infection rates: public disclosure will help consumers and providers focus on reducing these deadly infections, which are killing 100,000 Americans per year;
• a new public health insurance option in a National Health Insurance Exchange.

Of course the bill has not been endorsed by angry teabaggers:

Who will Peter Roskam listen to?

Related posts:

1. Peter Roskam’s Vote for Pay Cut to Du Page County Physicians
2. Peter Roskam: Protecting Illinois Children Against Better Healthcare
3. Idiotic Republican Healthcare Plan INCREASES Numbers of Uninsured, Saves Less
4. Peter Roskam Indicates He Will Continue to Obstruct Universal Healthcare Coverage
5. Peter Roskam’s Hypocritical Stance on Earmarks, Health Care

Well the wait is over and the plan is in. And it is really, really stupid.

It came the other day in the form of an ammendment to H.R. 3962, the Affordable Healthcare for America Act, offered  House Minority Leader and Chief Idiot John Boehner. The Boehner ammendment essentially replaces all of the provisions of that bill, the House Democratic plan, with a great big Christmas present to the healthcare industry.

Yesterday the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), which Peter Roskam has repeatedly cited as authoritative in discussing the Democratic plans, released its evaluation of the Boehner ammendment. You can read the whole thing here.

Essentially though, the CBO finds that the Republican plan would actually increase the number of Americans with no health insurance coverage by 2019 when population growth is considered. The CBO found that the Republican plan would make it possible for only an additional 3 million Americans to obtain health coverage (compared to 34 million for the House Democratic plan) making not even a dent in the percentage of American without coverage. 17% now. 17% in 2019. This compared with the Democratic plan which reduces the percentage of uninsured to 4% in the same period.

Ironically, the Republican plan will only cut the deficit by $68 billion, compared to $104 billion for the Democratic plan.

The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein sums it up well:

The Democratic bill, in other words, covers 12 times as many people and saves $36 billion more than the Republican plan. And amazingly, the Democratic bill has already been through three committees and a merger process. It’s already been shown to interest groups and advocacy organizations and industry stakeholders. It’s already made its compromises with reality. It’s already been through the legislative sausage grinder. And yet it saves more money and covers more people than the blank-slate alternative proposed by John Boehner and the House Republicans.

The Democrats, constrained by reality, produced a far better plan than Boehner, who was constrained solely by his political imagination and legislative skill.This is a major embarrassment for the Republicans. It’s one thing to keep your cards close to your chest. Republicans are in the minority, after all, and their plan stands no chance of passage. It’s another to lay them out on the table and show everyone that you have no hand, and aren’t even totally sure how to play the game. The Democratic plan isn’t perfect, but in comparison, it’s looking astonishingly good.

Key to the Republican plan are a couple of provisions that Peter Roskam likes to tout:  capping damages in medical malpractice cases and allowing insurance companies to sell policies across state lines.  These are huge gifts to the healthcare industry which has poured so much money into the campaign coffers of Roskam and other Republicans. They are also huge mistakes.

Capping malpractice damages would effectively immunize healthcare provider conglomerates against negative consequences when they screw up. This would reduce the incentive that healthcare providers currently have to improve quality and prevent errors and would leave consumers who are harmed by medical errors or negligence with little recourse.

Allowing policies to be sold across state lines would mean that health insurers would flock to jurisdictions where insurance regulations are minimal. Premiums would rise and benefit plans would shrink. Consumers will pay more for health insurance and get less.

Related posts:

1. Peter Roskam Indicates He Will Continue to Obstruct Universal Healthcare Coverage
2. Peter Roskam’s Constituents Need Health Coverage – Roskam Gives Them a Blog Instead
3. Why Are My Tax Dollars Being Used for Peter Roskam’s Campaign Mail?
4. Call Peter Roskam Today and Ask Him to Vote for H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act
5. Peter Roskam: Protecting Illinois Children Against Better Healthcare

More mail from Peter Roskam yesterday. This time a piece designed to scare me about the national debt.  On the back, next to Roskam’s signature, it tells me “This mailing was prepared, published and mailed at taxpayer expense. This is a service to the the citizens of the Sixth Congressional District of Illinois.” Right next to the pretty glossy photo of rich white people walking in a park, probably in Wheaton.

So how is this a service? A service to the residents of the sixth might be a mailer that told the victims of the Bush financial collapse how to get job re-training and unemployment benefits, and food stamps, and suicide counseling. No, this is a political message, designed to help Roskam’s party defeat the efforts of President Obama to make things better for ordinary Americans.  Pretty ironic when you think about it – Roskam’s spending our tax dollars to print and mail this political message railing about the national debt and excessive spending. What an ass. Based on their polling, Roskam and his Republican colleagues believe that debt and budget deficits are one area where President Obama is potentially vulnerable and so they’re wasting our money on propaganda like this.

Roskam says that “we’re at near historic debt levels, the likes of which have not been seen since WWII: the national debt is over $11 trillion dollars and growing rapidly.” Well, that’s true enough.  But where did all that debt come from? The New York Times’  David Leonhardt did a great job analyzing the growth of budget deficitsback in June: America’s Sea of Red Ink Was Years in the Making.

It all began when George Bush took office in 2001. As the last Democratic president left office, he handed President Bush a booming economy and a budget surplus projected at $800 billion annually through 2012. Under Bush, the nation plunged into recession in 2001 and the country was forced to increase spending on economic relief while tax revenues decreased. Meanwhile Bush started two expensive wars, one of them inargueably elective, and spent billions on a Medicare prescription drug benefit that was largely a gift to insurance and pharmaceutical companies. So as spending soared and tax revenues decreased, what does Bush do: why give huge tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans, further decreasing revenues and increasing the deficit.

Bush’s economic policies resulted in his second recession, the present one, that began in 2007. Again tax revenues plummeted and safety net spending increased.  And then then the mortgage and banking crisis, a product of Bush’s anything goes anti-regulatory policies. Bush is forced to bailout the banks, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac to prevent a global economic collapse, further increasing the deficit. Bush leaves office and hands President Obama a $1.3 trillion deficit, two wars with no end in sight, and an economy in ruins.

Leonhardt breaks down responsibility for the deficit like this:

You can think of that roughly $2 trillion swing as coming from four broad categories: the business cycle, President George W. Bush’s policies, policies from the Bush years that are scheduled to expire but that Mr. Obama has chosen to extend, and new policies proposed by Mr. Obama.

The first category — the business cycle — accounts for 37 percent of the $2 trillion swing. It’s a reflection of the fact that both the 2001 recession and the current one reduced tax revenue, required more spending on safety-net programs and changed economists’ assumptions about how much in taxes the government would collect in future years.

About 33 percent of the swing stems from new legislation signed by Mr. Bush. That legislation, like his tax cuts and the Medicare prescription drug benefit, not only continue to cost the government but have also increased interest payments on the national debt.

Mr. Obama’s main contribution to the deficit is his extension of several Bush policies, like the Iraq war and tax cuts for households making less than $250,000. Such policies — together with the Wall Street bailout, which was signed by Mr. Bush and supported by Mr. Obama — account for 20 percent of the swing.

About 7 percent comes from the stimulus bill that Mr. Obama signed in February. And only 3 percent comes from Mr. Obama’s agenda on health care, education, energy and other areas.

So about 10 percent of the present deficit is attributable to President Obama’s policies: 7 percent to economic stimulus to pull the nation out of the economic crisis he inherited from an incompetent Repupublican administration and 3 percent related to his new domestic programs. 3 percent!

If Peter Roskam were serious about reducing the deficit he would:

• Stop wasting tax dollars on political mailings and telephone campaigns
• Start working to repeal the irresponsible Bush tax cuts
• Start working to disengage the country from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that he has supported and to reduce military spending to reasonable levels
• Get behind the President’s efforts to fix the healthcare system
• Stop working for more tax breaks to the wealthy like an end to the estate tax

But then we all know that Roskam is not serious about reducing the deficit. His only interest is in using it to make things more difficult for the President in hopes of boosting his party’s political fortune.

No related posts.

Thanks to RSR reader Matt for pointing out this video which is a little more recent than the first one posted. Ben talks about care for the environment in a faith context. I’m really starting to like this guy. Not ready to endorse him, but I like him. Ben is a good reminder, to some progressives like myself who react reflexively to Christianity in politics, that not all Evangelicals are cut from the same cloth – not all have sold out to the Republican corporate establishment.

