Kucinich To VOTE FOR HEALTHCARE BILL

Doesn't like the bill, but will vote for it.

More later

UPDATE

Cleveland Plain Dealer report asked is there was a Quid Pro Quo - Kucinich fenced the question away. Leaves me to believe that he did get something in return.

UPDATE II

Still going to work towards Single Payer system.


"Bill is still flawed"
"Looking at the Bill as it is not as he wants it"

UPDATE III - PRESS CONFERENCE OVER

Some more quotes from Rep Kucinich:

A defining moment as to moving off of square one to get healthcare;

Its about creating jobs, keeping people in their homes - need to move off debate to get on with other items.

Was asked again if there was a regulatory deal like the Louisiana Purchase or a Nebraska deal for the 10th District or Ohio, he said no, this change in vote is "taking a more historic movement of moving the contry forward"


When asked about the way the Healthcare bill is being moved through congress he said "Doesn't like much about this process"

Final message from Kucinich - Doesn't want the Obama Presidency ruined because of Healthcare legislation.

Downsizing the Federal Government

Saw this article by Chris Edwards listing six reasons to downsize the government and in light of the Obama's attempt to increase the size of the government and quite possibly the debt via the debacle known as the healthcare plan, I thought it quite timely.

1. Additional federal spending transfers resources from the more productive private sector to the less productive public sector of the economy. The bulk of federal spending goes toward subsidies and benefit payments, which generally do not enhance economic productivity. With lower productivity, average American incomes will fall.

 

2. As federal spending rises, it creates pressure to raise taxes now and in the future. Higher taxes reduce incentives for productive activities such as working, saving, investing, and starting businesses. Higher taxes also increase incentives to engage in unproductive activities such as tax avoidance.

3. Much federal spending is wasteful and many federal programs are mismanaged. Cost overruns, fraud and abuse, and other bureaucratic failures are endemic in many agencies. It’s true that failures also occur in the private sector, but they are weeded out by competition, bankruptcy, and other market forces. We need to similarly weed out government failures.

4. Federal programs often benefit special interest groups while harming the broader interests of the general public. How is that possible in a democracy? The answer is that logrolling or horse-trading in Congress allows programs to be enacted even though they are only favored by minorities of legislators and voters. One solution is to impose a legal or constitutional cap on the overall federal budget to force politicians to make spending trade-offs.

5. Many federal programs cause active damage to society, in addition to the damage caused by the higher taxes needed to fund them. Programs usually distort markets and they sometimes cause social and environmental damage. Some examples are housing subsidies that helped to cause the financial crises, welfare programs that have created dependency, and farm subsidies that have harmed the environment.

6. The expansion of the federal government in recent decades runs counter to the American tradition of federalism. Federal functions should be “few and defined” in James Madison’s words, with most government activities left to the states. The explosion in federal aid to the states since the 1960s has strangled diversity and innovation in state governments because aid has been accompanied by a mass of one-size-fits-all regulations.

 

One thing that I have always thought that once you begin to take out more money from the citizenry, then there is always less for them to make purchases and thereby creating an economy or in the current climate no economy.

But, it seems to me that at every level of government they just can't seem to understand that.

h/t Prof Reynolds

Saturday Afternoon

If anybody is looking for me, I will be here:

Flying around on this:

Finally, a dream come true!

Interesting to Look at the Nuts & Bolts of voting

Unofficial Results by Precinct. With the reconfigured precincts this year's election was a bit of a guess as to how everything would fall.

Once again the Dems have this City figured out and now the Mayor has all of his people in place to govern. So lets see what happens.

01 NICKIE J. ANTONIO 5,616 20.30 05 DANIEL E. SHIELDS 3,789 13.70
02 RYAN PATRICK DEMRO 5,229 18.90 06 = MONIQUE SMITH 5,451 19.71
03 BRIAN POWERS 5,591 20.21 07 = OVER VOTES 24
04 JARED K. SHAPIRO 1,984 7.17 08 = UNDER VOTES 12,306

----------------------- 01 02 03 04 05 06
LAKEWOOD -01-A 159 137 178 43 81 175
LAKEWOOD -01-B 159 171 181 50 109 182
LAKEWOOD -01-C 112 95 109 26 76 104
LAKEWOOD -01-D 117 130 136 42 89 130
LAKEWOOD -01-E 160 150 143 44 94 167
LAKEWOOD -01-F 65 78 64 31 76 83
LAKEWOOD -01-G 77 114 78 43 63 101
LAKEWOOD -01-H 189 176 252 54 82 179
LAKEWOOD -01-I 161 137 151 42 98 155
LAKEWOOD -01-J 203 203 226 65 109 234
LAKEWOOD -02-A 196 173 218 49 139 188
LAKEWOOD -02-B 133 118 125 37 111 132
LAKEWOOD -02-C 154 176 146 55 145 180
LAKEWOOD -02-D 119 82 106 41 98 122
LAKEWOOD -02-E 157 163 168 51 145 168
LAKEWOOD -02-F 123 151 162 44 115 118
LAKEWOOD -02-G 136 145 103 55 102 117
LAKEWOOD -02-H 118 136 103 56 130 136
LAKEWOOD -02-I 137 151 123 43 106 146
LAKEWOOD -02-J 147 157 132 44 150 171
LAKEWOOD -03-A 239 208 342 51 106 191
LAKEWOOD -03-B 203 174 175 81 119 168
LAKEWOOD -03-C 120 129 116 94 78 107
LAKEWOOD -03-D 144 171 145 56 96 141
LAKEWOOD -03-E 128 121 131 75 88 140
LAKEWOOD -03-F 204 170 193 64 114 178
LAKEWOOD -03-G 122 122 120 52 84 87
LAKEWOOD -03-H 147 121 125 45 84 122
LAKEWOOD -03-I 102 134 113 62 78 96
LAKEWOOD -03-J 102 82 94 44 67 89
LAKEWOOD -04-A 182 165 176 60 91 153
LAKEWOOD -04-B 119 82 106 47 64 111
LAKEWOOD -04-C 85 45 78 18 53 76
LAKEWOOD -04-D 133 99 137 45 80 115
LAKEWOOD -04-E 49 43 47 26 38 54
LAKEWOOD -04-F 116 114 101 54 98 119
LAKEWOOD -04-G 83 63 68 26 48 83
LAKEWOOD -04-H 142 94 111 44 74 108
LAKEWOOD -04-I 138 117 123 44 70 130
LAKEWOOD -04-J 155 83 119 50 88 117
LAKEWOOD -04-K 81 49 67 31 53 78

Council at Large Race General Elections 2009

Tomorrow is the General Election in Lakewood for the 3 At-Large Council seats.

This has been pretty much a ho-hum type of race, no real drama from the Candidates themselves. The only one creating drama is Mayor FitzGerald and based on the comments I got while knocking on doors yesterday, Mayor FitzGerald should have left things alone and not injected himself into the mix. I think a few people who have liked what he has done since he has been Mayor felt he overstepped himself with the last minute hit piece.

I have a feeling there are a few Democrats who probably didn't distribute his piece because of the ineffectiveness of it. (I will post the piece in question later on today)

Now on to the race it self.

Generally speaking there are three seats up for Election.

Nickie Antonio is seeking re-election to a second term

Brian Powers is looking to retain the seat he was appointed to last year when FitzGerald became Mayor and had to vacate his seat.

Mike Dever decided to not run for re-election this year so this seat is open.

So here are the Candidates:
Nickie Antonio
Brian Powers
Ryan Demro
Jared Shapiro
Dan Shields
Monique Smith

Now this is where the intrigue begins:

The Lakewood Democratic Club endorsed Antonio, Shields and Smith;
Mayor FitzGerald is pushing for Antonio, Powers and Smith

The Republicans are working for Demro and Shapiro

So it looks like the Democrats are going to be split as to who to choose.

The question really becomes who gets the other two seats.

The way I see it,

Antonio will win the top spot pretty handily, she has waged pretty much a similar campaign that worked for her 4 years ago. Although, I don't think she knocked on as many doors this time around. Name recognition will get her in.

To me the next two seats are essentially up for grabs.

Brian Powers had a rocky start to his tenure when he pulled up the Pit Bull ban and then came across a little heavy handed. Will he retain his seat -- maybe.