Ben’s concern for stewardship and for social justice is refreshing to one who has live through the reign of Henry Hyde and his political heir, Peter Roskam, in the 6th district. I’ll be watching closely to see whether Ben can translate his admirable impulse for justice and stewardship into a sound policy platform. I’ll also be watching to see how well Ben is able to relate to the diverse 6th District community (we’re not all Christians, we’re not all religious, some of us have been marginalized by organized religion) and how he deals with the boundary between personal belief and public policy.

No related posts.

Related posts:

1. More Video on Roskam Opponent Ben Lowe
2. Peter Roskam’s Challenger Ben Lowe an Environmentalist

Ben Lowe’s views on creation care were shaped early in his life. Growing up as a missionary kid in Singapore/Malaysia, he often dealt with water shortages and bad air quality due to mismanagement and abuse of natural resources. Carrying these experiences with him, he eventually found his way to Wheaton College where he majored in environmental studies and helped organize Wheaton’s first national Climate Change Summit. His summers were filled working as an environmental educator with the Massachusetts Audubon Society and as a student researcher for fisheries projects in Corpus Christi, TX and on Lake Tanganyika, Tanzania.

Lowe currently calls Chicago home and works as the cocoordinator of Renewal, a grassroots network committed to equipping this student generation in the compassionate stewardship of all of God’s creation. Previously he served as outreach director for A Rocha USA, an international Christian conservation organization, where he helped to mobilize churches and campuses around creation care issues.

Renewal’s web site describes the organization this way:

Renewal is a Christ-centered creation care network that focuses on living in right relationship with God. As followers of Christ, we seek to follow His example of love, stewardship, and reconciliation. For us, this means taking care of everything that God so lovingly created- the earth and each other. With a heart for the poor and a commitment to following Jesus’ call to ‘love your neighbor as yourself,’ the students of Renewal seek to care for the earth so that all of God’s people and creatures, as well as future generations, can have a healthy environment in which to live.

“Heart for the poor” and “care for the earth” are music to my ears after two terms of Roskam’s screw the poor and exploit the earth mentality. I look forward to hearing more from young Ben about his aims as a candidate.

Related posts:

1. More Video on Roskam Opponent Ben Lowe

Ben has the beginnings of a web site here.  He also has a Twitter account and we encourage all our readers to follow him as Ben begins to communicate about himself. Ben is also on Facebook.

Update: Ben’s campaign web site has been updated with a bio and a letter from Ben. From what he’s written here, Ben sounds like a progressive fellow:

His years living overseas, coupled with a summer science-research grant in rural sub-Saharan Africa, nurtured another passion in Ben: a concern for a more nuanced foreign policy, and the renunciation of foreign adventurism and nation-building. He advocates the highest care for our troops serving bravely in the face of danger; one of the highest forms of care is a foreign policy which acts more judiciously before thrusting troops into danger. Ben supports an expeditious end to wars that have proven devastatingly costly in terms of both American soldier and local civilian casualties. Money saved from war could more usefully promote economic development abroad, so as to re-brand America’s image throughout the world, using our global position of influence to encourage peace, respect for human rights, and religious freedom.

The son of a naturalized U.S. citizen, Ben has spent considerable time interacting with both prosperous and impoverished immigrant communities. This experience drives home the need to reform our broken immigration system.

Yet another dimension of his life overseas – and his career serving with non-profit organizations – has been first-hand experience of the risks of being uninsured or under-insured. He advocates reform of our health insurance system to ensure that all Americans have access to adequate, affordable health care. Additionally, the recent economic downturn underscores the need to provide a safety net for those facing joblessness and homelessness, yet within the parameters of fiscal conservatism.

Related posts:

1. Jill Morgenthaler Calls Roskam on His Lack of Support for Illinois Vets

• “peter roskam phone calls”
• “how to get peter roskam to stop calling”
• “remove my number from peter roskam phone”

From past experience I knew this must mean Roskam was conducting another phone campaign so I went to my voice mail and there was another “sorry I missed you” message from Roskam indicating that he was presently holding yet another telephonic “town hall”. I can’t count how many of these messages I’ve received over the past year. They always seem to come around dinner time. I can understand why they’re pissing people off. Roskam is taking them away from their meals and from time with their kids, from their time to relax at the end of a busy day.

And the sad thing is, he’s not really calling to listen to people, he’s calling to campaign against healthcare reform, against cap and trade, and against just about anything that President Obama and the Democrats in Congress try to do to rescue the economy and to improve the lives of ordinary people. Anybody who signs on to one of these town halls is going to hear the same tired talking points that Roskam has been repeating over and over and over again. He’s not going to listen. And he’s not going to offer any real plan of his own to address the healthcare crisis, or global climate change, or unemployment. He’s just going to attack the Democrats who are actually trying to solve problems.

And Roskam is using our tax dollars, the money that is deducted from our paychecks each week, to run these telephone campaigns and the mail campaigns as well. He’s not providing any information to citizens – he’s merely waging a political campaign against the Democrats and he’s doing it on our nickel. As someone who likes to style himself as a ‘hero of the taxpayer”, Roskam should be ashamed. But of course, as we all know by now, Roskam has no shame.

There’s probably no easy way to get Roskam to stop calling. I’m writing this post in hopes that he’ll take note and stop harassing his constituents. You can try calling him and asking him to remove you from his list. I’m not sure whether he’ll comply. His local office number is (630) 893-9670. In Washington, the number is (202) 225-4561.

There’s also a web site you can try, stoppoliticalcalls.org. They say that they’ll send your contact information to ALL political parties, candidates, political action committees, and any other organization that makes political robo calls and ensure that they are told that you no longer want robo calls from them. Again, no guarantees the calls will stop.

Good luck!

No related posts.

“I’m for expanding domestic energy production now and investing in renewables like wind and solar.”

That’s what Peter Roskam had to say in his first campaign ad of 2008.  And Roskam had this to say in July 2008:

“Soaring energy prices place an enormous financial weight on our family’s budget today, far greater than any time in this nation’s history,” said Roskam. “Energy costs now consume nearly one-fifth of the after-tax incomes of low and middle-class families – double that of just 10 years ago. It has come time for a national energy policy that places us on a path to independence. This is a common goal to all Americans – Republican and Democrat. For our economic security, our national security and environmental security we must be energy independent within the next 15 years.”

And this:

Your friends and neighbors, constituents of our 6th Congressional District, are common sense folks that understand the dire situation we face, and our great need to transform into a new energy economy. They also recognize that we can’t completely drill ourselves out of our energy woes, and instead move toward our energy future with an “all of the above” approach, leaving nothing on the table.

And this:

I understand that advancing America’s energy security, and working to bring down gas prices, will require a comprehensive approach that promotes responsible domestic energy production, increased conservation and efficiency standards, and robust research and development to expand the use and application of alternative energy sources.

Roskam was given a chance to stand behind his statements and keep his promise last Thursday when the House voted on H.R.3585 – Solar Technology Roadmap Act. Roskam voted no. He broke his promise.

H.R. 3585 seeks to develop a coherent solar energy development strategy through public private partnership and to provide focused public investments that are guided by that strategy or roadmap – the goal being to develop the U.S. solar energy industry and make it more competitive globally producing green jobs here at home and ultimately increasing our energy independence while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Speaker Pelosi supplies more detail on the bill:

Roadmap for Solar Research and Development: H.R. 3585 establishes a comprehensive roadmapping process for solar technology research, development, and demonstration activities conducted by the federal government in partnership with the private sector. The Secretary of Energy is also directed to award grants to carry out these programs on a merit-reviewed basis, and specifically to provide awards to industry-led consortia for RD&D in solar manufacturing. The roadmap provision is modeled on the successful National (now International) Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors, which has been instrumental in helping semiconductor technology advance rapidly over the past two decades.

Roadmap Committee Make Up: The Secretary must appoint a Solar Technology Roadmap Committee, comprised of at least 11 members, within four months of enactment of the Act. At least one-third but not more than half of the members of the Committee must come from the solar industry. The Secretary must also appoint a Committee chair, who shall not be a federal employee.

Timeline and Mandate of Committee: H.R. 3585 requires that the Committee create a Solar Technology Roadmap within eighteen months of enactment of the Act. The Roadmap will present the best current estimate of the near-term (up to two years), mid-term (up to seven years), and long-term (up to 15 years) RD&D needs in solar technology. It must also provide direct guidance for solar technology RD&D activities supported by the federal government. The bill requires that 30% of DOE solar RD&D funding in 2012 is pursuant to the recommendations of the Roadmap, ramping up to 75% in 2015. The Committee must update the Roadmap annually as needed, and comprehensively review and revise it every three years.

Photovoltaic Provisions: The Solar Technology Roadmap Act authorizes DOE to conduct at least 10 photovoltaic demonstration projects ranging from one-to-three megawatts in size and three-to-five solar projects greater than 30 megawatts in size. DOE is also required to study the performance of photovoltaic installations and identify opportunities to improve the energy productivity of these systems. In addition, DOE must establish a program of RD&D related to the reuse, recycling, and safe disposal of photovoltaic devices.

Dedicated Funding for Solar Research and Development: The bill authorizes $350 million for DOE to carry out these activities in FY 2011, rising to $550 million in FY 2015.

H.R. 3585 passed by a a vote of 310-106 with 63 Republican members joining 247 Democrats to make it a truly bipartisan bill. Republican Representative Michael McCaul of Texas had this to say in celebrating the bill’s passage:

The Solar Technology Roadmap Act has potential to be landmark legislation. It doubles the available research and development funding currently available. Further, it provides the collaboration that the professors at Stanford, the University of Texas and other leading institutions need to further their research so they can effectively harness the sun’s energy. The challenges they must overcome include storage, transportation and transmission of solar energy. I am hopeful this is the step that allows us to vastly expand America’s investment in research and development and commercialization of our solar industry.

Long-term, it will give us the ability to more efficiently heat and cool our homes and offices and operate equipment. Energy will cost less and the air we breathe will be cleaner.

Companies in high-tech centers such as Austin and Silicon Valley are in position to compete globally to produce this technology, creating jobs in the United States rather than export them.

Sadly, our own Republican Representative, Peter Roskam, thought it was more important to continue his political game of obstructing the Democratic legislative agenda than it was to support his promise to invest in alternative energy sources and help put our nation on the path to energy independence.

Related posts:

1. Roskam Votes to Obstruct Progress on Energy Efficiency, Global Warming
2. Peter Roskam Sides with Polluters Over Planet – On the Wrong Side of History
3. U.S. Chamber of Commerce Gives Peter Roskam Award for Voting Against Constituents Interests
4. Roskam Again Supports Big Oil Interests Over Those of Constituents
5. Roskam Sides with Big Oil, Chamber of Commerce to Block Price Gouging Prevention Act

The Roskam plan:

• Say “no” to anything that might help people – unemployment insurance, food stamps, minimum wage, green jobs, civil rights, health care
• Unless that “people” means the insurance industry ($237,488 in campaign contributions), the real estate industry ($208,401),  the securities and investment “industry” ($251,490), commercial banks ($140,148), the oil and gas industry ($143,315), electric utilities ($82,900), the healthcare sector ($456,000) or, of course, Peter Roskam.

No related posts.

Even as the overall health of the economy shows signs of improvement, the unemployment rate in Illinois rose to 10.5 in September, the highest rate since 1983, and Illinois lost over 14,000 non-farm jobs. That’s in addition to over 306,000 jobs lost since August 2008 due to the Bush recession.

With so many families in trouble, we might expect our Congressman to be taking action to provide aid to those hit by job losses. Here in the 6th District, our Republican Congressman, Peter Roskam has been gleefully citing these statistics to make political trouble for President Obama. But utterly devoid of empathy for those who are suffering, Roskam hasn’t lifted a finger to help those families. In fact, he’s been doing his best to make things worse.

We have already written about Peter Roskam’s vote in September against the extension of unemployment benefits for those whose benefits are about to end.

This month, Peter Roskam voted to eliminate a number of key federal food assistance programs.

The vote came on October 7 on the conference report for HR 2997, Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010. Peter Roskam voted no.

In voting against the conference report, Roskam voted to eliminate the following programs which are critical to meeting the nutritional needs of those experiencing economic hardship:

Child nutrition programs. The child nutrition programs included in S. 1406 provide funding for the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Program, Summer Food Service Program, and Child and Adult Care Food programs. These programs serve nutritious lunches and breakfasts to children attending school or residing in other institutions. The purpose is to improve the health and well-being of the nation’s children. H.R. 2997 would provide $16.85 billion in mandatory budget authority for child nutrition programs, which is $58 million more than the President’s budget request and $1.9 billion more than the enacted Fiscal Year 2009 level.

Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC). The WIC program provides assistance to pregnant, breast-feeding and post-partum women and infants, and children up to age five who are at nutritional risk because of inadequate nutrition and inadequate income. H.R. 2997 would provide $7.25 billion in discretionary budget authority for this program, which is $525 million less than President’s budget request and $392 million more than the enacted Fiscal Year 2009 level, excluding emergency appropriations. Additionally, it is important to note that $487 million in contingency funds will be available in Fiscal Year 2010 making a total of $7.7 billion available for the WIC program.

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Food Stamps). The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program provides assistance to needy persons and families to alleviate hunger and malnutrition and increase their food purchasing power. H.R. 2997 would provide $58.2 billion in mandatory budget authority for this program which is $3.07 billion below the President’s budget request and is $4.3 billion more than the enacted Fiscal Year 2009 level.

Commodity Assistance Program. The Commodity Assistance Program provides supplemental food to infants and children as well as prepared meals to low-income households. H.R. 2997 would provide $248 million for this program, which is $14.6 million more than the President’s budget request and is $17.2 million more than the enacted Fiscal Year 2009 level.

I really find it hard to fathom how a man with any conscience at all could choose to play political games at a time like this and ignore the suffering of his brothers and sisters. Fortunately, the measure passed without Roskam’s vote and is expected tobe signed into law shortly by President Obama.

I’d encourage you to contact Roskam to register your displeasure, but quite frankly that would be useless. This man is unconcerned with anything but political advancement and aiding his corporate campaign donors. He is blind to the suffering and hardship that exists amongst his constituents.

Ellen in the 10th has a good post with some stats fleshing out the degree of economic hardship here in Illinois.

Related posts:

1. Millions for Big Business, Not a Cent for Children
2. Peter Roskam, George Bush Attempt to Block Increased Funding for Food Aid to Poor
3. Peter Roskam Throws Hissy Fit on House Floor Over Taxes on Dead Rich Folks
4. Roskam’s Medi-Fraud Alert Highlights Obama’s Vigorous Efforts to Combat Medicare Fraud

It is the late summer of 2009. There is growing unease in Corporate America. Popular Democratic President Obama has signed into law the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and is pushing a legislative agenda that includes healthcare reform, cap & trade, employee free-choice, and employment non-discrimination. On top of it all he has had the nerve to appoint a “pay czar” to oversee executive compensation at the huge banks that benefited from the Bush bailout. Corporate shills like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck and astroturf efforts like the Tea Parties  and the Town Hall riots have damaged Obama somewhat but haven’t dealt a crippling blow. It is time for more forceful action.

Representatives of the U.S. Chamber and the big oil companies meet secretly with friendly generals at the Pentagon and a plan is devised. Early in the morning on Sunday, September 6th, a large contingent of special forces enters the White House grounds and quickly overwhelms the Secret Service detail. President Obama, his wife, and his daughters are dragged from their beds in their pajamas and forced to board a helicopter which takes them to Andrews Air Force Base where they are placed on jet and whisked off to Ottawa. A member of President Obama’s own party, Senator Joe Lieberman, is immediately installed as interim President, to serve until the scheduled end of Obama’s term in 2013. Lieberman immediately declares martial law and imposes a curfew, “temporarily” suspends the bill of rights, and shuts down “unfriendly” news organizations such as NPR, the New York Times, and MSNBC. A number of Democratic Representatives and Senators are arrested and detained. The military is used to quash demonstrations in favor of  Obama’s return and a number of civilians are killed while others are arbitrarily arrested and beaten and tortured. Some just disappear.