Ryan Demro is the former Ward 2 Councilman, who gave up his seat last year to run an unsuccessful attempt for Mayor. Besides Antonio, he is the most experienced candidate on the slate.

He has run a campaign this time around with a little less bombastic stuff then he did for the Mayor's race. Maybe a little Army training and maturation will help him slide into one of the spots.

Jared Shapiro is a newcomer to Lakewood politics and unfortunately will suffer the same fate that I did, and finish out of the hunt.

Now to Monqiue Smith and Dan Shields, here is where the Democrats will create a problem.

Smith is a rookie to running for office, but she is not a rookie to Democratic politics. Shields has made several attempts for elective office. But is considered to be an outsider from the Democratic clique.

I believe the split in the Democratic party endorsements will cause a split in these two and cancel each other out and put someone else in that third slot.

Here is how I think it will go:

Antonio - Gets re-elected
Demro - Comes in second, the split votes among Powers, Smith and Shield jumps him into here
Powers - Gets Retained, LCA parents and FitzGerald Fans will bring him in to the final slot
Smith - She needs more polish on her presentation at candidate forums and Q & A sessions.
Shields - Just can't get by the machine
Shapiro - Like Shields can't get by the machines

Eight Years Laters

Today as we remember those who have perished in the WTC, the Pentagon and in the fields of Shanksville, let us also remember those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice in defense of our freedoms.

The video below honors the troops, but the song sings to all of us. Some have already left and the rest live until then we are all called Homeward Bound.






God Bless the United States of America.

Some Post Primary Thoughts

With the actual ballots cast information still not yet published its interesting to see that over 5,000 absentee ballots were requested but only a little more than 2,600 were returned.

Once the voter information is published it will be telling to see who did the better job of stirring the pot and moving people into the polls.

As in past years, the sad part is that about 10% of the voting public will be making choices that affect 100% of the population and businesses in Lakewood.

Mayor FitzGerald's piece seemed to help Monique Smith at the absentee level, but I think the Lakewood Democratic piece helped Dan Shields more.

Can Monique Smith keep the party faithful to her side or do they side more with Dan Shields?

More to come in the next few weeks. Everyone, except Antonio is going to need to work a little harder to keep their voters in check and pick up new supporters along the way.

UPDATE: Here is the Unofficial breakdown by Precinct.

Lakewood is near the end of the page.

Results from Primary Day in Lakewood

Selected Election Results
Municipal
LAKEWOOD COUNCIL AT LARGE 41 of 41 precincts reported. (Bolded Moves on)

NICKIE J. ANTONIO 2400
DANIEL BARTOS 756
ANTHONY DAVIS 377
RYAN PATRICK DEMRO 1993
EDWARD M. MCCARTNEY 483
BRIAN POWERS 2283
JARED K. SHAPIRO 825
DANIEL E. SHIELDS 1157
MONIQUE SMITH 2196

Congratulations to all, now the hardwork begins!

Primary Day in Lakewood

Tomorrow the City begins to narrow down the list of candidates for the At-Large City Council race.

Here is the ballot:

You get to make three choices on the ballot:

Nickie Antonio - Incumbent
Daniel Bartos - Challenger
Anthony Davis - Challenger
Ryan Demro - Challenger
Edward McCartney - Challenger
Brian Powers - Incumbent
Jared Shapiro - Challenger
Daniel Shields - Challenger
Monique Smith - Challenger

Now looking at the historical data from the 2005 At-Large Race the level of turn out was a paltry 9.27 percent or about 3,935 ballots cast out of 42,441 registered voters. With no one garnering more than 1750 votes.

If my information is correct 2800 absentee ballots were requested, so the polling locations could be very sparse and the results should be known very quickly after 8 PM.

We have nine candidates and the primary will cut it down to six:
I think at 11 pm the six will be in alpha order - Antonio, Demro, Powers, Shapiro, Shields and Smith.

Now I would not be surprised in Bartos slid in there and maybe knocked Shields or Shapiro out. But, I think the Republicans will be trying to keep two GOP candidates for the General in November.

What has been interesting to me is the play amongst the Democrats. Who will the Democratic voters be going for. Will have to wait and see.