The coup is immediately condemned as illegal by the United Nations, the Organization of American States, NATO, and the European Union. The Prime Minister of Great Britain, Gordon Brown issues a call for Obama’s reinstatement which goes unheeded. Instead, the corporate-friendly Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, declares Obama’s ouster constitutional because of his “crimes against free enterprise” and affirms Lieberman’s presidency. Still, not a single country in the world recognizes the Lieberman junta as the legitimate government of the United States. No matter for some conservative M.P.s from Britain who, friendly to British corporations such as B.P. operating in the U.S., journey to Washington to meet with Lieberman and other members of the junta, and then return home praising the Lieberman government in contradiction to Britain’s official policy as articulated by Gordon Brown.

This could never happen here, you say. Perhaps not. But something much like this happened in Honduras over the summer and our own Republican Congressman, Peter Roskam, has endorsed it as a model of democracy.

This past June, Manuel Zelaya, the democratically elected President of Honduras, was overthrown by a right wing military coup. The President was kidnapped by the military and flown out of the country. Roberto Micheletti was installed as “interim President” and he immediately moved to suspend constitutionally guaranteed freedoms and to suppress those elements of the media unfriendly to the takeover. The coup was immediately branded as illegal by the United Nations, the Organization of American Stat, and the European Union. President Obama quickly decried the coup as illegal and insisted that Manuel Zelaya was still the rightful President of Honduras. The administration held off on a formal declaration that the seizure was a coup, in hopes that diplomatic actions could return Zelaya to office. Mediation efforts by Oscar Arias, a Nobel peace laureate and the President of Costa Rica, came to naught, and the Obama administration announced a termination of non-humanitarian aid to Honduras in early September.

Enter Roskam. So Peter Roskam flies off to Honduras in early October in the company of Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina and Illinois Congressman Aaron Schock and some other dude whose name escapes me at the moment. They meet with the members of the illegal government who can’t figure out why they’re getting such a bad rap since it has historically been U.S. policy to support ruthless rightwing thugs in Central America.  They make no attempt to meet with Manuel Zelaya, the legitimate President, who is holed up in an embassy having recently returned to the country. They also meet with the U.S. Ambassador who Roskam complains is a little defensive (can’t understand why with all these nice Republican Congressman coming down to interfere with U.S. policy).  So Roskam and the delegation give encouragement to the illegal government that is so badly misunderstood and quickly fly back to the U.S., Roskam apparently having developed a serious man crush on DeMint during the trip.

On his return, Roskam begins his own little public relations campaign for the illegal Micheletti regime. He does a couple of radio infomercials on friendly local stations. Here he is last week on WIND’s John & Cisco (You have to listen to him give an update on the status of Republican efforts to kill meaningful healthcare reform first – my audio editor is on vacation):

Roskam WIND 10/15/2009

On the same date, the Chicago Tribune published an op-ed piece by Peter Roskam on the Honduras situation entitled “Democratic Elections in Honduras Deserve American Support”.

Roskam starts out:

There is little debate about the value of Honduras as an American ally. As a democracy in an increasingly unstable region, Honduras has been a partner in the war on drugs, a necessary check against President Hugo Chavez’s aggressive regime in Venezuela and an important $5 billion export market for American manufacturers through the Central American Free Trade Agreement. A stable and democratic Honduras is unquestionably in America’s best interest.

Lets get this straight. Honduras ceased being a democracy on that day in June when the military junta deposed its democratically-elected government. And this b.s. about Chavez’s “aggressive regime”. Is Venezuela lobbing missiles across our borders? Are they quartering troops in Washington? Are they blowing up our ships in the Panama canal? Just how is the Chavez government aggressive? In fact, if anyone has been aggressive it has been the United States. You may remember that Chavez himself was the tempoarily removed from office by a right-wing coup in 2002 and there is evidence that the Bush administration was involved. Certainly Chavez’ ouster was tied to the same reactionary business interests that Roskam represents in Congress and that are behind Zelaya’s ouster in Honduras. Chavez is also a democratically elected president, having won over 63% of the vote in his last election. He enrages right-wing interests both at home and here in the United States because his policies favor the poor over big business and because of his sharing of the proceeds from the country’s oil wealth with the people.

Roskam writes further:

To be sure, Central America is a tenuous region and the Obama administration must carefully maintain the support of our allies. Moreover, Micheletti has made some very notable tactical errors, including forcibly making Zelaya leave Honduras and then temporarily restricting the freedom of the press.

These are serious mistakes, but they don’t make the case for democratic elections any less warranted.

There remains a solution that will satisfy American interests, provide stability to a region in short supply of it and, most important, give Hondurans what they deserve — fair elections. Even if the State Department will not recognize Micheletti’s interim government, it should support election monitors to observe the upcoming Honduran elections.

So Micheletti made some mistakes, but Obama and the U.S. government (the legitimate U.S. government that is, not DeMint and Roskam) should support him becuse this is all about obtaining free and fair elections, you know, democracy.

So lets take a look at democracy, Micheletti Style. Here’s some video of Micheletti’s police applying a heavy dose of democracy to some peaceful pro-Zelaya demonstrators in Tegucigalpa in June, ordinary folks who were a little upset that their President had been illegally removed from office. That’s tear gas you see in the beginning. A very useful tool for promoting democracy.

When tear gas proves ineffective at achieving democracy, sometimes you have to use bullets.

Making sure the press doesn’t spread “insurrection”, to use Roskam’s term, is an important aspect of promoting democracy. Here Micheletti’s masked police are shutting down a TV station, Channel 36, in September. Apparently this station didn’t understand that press freedom means the freedom to say what Micheletti wants you to say.

When I hear Roskam on the radio or read him in the paper defending this I think my heads going to explode. I used to think Roskam wasn’t such a bad guy though of a decidedly different ideological bent than my own. But now I have to say this man is a pig. He is evil. He does not understand right from wrong or just doesn’t care. Would not be surprised to learn when campaign contribution data becomes available that Roskam received some fat contribution for his P.R. work on behalf of the Honduran junta through one of its high-powered U.S. lobbyists.

Roskam needs to be unelected. Still hoping that we’ll get a strong candidate to step up and slug it out with him in 2010. Tammy, are you up for another go at this creep?

Related posts:

1. Peter Roskam’s Conduct in Honduras Is Treasonous
2. Peter Roskam Keeping the Hemisphere Safe for “Big Fruit”
3. Is Peter Roskam Taking the War Against Democracy to Honduras? HSIK

The Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest civil rights organization, labors to achieve full equality for LGBT people. For each Congress, HRC produces a scorecard detailing each representative’s votes and co-sponsorships on issues of key importance to the community. Roskam was first scored for the 110th Congress which ended last year, Roskam’s first term in office.

Roskam scored a zero. That mean’s that Roskam opposed LGBT rights 100% of the time, a distinguished record of legislative homophobia:

• The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (H.R. 1592) would expand federal jurisdiction to reach serious, violent hate crimes perpetrated because of the victim’s race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability. The House passed the bill on May 3, 2007, by a vote of 237-180 (Roll Call Vote No. 299, 1st Session, 110th Congress). Democrats — 212 yes, 14 no,6 not voting; Republicans — 25 yes, 166 no, 10 not voting. HRC supported the bill. Peter Roskam voted NO.
• Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) offered a motion to recommit promptly the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (H.R. 1592). The motion would amend the bill to add the categories of senior citizens and members of the armed forces to the legislation, but also wouldrefer the bill back to committee, effectively killing the bill. The motion was defeated on May 3, 2007, by a vote of 189-227 (Roll Call Vote No. 298, 1st Session, 110th Congress). Democrats — 9 yes, 216 no, 7 not voting; Republicans — 180 yes, 11 no, 10 not voting. HRC opposed the motion to recommit. Peter Roskam voted to kill the bill.
• The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (H.R. 3685) would prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The House passed the bill on Nov. 7, 2007, by a vote of 235-184 (Roll Call Vote No. 1057, 1st Session, 110th Congress). Democrats — 200 yes, 25 no, 8 not voting; Republicans — 35 yes, 159 no, 6 not voting. HRC supported the bill. Peter Roskam voted against the ban on discrimination.
• Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.) offered a motion to recommit promptly the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (H.R. 3685). The motion stated that the bill would have no impact on state or federal definitions of marriage as being between one man and one woman, but also would refer the bill back to committee, effectively killing the bill. The motion was defeated on Nov. 7, 2007, by a vote of 198-222 (Roll Call Vote No. 1056, 1st Session, 110th Congress). Democrats — 14 yes, 214 no, 5 not voting; Republicans — 184 yes, 8 no, 8 not voting. HRC opposed the motion to recommit. Peter Roskam voted to kill the bill.
• Members of Congress were asked to co-sponsor legislation, introduced on April 24, 2007, that would prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. As of Oct. 3, 2008, the measure had 185 co-sponsors: Democrats 179; Republicans 6. Peter Roskam refused to co-sponsor the legislation.
• Members of Congress were asked to co-sponsor legislation, introduced on Feb. 28, 2007, that would repeal the discriminatory “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” military policy that denies lesbian, gay and bisexual soldiers the right to serve their country openly. As of Oct. 3, 2008, the measure had 149 co-sponsors: Democrats 146; Republicans 3. Peter Roskam refused to help end discrimination against LGBT soldiers.
• Members of Congress were asked to co-sponsor legislation, introduced on March 29, 2007, that would equalize tax treatment for employer-provided health coverage for domestic partners and other non-spouse, non-dependent beneficiaries. As of Oct. 3, 2008, the measurehad 120 co-sponsors: Democrats 116; Republicans 4. Peter Roskam refused to work for equality.
• Members of Congress were asked to co-sponsor legislation, introduced on May 8, 2007, that would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide same-sex partners of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents the same immigration benefits that legal spouses of U.S. permanent residents enjoy. As of Oct. 3, 2008, the measure had 119 co-sponsors: Democrats 118; Republicans 1. Peter Roskam refused to help LGBT immigrants.

These coupled with Roskam’s vote last week to defund the military rather than approve federal hate crimes legislation paint a picture of a legislator who is agressively anti-gay. LGBT residents of the 6th District need to pressure Roskam to stop voting against equality.

In case you haven’t seen it, here is President Obama’s speech to the HRC last week. Obama vows to sign the hate crimes legislation and to end “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”. I don’t doubt his sincerity of intent. But I sincerely hope that he will take action sooner rather than later. It is growing harder to rationalize support for a party that has so often disappointed when it comes to LGBT rights.

Related posts:

1. Peter Roskam Votes to Defund Troops to Satisfy Homophobic Christian Base
2. Peter Roskam Says Gay is Not OK
3. A Reply to Tony Perkins and the Persecuting Church
4. Peter Roskam’s Refusal to Stand Up Against Hate Crimes
5. Peter Roskam and Misogynistic, Homophobic Republicans Vote to Defund State Department, Peace Corps

Received a note today from a 6th District voter.  I won’t disclose her identity because I haven’t obtained her permission. She wrote regarding this email message from Roskam. She was upset by the “survey” on the “government takeover of healthcare” included in the message. Her response to Peter Roskam, which she copied me on, follows.

To: peter.roskam@mail.house.gov
Sent: Sun, Oct 11, 2009 10:05 pm
Subject: Fwd: Roskam Hosting CNBC`s Squawk Box Monday

This email is a perfect example of how words can be manipulated to fit YOUR version of the health care debate.

Who would answer “Yes” to the question below? I wouldn’t answer “Yes” and I am totally in favor of revamping our health care system. It is disingenuous of you to ask your constituents the LOADED question below. President Obama CLEARLY stated in his address to congress that a single-payer option (aka government takeover, in your words) is NOT on the table.

Yet, you will use the results of this question to justify not voting for health care reform, including a public option, saying it is not what your constituents want. You recently sent me a letter stating that you agree with President Obama’s assertion that congress is in agreement with 80% of the health care reform package currently being considered–and that you AGREE with him. Then you send out this email that totally rebuts what you said in that letter because this email will drive a bigger wedge between proponents of health care reform and those that are afraid of a public option–and you will use that to further your own agenda which is just to stop health care reform so that the democratic party is looked upon as a failure.

Your party is so good at calling the President every word in the book. Well, I’ll throw one at you–the republican party is treasonous. You are trying to disrupt the government at the cost of every American who does not have health care and those who cannot see through your manipulative words and believe they are doing the right thing.

You make me sick.

Related posts:

1. Peter and Parity
2. Constituents Meet with Peter Roskam on Healthcare – Get Same Tired Answers
3. Peter Roskam Indicates He Will Continue to Obstruct Universal Healthcare Coverage

• A 3.4 percent pay raise for members of the armed services
• A $6.7 billion allocation for mine-resistant armored vehicles (MRAPs) designed to protect soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.
• Procurement of body armor for those same soldiers
• Aid for soldiers with catastrophic combat-related conditions to obtain personal care assistance during the period before retirement or disability becomes effective
• A skill incentive bonus for members of the reserves
• Bonuses for military linguists serving long-term in Afghanistan
• Ensuring that servicemen on duty overseas have the opportunity to have their absentee votes counted
• Funding research on tissue repair and transplantation for combat injuries

Why would Peter Roskam vote to defund the military? Because the bill also helps gay people.

Specifically, the bill extends the federal hate crimes legislation, passed in 1968 in the wake of the assasination of Rev. Martin Luther King, making violent crimes committed against people on the basis of sexual orientation federal offenses.

The legislation is important because it allows the federal government to intervene and prosecute such crimes in jurisdictions where local and state authorities prove unwilling to do so. While there is much work left to do, the bill is a big step toward ensuring that LBGT people are ensured equal status under the constitution and can enjoy the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence.

Roskam and other House Republicans voted against the bill because of opposition by Christian hate groups such as the Family Research Council that claim that their free speech rights will be violated by preventing them from demonizing gay people from pulpits lest one of their misguided followers commit a violent crime. The bill, however, contains no prohibitions on speech, though hopefully it will encourage more responsible speech on the part of some pastors. Their argument is a fallacy. Protection against crimes committed against persons on the basis of religion in the original 1968 legislation has in no way impaired the free speech rights of those who are critical of religion. But it has, appropriately, enabled federal involvement in investigation of crimes against Christians such as church burnings.

Related posts:

1. Peter Roskam’s Appalling Record on Gay Rights
2. Another Roskam Vote Against Services for Illinois Veterans
3. Funding Our Returning Heroes Not a Priority of This Congressman
4. Jill Morgenthaler Calls Roskam on His Lack of Support for Illinois Vets
5. Peter Roskam’s Refusal to Stand Up Against Hate Crimes

I received this expensive-looking over sized mailer from Peter Roskam a couple of days ago. Says it contains “important facts and information”. “Dated information”, it tells me, “read today”. This must be it. This must be Peter Roskam’s plan to make sure that all Americans receive adequate quality healthcare. Maybe he’s finally doing the job we pay him for. Maybe he’s studied the situation and decided a public option makes sense after all. Lets see.

Nope. No plan here.  Just a picture of Peter with an ugly tie. Says he wants “real bipartisan reforms”. Doesn’t want a public option – that would put bureaucrats in charge of my family’s healthcare.  Hmm. That sounds a lot like the same old crap we’ve been hearing from the Republicans who’ve been trying to block healthcare reform in Congress. “Bipartisan” means do whatever we want and what our campaign donors from the healthcare industry want or else. Says the status quo is unacceptable. Things must change by remaining exactly the same, withour healthcare in the hands of giant corporations. Not a government plan like in those commie countries – like England and Switzerland.

There’s another picture of Peter smiling next to a nurse taking a small child’s blood pressure while mom looks on. Everybody is smiling. Blood pressure taking is fun.  (We hear from usually reliable sources at the hospital that Peter devoured this child for lunch moments after the picture was taken – solving the healthcare crisis one child at a time).

There’s a note under the photo that brags about Peter’s $1.1 million in earmarks for local healthcare facilities since 2007. Yes, that’ll solve the problem. Well maybe Peter’s plan is on page 3. Let’s take a look.

Well this looks familiar. We’ve seen this before. Over and over. Pretty nebulous. Doesn’t say anything concrete about what he’s going to do this year to ensure that those people without health insurance can get coverage and those who have it can get covered for pre-existing conditions or deal with increasingly unaffordable co-payments and deductibles and how they can keep insurance when they lose or leave their job. Maybe that’s on the next page. Lets see.

No its not here.  Just some stuff telling me that this was paid for with my money. And instructions on how to get hold of Peter if I need help.

I guess that must be the plan. If you don’t have insurance, if your coverage is being denied because of a pre-existing condition, if your deductibles are too high, if you want to move to a new job but can’t afford to lose your insurance – just call Peter Roskam’s office and he will help you. (630) 893-9670. I guess its not really the plan I hoped for.

So, I have to say, this pretty much looks like a campaign piece. There’s really no information here. This is Peter Roskam using his constituents hard-earned money to lobby them in order to defeat the Democratic healthcare reform plan that would otherwise benefit them. That’s pretty twisted. But then so is Roskam.

Related posts:

1. Peter Roskam’s Constituents Need Health Coverage – Roskam Gives Them a Blog Instead

Congressman Peter Roskam, R-Ill, also spoke with The Cable just after returning from Tegucigalpa to talk about his delegation and the strategy behind the GOP’s controversial engagement approach…

Although the State Department tried to prevent the delegation from going, U.S. consular officials did assist the delegation logistically, but did not participate in the meetings, Roskam said. The delegation also had a tense meeting with U.S. Amb. Hugo Llorens, in which Roskam described him as being “very defensive.”

“The very consistent theme that was coming across was a sense of bewilderment from all the Hondurans we were meeting with at their treatment by the United States,” Roskam related.

Micheletti acknowledged to the group that he did not have the authority to physically remove Zelaya from the country, but he seeks communication with the U.S. government and was not pleased that the State Department had cut him off.

The conclusion Roskam drew from the trip was that the problem in Honduras won’t be solved until the Nov. 29 election, in which neither Micheletti nor Zelaya is running — that is, if it can meet reasonable standards of freedom and fairness.

U.S. trade with Honduras is at stake, Roskam argued, and is needed to counter the expanding regional influence of anti-American forces such as Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez.

This is unbelieveably arrogant, and, I believe, treasonous.

First off, the Republican Party is not entitled to conduct an alternative foreign policy. They lost the Presidential election in November, in no small part because of the horrible mess they made of  U.S. relations  with the rest of the world. They are neither competent to or empowered with conducting foreign policy. That is the role of President Obama.

Second, the policy of the United States of America,  as defined by the President, is that Manuel Zelaya was illegally deposed from power and that the government of Roberto Micheletti is illegitimate and must restore Zelaya to power.  Micheletti admitted to Roskam that he lacked authority for his actions. This policy is shared by the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and the European Union. The men Roskam met with constitute a criminal regime and consequently are enemies of the United States.

Third, since Roskam is clearly not acting on behalf of the United States, on whose behalf is he acting? Well, clearly, the criminal dictator Micheletti, who seized power and then terminated the constitutional rights of the press and the people of Honduras. But Roskam told us who he was really acting for when he said this was about trade. He is acting on behalf of the huge U.S. based corporations that do business in Latin America and don’t like the democratically-elected governments because they are supportive of higher wages and better working conditions for those who they employ, endangering their obscene profits.

So Roskam’s project in Honduras is to subvert the legitimate foreign policy of the United States, and give aid and comfort to its enemies, the criminal junta in Honduras, on behalf of another power, the multinational corporations.That sounds like treason to me.

And he complains that the U.S. ambassador is defensive??

Fortunately, in this country, we have the possibility of free and fair elections, at least while the Republicans remain in the minority. 6th District voters should overthrow the treasonous Roskam at the polls in 2010.

Related posts:

1. Is Peter Roskam Taking the War Against Democracy to Honduras? HSIK
2. Peter Roskam Keeping the Hemisphere Safe for “Big Fruit”
3. Peter Roskam and Misogynistic, Homophobic Republicans Vote to Defund State Department, Peace Corps
4. Peter Roskam is an Enemy of Democracy
5. Peter Roskam Receives Contributions from Lobbyists Acting for Libya

We introduced ourselves and explained what brought us to his office. Each of our group of 16 had a unique reason for being there and I was touched by their stories.

Sally was denied coverage for her family after treating her daughter’s depression, because that depression became a pre-existing condition.

Laura’s father was also denied coverage after doctors thought he had a heart attack. They later diagnosed it as just heart palpitations, but the heart attack had already been documented and became a pre-existing condition.

Linda and Herb have seen their family destroyed by bankruptcy because they could not afford healthcare when they needed it most.

After 20 years managing litigation for an insurance company, Brian recently lost his health insurance after being forced into early retirement. The COBRA has run out and he has bladder cancer, likely caused by Agent Orange that he was exposed to as a soldier in Vietnam. He is not eligible for VA programs because he did not register for benefits during the window he was eligible. His wife, Diane, is eligible for the state program, but cannot afford the premiums.

These were just a few of the stories we shared, briefly, with our Congressman. Our faith-based group leaders added that health for all is Christian. How, as Christians, can we let anyone go sick? Additionally, Frank approached Roskam as a fiscal conservative and discussed the profiteering of the American health industry.

Roskam listened, but did not take notes, nor did the staffer who joined us. He asked a few questions to clarify, but waited for each of us to present our case before responding to the group. He talked about cutting some of the administrative waste within the system and making insurance more accessible, but did not talk specifically about how he plans to do that. He used the Congressional report from Peter Ozag, OMB Director, to defend his position against the public option, citing the $1.5 trillion cost of HR 3200, which is now essentially off the table. He compared President Obama’s goal of being the last President to deal with healthcare to President Bush’s immigration proposals, claiming that both issues will require work for years to come.

Roskam used our stories to refute our requests. He used the problem Brian had with the VA system as an example of the problems of a system run by our government. He cited Diane as being part of the 10 million people without insurance, but did not acknowledge the other 35 million we know are uninsured. He used our lack of time as an excuse to avoid details and made a joke that one of our group members was long-winded. He was the only one who found it funny.

While most of us knew where he stood before we went into his office, Roskam’s demeanor surprised me. He completely lacked any compassion, and he would sigh and readjust in his chair when we made a defense of the public option. While many of us support single-payer, we tried to avoid discussing it as we did not want the meeting to become about his opposition to it. He took each opportunity he could to bring up single-payer and he attempted to refute small details of our arguments rather than addressing the big picture. He asked us to follow up when we talked about 65% of the public supporting a public option. (CBS/NY Times Poll 9/25/09) He repeatedly mentioned that he had been informed it would only be five people, even though Siobhan gave his staff a list of thirteen people the week prior.

Despite Roskam’s reactions, I came away from the meeting feeling empowered. We did our job as citizens by sharing our thoughts, ideas and stories with our representation. I hope that we can find a credible candidate to stand up to Roskam on our behalf soon, but in the meantime, we must continue to represent ourselves. Again and again.

Related posts:

1. Why Are My Tax Dollars Being Used for Peter Roskam’s Campaign Mail?
2. Peter Roskam Indicates He Will Continue to Obstruct Universal Healthcare Coverage
3. Where’s Peter Roskams Healthcare Plan?
4. Peter Roskam Email Enrages Constituents
5. Call Peter Roskam Today and Ask Him to Vote for H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act

Not content with crushing the working poor here at home, Peter Roskam flew off to Honduras this past Friday, in the company of South Carolina’s Christo-fascist Senator Jim DeMint, to meet with members of the right-wing junta which seized power in Honduras in June in a military coup and has since suppressed the press and suspended the constitutional rights of the people including “the right to personal liberty, freedom of association, freedom of movement, and protections against arbitrary detention”.

Roskam framed his meddling as an attempt ensure free and fair elections in Honduras.  That explanation, of course, makes no sense, as Roskam and company met only with members of the illigitemate government that overthrew the democratically-elected President Manuel Zelaya. They made no attempt to confer with Zelaya. The trip is best seen as an attempt to interefere with the Obama Administration’s foreign policy efforts in Honduras to restore the rightfully-elected President. As always, Roskam is acting on behalf of the powerful U.S. corporate interests seeking to subvert the reforms begun on behalf of workers by President Zelaya. Once again, Roskam show’s he has either no understanding of, or no concern for right and wrong. His conduct is despicable. The word “sociopathic” again comes to mind.