The Health Care Issue

As most know I grew up in the WNY area and the only remaining paper is The Buffalo News and it is very similar in many ways to the Cleveland Plain Dealer with its very strong lean to left.

Its a paper that I read every day, more so than the Plain Dealer.

As to the Health Care Issue, The News has been steady in its support of it, until this morning.

This editorial is summing up the fact that Obama has lost this round and needs to go back and rethink or redraft the legislation.

Here it is in its entirety:

Before he took office, one piece of advice President Obama took seriously was that "you can't succeed with your agenda without the cooperation of the Congress."

Perhaps he took that too seriously, because in at least two instances he has directed Congress to draft the actual legislation for what are perhaps his two most critical domestic problems. He should have proposed his own bills.

In the first case, he allowed Congress to draft the stimulus bill. It did, coming up with a hugely expensive plan -- an estimated $1.2 trillion when interest payments are factored in -- that minority Republicans quickly criticized as laden with pork. And then, the next day, it passed a $410 billion omnibus spending bill that included 8,575 spending "earmarks" from congressmen. The slow trickle of actual financial stimulus into the economy is good evidence that never would have passed a panel most concerned with need and effectiveness. Economic recovery might be a lot further along had the president drafted a bill that met those goals he was promoting.

Now, in the second instance, he is faced with multiple thousand-page proposals, in several House and Senate committees, and a Congressional Budget Office estimate that the two leading plans -- the House leadership's HR 3200 bill and Sen. Ted Kennedy's still-unnamed plan -- will drive up costs until 2019, when savings supposedly would take over. Be wary of any politician who wants to tap your wallet more deeply based on savings that might appear in 10 years.

Also, be wary of efforts to ram through such sweeping, financially freighted and dramatic reforms -- changes that would affect a sixth of the American economy -- on a political deadline.

The president is a gifted communicator, but even he cannot overcome the confusion the multiple, changing bills have created. And now he has a public uprising on his hands. Most people in the country don't trust the government to maintain the health care they now have, and while people realize costs have spiralled out of control, they don't believe the health bills will produce a solution. In fact, many worry that their health costs could accelerate more quickly with what has been proposed. They are right on both scores.

The bills have sought to add new programs that are staggering in their costs and potentially reduce existing health care, particularly for the elderly. There are calls for mandates that would escalate business costs, with potential stimulus-killing effects on the economy.

All deserve careful, not rushed, consideration and reasoned, not misinformed, debate.

Most immediately, the president also must address true reductions in costs -- the costs of care that are in large part driving up the price of insurance and driving down the number of people able to afford insurance -- before he simply adds on new benefits or expands the ranks of the insured. Cutting just 1 percent from the escalating cost of health care would save the nation $1.3 trillion.

What is needed is genuine reform. Various agency watchdogs say there is plenty of room for that. Bad practices and policies have been identified; let the government's energies be spent there.

Two relatively easy but gigantic savers are conspicuous. Introducing universal use of electronic medical records not only should save billions, it also can prevent errors that can cost lives. Tort reform -- changing medical malpractice litigation -- also could save hundreds of billions by eliminating "cover your backside" testing and allowing doctors to practice and prescribe according to their own training and judgment, not to mention curtailing the costs of physician insurance that in turn also escalates health costs.

The president does not have a lot of time. He rightly should fear that the Democrat-controlled Congress will pass a hodgepodge of compromises that will be costly and accomplish little. His signals that he may be willing to drop the "public option" that would offer a choice of a government-run program alongside existing private health plans may be evidence of his awareness of his limited opportunity, and his willingness to compromise to win some health care reforms.

In any case, it is time for reform proponents to regroup. What has happened so far has been soundly rejected. Confusion still reigns.

Draft a simple, clear bill that makes some headway. The cost of health care is a complex problem of major proportions, and it will not be easy to solve. Rather than take a chance on risky proposals that are certain to be costly, do something in which the people can have confidence.

Obama indeed may need the cooperation of Congress to get his agenda passed, but he can do nothing lasting if the people of America have lost confidence in the current proposals. It's time to restore that confidence, and move forward with clear, significant reforms.

I agree the White House needs to go back and start over. The American people are demanding it now and deserve something that is workable and won't bankrupt the nation in 50 years.