Zelaya enjoyed strong support from the poor and from the unions. His offense appears to have been attempting to raise the minimum wage by 60%. This move apparently angered, among others, the giant fruit companies Dole and Chiquita. Chiquita claimed, according to journalist Nikolas Kozloff that it would cost 20 cents more to produce a crate of pineapples and 10 cents more to produce a crate of bananas, eating into corporate profits. While there is no evidence linking these companies directly to the coup, they were, no doubt, among its most important beneficiaries.

The coup against Zelaya was led by Gen. Romeo Orlando Vásquez Velásquez who, according to a report by Linda Cooper and James Hodge in the National Catholic Reporter, is a two-time graduate of the infamous School of the Americas (SOA). SOA is a U.S. military institution, now called the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation, located at Fort Benning in Georgia that, according to NCR,  has “trained hundreds of coup leaders and human rights abusers in Latin America”:

The three Honduran generals fit into the larger picture of coup leaders trained by the U.S. Army school, which used to boast about how many of the school’s graduates had become heads of their countries.

The boasting, which stopped after the graduates’ undemocratic paths to power became better known, celebrated such figures as:

* Argentine Gen. Leopoldo Galtieri, who seized power in a bloody coup, bringing down another SOA grad, Gen. Roberto Viola, who came to power during Argentina’s Dirty War.
* Guatemalan dictator Gen. Efrain Rios Montt, who seized power in a coup in 1982 and conducted a scorched earth campaign against the Mayan Indians.
* Panamanian dictators Gen. Omar Torrijos, who overthrew a civilian government in a 1968 coup, and Gen. Manuel Noriega, a five-time SOA graduate, who ruled the country and dealt in drugs while on the CIA payroll.
* Ecuadoran dictator Gen. Guillermo Rodriguez, who overthrew the elected civilian government in 1972.
* Bolivian dictators Gen. Hugo Banzer Suarez, who seized power in a violent coup in 1971, and Gen. Guido Vildoso Calderon, who grabbed power in 1982.
* Peruvian strongman Gen. Juan Velasco Alvarado, who in 1968 toppled the elected civilian government.

In ousting the Honduran president Sunday, Vásquez Velásquez had the help of other SOA graduates, including Gen. Luis Javier Prince Suazo, the head of the Honduran Air Force.

Another two-time SOA grad, retired Gen. Daniel López Carballo, told CNN that the coup was justified because Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez would be running Honduras by proxy if the military had not acted.

Records show that Vásquez Velásquez took a basic combat arms course at SOA in 1976 and another course on small military units in 1984, while Prince Suazo took a 1996 course on joint operations.

The Obama Administration has responded to Zelaya’s ouster by terminating all non-humanitarian aid to Honduras.  The coup has been condemned by the Organization of American States, the United Nations, and the European Union.  Nobel peace laureate Oscar Arias, the President of Costa Rica, tried unsuccessfully to broker a deal to return Zelaya to office.

And yet here’s our pissant Congressman Roskam, cozying up to this illegitimate regime, interfering in the President’s conduct of foreign policy.  I guess it should come as no great shock. This behavior fits right into Roskam’s primary project of promoting the interests of big corporations and trampling the unions and the wage-earners who get in the way. And Roskam’s never met a right-wing thug he didn’t like.

Related posts:

1. Is Peter Roskam Taking the War Against Democracy to Honduras? HSIK
2. Peter Roskam’s Conduct in Honduras Is Treasonous
3. Peter Roskam is an Enemy of Democracy
4. Terrorists are OK… If They’re Our Terrorists

6th District Congressman Peter Roskam and members of his staff were contacted numerous times during 2008 by a Washington lobbying firm acting on behalf of the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, that is the government of Libya, and Roskam received 3 campaign contributions, totaling $1500, from one of the lobbyists involved. This according to information provided by the new Foreign Influence Lobbying Tracker produced in a joint venture by ProPublica and the Sunlight Foundation. The tool uses Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) disclosures filed by foreign governments and their representatives to document the influence foreign governments may have over our legislative process.

The lobbying firm involved is the Livingston Group, LLC., founded by former Republican representative and speaker-elect Bob Livingston after he resigned from Congress in 1999 having acknowledged an affair during the impeachment of President Bill Clinton.  According to the disclosures, the contacts concerned the possibility of amending a statutory provision against U.S. trade with Libya.  It is not known from the disclosures what commitments, if any, may have been received from Roskam.  The full list of disclosures may be viewed here.

Roskam’s willingness to receive campaign contributions made on behalf of any foreign government is appalling to me as a constituent. That the government involved was that of Libya is outrageous.

Libya has been much in the news in recent weeks. In August, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, convicted of 270 counts of murder in the 1988 bombing of PanAm Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, was released by the Scotish Government on humanitarian grounds because of a reported terminal illness. He was returned to Libya and given a heroes welcome by the Libyan government. Then, earlier this month, Moammar Gadhafi, “Guide of the First of September Great Revolution of the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya”, came to New York to address the 64th United Nations General Assembly. Livingston Group was reportedly involved in negotiations surrounding the Libyan strongman’s plans to visit Englewood, New Jersey and erect a bedouin tent.

Related posts:

1. Peter Roskam’s Conduct in Honduras Is Treasonous
2. Telco Contributions Return Big Dividend in Peter Roskam’s FISA Vote
3. Peter Roskam Gives Lobbyists Place of Honor in Washington Office
4. Peter Roskam and Misogynistic, Homophobic Republicans Vote to Defund State Department, Peace Corps
5. Peter Roskam Endorses Obama – Does He Know Bill Ayers? How much do we really know about Peter Roskam?

Heading to Honduras tomorrow on a CODEL to meet with gov officials and hear about efforts to ensure a free and fair election in November.

“OMG”, I said to myself.  “HFAC. Is he emigrating PTL?” “But WTF is a CODEL?” “Some kind of an airplane?” And then it came to me… “CODEL” is tweetish for Congressional Delegation”.  “He’s going to Honduras to help the military junta that recently overthrew the democratically-elected President, Manuel Zelaya, maintain its grip on power and continue to crush the life out of the poor and the unions.” “Now it makes sense”, I chuckled. “LOL”. “WAJ”. Nothing like a bunch of Republicans to ensure a “free and fair election” is there?

So I went online to check it out and I find that, sure enough, Roskam’s bedfellow Jim DeMint (ideological that is, GAGFI but I think he’s  STR8) from South Carolina (SUFID), is planning an excursion to Honduras to meet with the phony government, PRT, 420, LIK, and maybe score some MOOS action like Sanford. But then I read that John Kerry (HP, SSC) says to DeMint “RMLB You can’t go!” .  So now I don’t know. May be the I&I is off for now and Roskam is SUAC. LMFAO. KYFC.

PIR. BBFN. BBIAW.

Related posts:

1. Peter Roskam’s Conduct in Honduras Is Treasonous
2. Peter Roskam is an Enemy of Democracy
3. Peter Roskam Keeping the Hemisphere Safe for “Big Fruit”

Frannie dear, we know you are upset about how the last election came out and all, but while organizing workers, advocating for a livable wage, supporting a public option in healthcare reform, and giving a voice to the poor are all capital crimes in your dark utopia, here on planet America, they are part of what we know as Democracy.

For SEIU to be a “criminal organization”, it would have to have committed a whole slew of criminal acts. Please identify them.  (No, supporting Barack Obama doesn’t count).

Related posts:

1. Mark Kirk and Peter Roskam Ties to Notorious Criminal Organization Exposed
2. Peter Roskam Again Says No to Workplace Safety

Anti-labor Republican Representatives Mark Kirk and Peter Roskam addressed the media today calling for the U.S. Census to sever its partnership with the  Service Employees International Union (SEIU) because of SEIU’s alleged ties to the community organization ACORN.  ACORN has been the subject of a right-wing smear campaign of late because of its advocacy work on behalf of low- and moderate-income people and particularly because of its efforts to mobilize voters. Kirk and Roskam, who use their offices to advance the interests of corporate contributors and economic elites and thus hate unions almost as much they hate poor voters, have identified an opportunity to damage SEIU by association and to distract the public from their attempts to block healthcare reform, financial industry regulation, and meaningful legislation to address the threat of global climate change.

The U.S. Census Partners are government, non-profit, corporate or community organizations that have formally pledged their commitment to share the 2010 Census message and mobilize their constituents in support of the Census Bureau’s goal of achieving a complete count. SEIU is just one of many diverse partners. Others include American Baptist Churches of the South, American Library Association, U.S. Conference of Mayors, United Way of America, University of Texas, Meals On Wheels Association of America, Marathon Oil Corporation, Monsanto Company, Boy Scouts of America, Home Depot, General Mills, United Methodist Women, to name just a few.  Roskam and Kirk’s assertion that SEIU somehow presents a threat to the “integrity of the Census” is patently ridiculous.

Meanwhile, in a related development, RSR has learned of Peter Roskam’s and Mark Kirk’s shocking ties to to an actual criminal organization, whose members in recent years have been indicted and/or convicted on a variety of serious criminal charges and have been involved in all manner of sexual impropriety. Members of that organization, the Republican Party, also known as the GOP, has been implicated in numerous implicated of bribery, tax evasion, conspiracy, money laundering, fraud, and obstruction of justice and have engaged in voter suppression, frequented prostitutes, solicited sex in mens rooms and conducted inappropriate sexual chit chat with under-aged Congressional pages. Both Roskam and Kirk have maintained close personal ties with members of the GOP and it is believed that money may have been transferred between the GOP and the Roskam and Kirk campaigns.

While it is yet to be determined whether Roskam and Kirk will be forced to relinquish their offices due to their connections to this corrupt organization, it is clear that the integrity of the Census demands that Roskam, Kirk, and their associates in the GOP be banned from any participation in its conduct.

Here are just a few of the more outrageous examples of Republican impropriety from recent years:

Jack Abramoff:  A former Republican lobbyist and influence-peddler currently incarcerated at the Federal Correction institute in Cumberland, Maryland.  Abramoff was convicted in 2006 and 2008  of multiple felony counts related to his defrauding several Indian tribes of millions of dollars in gaming revenues and his trading of epensive gifts and trips with Republican legislators in exchange for political favors for his clients.

Bob Ney:  A former Republican Representative from Ohio’s 18th Congressional district, Ney was convicted in 2006 on charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States, falsifying financial disclosure forms, in connection with actions he took on behalf of an Abramoff client and a foreign businessman. Ney served 17 months in federal prison. He was released in 2008. Mark Kirk received a campaign contribution from Ney, which he later returned.

Randy “Duke” Cunningham:  Former Republican Congressman who represented California’s 50th district. Cunningham was convicted in 2005 of federal charges of conspiracy to  commit bribery, mail fraud, wire fraud and tax evasion. Cunningham used his position on the defense appropriations subcommittee to award contracts to defense contractors in exchange for bribes.  He is currently incarcerated in the United States Penitentiary in Tucson, Arizona.

J. Steven Griles: A former coal industry lobbyist who served as Deputy Secretary of the Interior during the Bush administration. Griles was convicted of obstruction of justice in 2007 after making false statements in the Abramoff investigation. Griles pledged to Abramoff that he would use his authority to block an Indian casino that Abramoff was lobbying against. Griles was sentenced to 10 months imprisonment.

I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby: Aide to President George W. Bush and Chief of Staff for Vice President Dick Cheney, Libby was convicted of federal charges of obstruction of justice, perjury, and making false statements to federal investigators in connection with the investigation of the Bush administration’s suspected  “outing” of CIA operative Valerie Plame in retaliation for her husband’s criticism of the Iraq war. Libby was sentenced to 30 months in prison but his sentence was ultimately commuted by President Bush.

James Tobin: Chairman of George W. Bush’s New England campaign, Tobin was convicted in 2005 of telephone harrassment in connection with a 2002 Republican plot to jam Democratic Party phone lines and frustrate get-out-the vote efforts. That conviction was overturned by a federal appeals court on a technical issue. Tobin was indicted again in 2008, for making false statements to the FBI in connection with the case.

Tom DeLay: Late of “Dancing with the Stars”,  DeLay is an ex-exterminator from Texas who served as Republican House Majority Leader until 2005.  DeLay, an associate of Jack Abramoff and recipient of numerous Abramoff gifts, is presently under indictment in Travis County, Texas for conspiracy to violate campaign finance laws.  DeLay was lobbied by Abramoff to stop legislation banning sweatshops in the U.S.’s Northern Mariana Islands.  After traveling with Abramoff to the islands, Delay block a bill from consideration that would have granted wage and hour protections to workers there. No criminal charges have yet been filed related to DeLay’s relationship with Abramoff. Peter Roskam is an ex-employee of Tom DeLay. Mark Kirk’s campaign has received funding from Tom deLay’s PAC, Americans for a Republican Majority.

Larry Craig:  The former Republican Senator from Idaho, Craig was arrested for lewd conduct in a men’s room at the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport in 2007, after attempting a sexual liason with an undercover police officer. Craig plead guilty, then unsuccessfully tried to retract his initial plea.

David “Diaper Dave” Vitter: The Republican sitting junior Senator from Louisiana, Vitter confessed in 2007 to having committed “a very serious sin”. That was shortly after his phone number was found to be included in the published list of clientele of the famous “D.C. Madam” , Deborah Jean Palfrey.  He was also alleged to have been a regular customer of New Orleans’ “C anal Street Madam”. Vitter is running for re-election to his Senate seat in 2010.

Mark Foley: Former Republican Representative from Florida’s 16th District. Foley resigned his seat in 2006 after it became public knowledge that Foley had sent sexually explicit text messages and suggestive emails to under-aged males then serving as, or who formerly served as, pages in the House. During the subsequent investigation, it became clear that Foley had been previously been warned about his conduct by the Republican leadership but that nothing had been done to remove him from contact with the pages.

And that’s just the short list.

Related posts:

1. Illinois Review Embraces Roskam and Kirk’s Neo-McCarthyism
2. Now Isn’t That Special?

Peter Roskam voted against the benefit extension.  He was alone among the Illinois delegation in doing so. The measure passed by a margin 331-83, garnering a substantial number of Republican votes. Even Shimkus voted for the extension.

I heard on the news the other day that there are about 6 job-seekers for every available position on average.  In an economic environment like that, the vote to extend benefits was a no-brainer.  Peter Roskam’s “No” vote demonstrates once again his almost sociopathic lack of empathy for the plight of his constituents suffering in the aftermath of the economic disaster wrought by the Roskam/Bush brand of anything goes capitalism.

So my question for my fellow 6th District residents:  How long are you going to keep voting for this arrogant prick? Haven’t you had enough?

Nice to see Bridget Dooley weighing in against Roskam again. And she has great music.

Related posts:

1. As Unemployment Rises, Peter Roskam Votes to Eliminate Food Programs
2. Peter Roskam Blocks Aid to Unemployed Illinois Workers

Received this in the mail today from Peter Roskam. It angers me for a number of reasons:

• Peter Roskam is using public funds, our tax dollars, to produce this drivel. This is pretty clearly a mailing aimed at self-promotion and advocating a political stance against the Democratic efforts at healthcare reform. While it is doubtful that any rules have been violated, Roskam, who likes to portray himself as a vigorous protector of our tax dollars, should be ashamed of spending our money on this crap. He should be using campaign funds.
• Roskam’s piece is aimed at convincing the gullible that he actually gives a damn about healthcare. He has been a consistent opponent of expansion of healthcare access during his tenure and is currently working vigorously to obstruct any reform from happening this year.
• Roskam’s piece says he called me but missed me. That is not true. I received and answered 3 calls from his robo-caller but was not permitted to join the tele-townhall, probably because I am not on the list of safe voters.

The mailing included a post card which Roskam asks you to send back expressing your opinions on healthcare, probably as an aide to his staff in further refining the lists of safe participants for future townhall meetings.

I am posting my reply card here because I spend all my money on this web site and can’t afford a stamp. And I don’t have franking privileges.

Related posts:

1. Are Peter Roskam’s Tele-Townhalls Rigged?
2. Peter Roskam’s Constituents Need Health Coverage – Roskam Gives Them a Blog Instead
3. Why Are My Tax Dollars Being Used for Peter Roskam’s Campaign Mail?